Some are very critical of the widespread competition among students in schools. Should schools try to minimize this competition?
Minimizing competition is only the first step. I believe our ultimate goal must be to eliminate all practices that turn education into a quest for triumph.By definition, a competitive environment is one where my success requires your failure. Research shows these consequences: (1) Competition undermines self-esteem, making one's value contingent on how many people one has beaten. Losing feels awful, but even winning ultimately fails to meet children's underlying psychological needs. (2) Competition disrupts relationships. Because its central message is that other people are potential obstacles to one's own success, competition breeds envy, contempt, hostility, and suspicion. (Team competition, meanwhile, teaches that cooperation is just a means to victory.) (3) Competition actually undermines achievement. Excellence is a fine goal, but let's not confuse it with the desperate race to beat people. Students learn most effectively when they can see their peers as collaborators rather than rivals.Must we nevertheless set students against each other to prepare them for the "real world"? No. Our pathologically rivalrous culture offers more than enough of that; what students need from us is the chance to experience a healthier alternative. It would be reassuring if problems occurred only when competition was done to excess, or because competitors had the wrong attitude. But after reviewing some 500 studies over the last decade, I'm unable to justify any win/lose structures in our schools.—Alfie Kohn is the author of No Contest: The Case Against Competition and, most recently, Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's, Praise, and Other Bribes.
In our nation's schools, we can restructure competition so that it involves all students in powerful learning activities and real-life experiences that develop individual potential.Today, most students are turned off by the word competition and camouflage themselves behind an attitude of "I'm doing my own thing." Too many students are afraid of failure, have poor work ethics, and set no goals or low goals. Healthy competition could stimulate these students to engage in challenging activities that foster self-confidence and pride in one's performance.On the other hand, many students compete for all the wrong reasons, becoming callous in their efforts to win at all costs or suicidal from pressures to be the best. Losers often feel they have failed and are depleted of their will to participate, to keep trying, and to develop their talents. As educators, we must be sensitive to the potential negative impact of competition.Most important, we should not allow competition to divide students into winners and losers. Competition rooted in the win/lose concept must change. Healthy competition is embedded in personal challenges that enhance one's abilities, self-worth, talents, and the determination to achieve one's best. This kind of competition will produce leaders for today and tomorrow. Schools, therefore, must provide competition that is fair and equitable for all students and provide a safety net so that no students feel like losers.—Barbara Saulsberry is assistant principal of Bayside High School in Virginia Beach, Va.
Probably not. Competition, like cooperative grouping, is simply a technique for motivating children to learn—and, if implemented thoughtfully, it works. While a great body of research supports the benefits of cooperative learning, another set of studies shows that competition among individuals may be the best way to strengthen students' academic performance. Both sets of studies are undoubtedly correct.However, what Robert Slavin found out almost 10 years ago also holds true: group rewards, combined with individual accountability, promote student achievement. High individual performance is more likely when students compete as part of a group (engaged in meaningful activities), with each individual's effort crucial to the group's success. Intergroup competition, as Slavin found, is often the most successful learning structure, combining the best elements of both individual accountability and cooperative groupings.There is no fairer way to motivate student achievement than by setting standards, establishing and publicizing assessments for those standards, and publicly acknowledging (rewarding) those students or groups who meet or exceed them. In such a system, students know the rules and how they will be evaluated. This type of extrinsic reward structure can be implemented using either individual or group activities, and individual or group competition.—Jacques Benninga is chair of the Department of Literacy and Early Education at California State University, Fresno.
Yes, for the most part. While competition challenges and stimulates some students, particularly the gifted and talented, it discourages and intimidates others.A major concern of middle grades teachers is to make students feel comfortable so that optimum learning can take place. Indeed, one of the reasons for organizing middle schools into teams and grade-level houses is to give students a sense of belonging, thereby increasing their comfort level and enhancing their learning. An environment that is in any way threatening—such as a competitive one—produces exactly the opposite effect.Moreover, many forms of academic competition foster only rote memorization or recall of simple facts. Only writing competitions may come close to calling for critical or creative thinking.Even athletic competition in the middle grades can have a negative impact. Young adolescents' bodies are changing rapidly—a fact many youngsters are uncomfortable with. These students may be asked to compete physically at a time when they are least equipped to do so. And defeat at this age can be a jarring experience.Many middle schools intentionally avoid the "star" system where only a few academically or athletically talented youngsters shine. Instead, they seek to recognize all students in some way, so that all students can feel good about themselves. For the most part, competition promotes achievement for only a small minority of students.—Maridell Bagnal is an 8th grade social studies teacher, team leader, and chair of the School Improvement Team at Fletcher Middle School, Jacksonville Beach, Fla.