The Importance of Positive Reinforcement

Photo by Nathan Dumlao on Unsplash

Every quarter, students meet with me one-on-one to discuss their writing. They got good grades on their writing in high school or community college, they tell me, but not here at UC Davis, and they don’t understand why. Ideally, prior feedback on their writing should give some insight. So, I first ask to look at prior feedback they received and often see vague comments like “good job,” “awkward,” or “?.” It’s no wonder students are confused. I am too. 

UC Davis’ Writing Support Center has three pillars of tutoring called The Big 3: teach by asking questions, use practice problems as models, and give positive reinforcement. We strive to use these pillars in every session, but it’s often the last one that trips us up. What if the student received negative prior feedback, but we disagree; how do we not undermine that while still giving honest praise? What do we do if the student’s paper is problematic, from our perspective? How can we give specific and helpful positive reinforcement? Meanwhile, the student is sitting across from us, expecting an improved paper by the end of a session.

The pillar of positive reinforcement is multifaceted, but ultimately, it’s important to use positive reinforcement strategically and authentically to build students’ confidence and guide them toward being independent writers. However, that is often easier said than done. Indeed, giving too much praise can give them a false confidence in their work or make them too dependent on tutoring. Giving students insufficient praise might prevent them from reaching their full potential as confident writers (Toms 43). Likewise, inauthentic and vague praise can lead to ineffectual revisions.

My first step to find this balance is to set clear goals at the start of a tutoring session. To help me direct my feedback, I need to determine the assignment guidelines, what help the student needs, and what (if any) previous feedback they have received (and from whom). Finding something good in the paper gets the session off on a positive start. Maybe the thesis statement is strong or there’s one body paragraph that makes me go “wow!” Providing reader-centric feedback can help the student see their writing from their audience’s perspective: “I think that mentioning a movie and then giving more scientific insight is a great way to engage a more diverse audience” (Loring and Mabunga). This can show the student what they are doing well, why, and what they can use as models for weaker sections of the paper. Then we can dive into those weaker sections, and I can alternate between critical feedback and positive reinforcement. It is critical to end with a summary of what they did well and why their revisions were successful. I like to remind students that they leave with a solid improvement of something, no matter how big or small. 

Pointing out an error, explaining why it’s an error, and helping the student to fix it can provide students with the knowledge to fix errors independently in the future. I’ve worked with many students who start a session having no idea how to differentiate between “the” and “a” and by the end confidently fixing article errors alone.  At this point I compliment the student’s process: “You did a great job learning how to use articles. Nice job fixing those on your own.” Oftentimes, at the next appointment the student will have fewer article errors in their draft.

Regardless of if you’re helping a student with content or grammar, it’s vital to praise the process, not the individual. Telling a student, “you’re so smart” can signal they have a particular fixed trait. Either someone is smart or not. This leaves little motivation to improve.  Also, what happens when that “smart” student does poorly on their next essay? They may question themselves and the value of tutoring. Praising a student’s process, instead, promotes a growth mindset.  The individual’s value is never questioned; instead, the student can use process-focused praise to reflect and determine if their processes are effective for different situations (Master 2; Toms 43). We want our students to be independent, after all, and appropriate positive reinforcement can give them confidence to become better writers.

Works Cited

Loring, Ariel and Mabunga, Bridget. “Scale of peer feedback from basic to most effective: Poster addendum for SABER West 2020 conference.” 2020. PDF file. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OACudFa0UCZ-AmcMDxCJBmYU-5sKmunm/view?usp=sharing

Master, Allison. “Praise That Makes Learners More Resilient.” The Mindset Scholars Network, August 2015, http://mindsetscholarsnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Praise-That-Makes-Learners-More-Reslient.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2020.

Toms, Marcia L. Put the Pencil Down:  Essentials of Tutoring. North Carolina State University, 2010.

Author Bio

Heather Sturman is the English Language Learner Specialist within the Writing Support Center in the Academic Assistance and Tutoring Centers at the University of California, Davis. She holds a PhD in Linguistics from UC Davis with a research focus on second language acquisition in education. She works with students on improving their writing, helps train undergraduate tutors, and develops and delivers writing support workshops for courses across disciplines.