Write A Reaction Paper To Alfie Kohn’s 'The Case Against Com ✓ Solved

Write a reaction paper to Alfie Kohn's 'The Case Against Com

Write a reaction paper to Alfie Kohn's 'The Case Against Competition' (Working Mother, September 1987) using this outline: Article Title: __________________________________________________ Author: ______________________________________________________ Source: ______________________________________________________ I. Main Idea of the article (author’s Thesis): a. Your Main Idea (your RESPONSE to the author’s THESIS) II. 1st Main supporting point of the article (author’s Direct Quote) a. Your Topic Sentence: b. Your Supporting Details: • ________________________________________________________________________ • ________________________________________________________________________ III. 2nd Main supporting point of the article (author’s Direct Quote) a. Your Topic Sentence: b. Your Supporting Details: • ________________________________________________________________________ • ________________________________________________________________________ IV. 3rd Main supporting point of the article (author’s Direct Quote) a. Your Topic Sentence: b. Your Supporting Details: • ________________________________________________________________________ • ________________________________________________________________________ V. Conclusion: a. Reinforce your position: b. Provide a closing message:

Paper For Above Instructions

Article Title, Author, and Source

Article Title: The Case Against Competition

Author: Alfie Kohn

Source: Working Mother (September 1987)

I. Main Idea of the Article (Author’s Thesis) and My Response

Author’s thesis: Alfie Kohn argues that competition is inherently destructive for children: it undermines self-esteem, diminishes learning and creativity, and fosters hostility rather than cooperation. He contends that "competition... means that one person can succeed only if others fail," and therefore competition is unnecessary and harmful in school, play, and the home (Kohn, 1987).

My response: I agree with Kohn’s central claim that pervasive win/lose competition often produces negative psychological and educational outcomes. While there may be contexts where performance comparison is informative, the evidence supports Kohn’s contention that habitual competitive structures in childhood frequently undermine intrinsic motivation, reduce cooperative skills, and inhibit deep learning (Johnson & Johnson, 1989; Deci & Ryan, 1985).

II. 1st Main Supporting Point: Competition and Self-Esteem

Author’s direct idea: Competition causes children’s self-worth to depend on external comparisons and victories, making self-esteem fragile and contingent (Kohn, 1987).

Your topic sentence: Competition reframes self-worth as conditional on outperforming peers, which corrodes stable self-esteem and encourages social comparison.

Your supporting details: Kohn documents how winning can create temporary gloating while losing produces shame; studies show repeated dependence on external evaluation reduces internalized self-worth (Kohn, 1987). Deci and Ryan’s self-determination theory explains that external contingencies (such as competitive rewards) undermine intrinsic motivation and internalized self-regulation, making praise and victory the primary drivers of self-evaluation (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Lepper, Greene, and Nisbett’s classical work also shows that extrinsic rewards and competition can diminish intrinsic interest, which relates directly to fragile, performance-based self-esteem (Lepper et al., 1973).

III. 2nd Main Supporting Point: Competition Harms Learning and Creativity

Author’s direct idea: Kohn reviews research showing that cooperative contexts produce better learning outcomes and that competitive contexts reduce creativity and complex learning (Kohn, 1987).

Your topic sentence: Competition distracts learners toward winning the reward rather than mastering content, thereby reducing deep learning and creative output.

Your supporting details: Meta-analytic and review evidence summarized by Johnson and Johnson indicates cooperative learning promotes higher achievement, more elaborate understanding, and better problem solving than competitive approaches (Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Teresa Amabile’s research finds that extrinsic competition and rewards can undermine creativity, producing less spontaneous and complex work (Amabile, 1996). Additionally, when tasks are complex, competitive pressure increases anxiety and reduces working memory and focus, weakening performance on difficult tasks (Deutsch, 1973).

IV. 3rd Main Supporting Point: Competition Fosters Hostility and Weakens Social Bonds

Author’s direct idea: Competition trains children to see peers as obstacles, generating envy, distrust, and reduced empathy (Kohn, 1987).

Your topic sentence: Regular competitive framing transforms social relations by encouraging adversarial mindsets and reducing prosocial behaviors like trust, sharing, and perspective-taking.

Your supporting details: Classic social psychology experiments — notably Sherif’s Robbers Cave study — show that intergroup competition produces hostility and prejudice, while cooperative goals reduce conflict (Sherif et al., 1961). Research by Deutsch and others demonstrates that cooperative structures promote effective communication, trust, and empathy, whereas competitive structures narrow perspectives and incentivize zero-sum thinking (Deutsch, 1973). Bandura’s social learning theory also suggests children model observed adult behaviors; when adults prize winning over fairness, children emulate adversarial strategies (Bandura, 1977).

V. Conclusion: Reinforcement of Position and Closing Message

Reinforce your position: Taken together, theoretical frameworks and empirical studies support Kohn’s claim that pervasive competition in children’s social and educational environments is more harmful than helpful. Competition often undermines stable self-esteem, reduces intrinsic motivation and creativity, and erodes cooperative social skills (Kohn, 1987; Johnson & Johnson, 1989; Amabile, 1996).

Provide a closing message: Rather than defaulting to win/lose structures, educators and parents should intentionally design cooperative tasks, use objective standards or personal improvement as benchmarks, and model nonzero-sum attitudes. Promoting cooperative learning, intrinsic motivation, and mutual aid prepares children for productive collaboration in adulthood and yields better learning and social outcomes (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Awareness of the research allows families and schools to choose alternatives that foster robust self-esteem, creativity, and healthy relationships rather than perpetuating competition as the default organizing principle.

References

• Kohn, A. (1987). The Case Against Competition. Working Mother, September 1987.
• Kohn, A. (1992). No Contest: The Case Against Competition. Houghton Mifflin.
• Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research. Interaction Book Company.
• Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in Context. Westview Press.
• Lepper, M. R., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1973). Undermining children's intrinsic interest with extrinsic rewards: A test of the "overjustification" hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28(1), 129–137.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Plenum Press.
• Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., & Sherif, C. W. (1961). Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation: The Robbers Cave Experiment. University Book Exchange.
• Deutsch, M. (1973). The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes. Yale University Press.
• Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random House.
• Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Prentice-Hall.