To give a cash reward to the twin who gets the best GCSE results?

[Stackss]

DS and DD are both in year 11 so have their GCSEs coming up shortly. Both are bright and of very similar if not identical academic ability and are predicted very similar grades.

Both are relatively hard working (although with a tendency to coast) but DH and I would really like them to knuckle down and push themselves to get the best grades possible.

We therefore came up with the idea of an effort-based reward scheme allowing them to earn treats for completing revision- e.g. 75 hours= a meal out, 150 hours= a night away etc.

However, both twins have suggested that instead, the twin who gets the best results should receive the whole cash reward. They are both competitive with each other and have said this would give them greater incentive to work harder.

My concern is that the twin who doesn't do as well will be doubly disappointed on results day as they will also get no reward. Should I go with the twins' suggestion?

I find it bizarre that the OP can't see that, while they may suggest this as an idea at the age of 16, if she were to actually do it they would look back on it as adults (probably in conversations with their therapist) and say "Wtf? Can you believe our childhood was so toxic that our mother agreed to pit us against each other at exam time?"

They're kids. The OP is an adult. She has no excuse for entertaining this idea.

Awful idea. Do they normally get along because this is a recipe for resentment especially if one of them has an off day and loses.

DS worked hard at various times. I bought him presents after doing the work and before results . I was proud of his work ethic and rewarded that. I did also reward grade improvement between his mocks and his actual results as well on results day. The only person he was working for and trying to improve was himself (ps if he dropped a grade between mocks and result he would not have been penalised).

That's all fine. But the monetary reward is still a dreadful idea. It's dysfunctional.

Terrible idea. But it came from them, interestingly.
I wonder whether the best thing is to distance yourself from the competitive aspect by suggesting that if they want to gamble on their results, they do that between themselves - perhaps they agree that the loser gives the winner £20. And try and persuade them to keep it well below whatever you're giving them.

You might also remind them that it might not seem so fair when the results come out. Suppose the difference in grades boils down to couple of marks difference across a grade boundary - and in fact the loser has far exceeded the winner in other subjects where it wasn't across the grade boundary.

However, both twins have suggested that instead, the twin who gets the best results should receive the whole cash reward.

You do realise that, on that basis, if both of them do really badly but one is slightly better than the other, you will be rewarding that one?

Horrible idea. Put yourself in the shoes of the twin who doesn’t ‘win’, even worse if they’re just one grade off winning or something. They will kick themselves and feel like a failure. They shouldn’t be comparing themselves to one another full stop, they’re both great in their own ways.

My FIL did this with his children, thinking that by getting them to compete off each other they will do better in life. They all
are doing well for themselves, but hate each other. it’s so sad. Don’t do this.

After discussing with the DC and DH, we have agreed on the below reward scheme:

£100 for each 9
£75 for each 8
£25 for each 7
They pay us £25 for each 6 or below- it is worth noting that they asked for this consequence. I don't know whether we would actually follow through.

They will also get £2 for each hour of revision completed so long as there js evidence that work has been done.

Paying per hr for revision is not a good idea unless you are setting caps. Burnout isn't healthy. But tbh, it's consistent with the whole fucked up picture here...

The competitive arseholes at assessment centres don’t get hired. Those assessment centres have group exercises for this exact reason.

And the bloody should be on the same team. A twin should be hoping that they both get the best grades possible, not hoping that the other one does badly. One doing well doesn’t damage the achievements of the other but this set up convinces them that it does.

Imagine one gets all 8s - in this set up, whether or not they’re a success depends on whether their twin got a 7 or got a 9. They still got all 8s, regardless, but they feel like they’ve succeeded or failed based on the actions of someone else (which is an unhealthy mindset) and they have an incentive to want bad things for their twin. They’re being paid to hope that their twin got a 7 instead of a 9 - that’s an unhealthy mindset too.

At the firm, we firmly believe we’re hiring candidates that are most suited to us. That means that when we see a candidate pushing out others, hoping they’ll fail or not supporting them to be their best - they don’t pass. A common example is in a presentation, a candidate wanting to tag their point on someone’s section onto the part the other candidate said instead of just having it put into that candidate’s part - they’re trying to make sure that they get the glory for the point that they thought of. But it’s to the detriment of the group because it makes the whole presentation look unrehearsed and disjointed. The candidate put their personal gain ahead of the group and we don’t like that so we won’t hire them.

Wanting others to fail because you view their failure as your success isn’t something to be encouraged - it won’t get you far in life.

What happened to natural consequences? Don't study, won't get a good grade. Passed well, congratulations let's celebrate. Didn't pass well, let's have a look at clearing/next year's options.

If your DC do as well in their GCSEs as they've done in getting money out of you, then they will do very well.

(Was I the only one thinking they'd introduced the competition idea because both of them were planning to coast, but they thought it would throw you off the scent, and they'd then plan to share the money?)

Sure.

Think this needs to be looked at by MN, lots of trolling threads about recently! Wish I hadn’t wasted my time giving help tbh.

This is so sad in so many ways. Mainly that you say your twins came up with the original idea. I would be questioning where I had gone so wrong that they see competing with each other as ok. Did you never have conversations about avoiding comparisons, focusing on your own efforts, and supporting your sibling?

This is very sad. Why are you putting a monetary value on their grades?

@redskydelight

They will do well if they work really hard. However, we will also be setting a minimum revision amount that needs to be completed on a weekly revision goal that has to be completed to make then eligible for the grade-based rewards.

Jeez, we've not had to motivate my DS Y11 with money or rewards. He just wants to do the best possible that he can and be proud of his achievement. This thread just makes me prouder of him.

Now I'm sure you're making this up.

They pay you if they get a B in old money.

Either this is made up or you are fucking them up.

I always wonder if the children who get "money per grade" actually do any more work than they were planning to anyway.
I have a strong suspicion that most don't.

Poor kids.
Seriously. Poor things. There is more to life than all this revision revision revision. At least there should be.

While doing GCSEs my friends who were given financial incentives were generally the most stressed. They’d often end up in tears from the pressure of knowing how important high grades were to their parents. I don’t think all of their parents knew how stressed some of the kids got, because the kids wanted to please their parents and be “good kids”. I really think it is wrong to tie financial reward to certain grades and/or revision time. Engage with your child on actual learning and work out what THEY want to achieve. Otherwise they won’t learn to do important things for their own benefit, but only to obtain material/financial reward.

Personally, I think your original reward scale for hours revision wasn't good. They should revise anyway, they don't need rewarding for it.

But if they want to go with their idea of competition I'd let them as long as its healthy and they are able to laugh about it. BUT, I'd be rewarding them both as long as they both have tried. The one who comes out with the better results should understand why both were rewarded, and if they don't then that's a separate conversation.

If they genuinely need this level of micromanagement at GCSE level, they are likely to struggle at university.

@redskydelight

They will need to work the scheme agreed as there is a minimum revision threshold that needs to be met to qualify for the grade rewards. There is also a £2 per hour reward for each revision hours completed.