‘Good job!’ is evaluation, not encouragement. It serves adult convenience, breeds dependence on approval, takes the child’s pleasure away, reduces interest, and can lower performance. ‘You don’t have to evaluate in order to encourage.‘
The five problems
- Manipulation (“sugar-coated control”, DeVries).
- Praise junkies: dependence on adult approval.
- Stealing the child’s pleasure (“Good job” replaces “I did it!”).
- Losing interest: attention withdrawn → activity dropped (Katz).
- Reducing achievement: lavishly praised students became more tentative (“Um, seven?”) (Mary Budd Rowe); children praised for generosity became slightly less generous (Grusec).
Instead
- Say nothing (for a helpful act).
- Say what you saw: “You put your shoes on by yourself.”
- Talk less, ask more: “What was the hardest part to draw?”
- Point to the effect on others, not your approval.
- Involve children in solving problems instead of bribes or threats.
Limits
Sparse citations; aimed at young children. Henderlong & Lepper (2002) show praise effects depend on how it’s given: informational, sincere, process-focused praise can help (Claude).
Where sources agree and differ
Carol Read and Kohn agree on “describe, don’t evaluate”. Read still endorses praise and CBG; Kohn rejects praise as a control technique. Read is more practical for classroom management, Kohn more radical. See Descriptive praise beats evaluative praise.
Connections
Rewards undermine interest in the rewarded activity · Descriptive praise beats evaluative praise