The famous psychologist BF Skinner believes that one of the obstacles in behavior development is lack of positive reinforcement, or the act of increasing the reward immediately after a response to also increase its frequency in the future. This is applied with dogs—increasing their treats as they learn their tricks. This is also applied in education, with academic distinction manifested in the Dean’s Honors List.
However, positive reinforcement must not be confused with fake praises. Carol Gioia states in her article for the Helium that while positive reinforcement can cause behavior modification, unreal praises may only ruin one’s self esteem. If people receive excessive remarks for a “job well done” even if they have failed, they lose the opportunity for genuine development.
With this, the whole operation of award-giving bodies—the volume and quality of awards and the selection process—must be carefully crafted. Sadly, the Harvest of Winners fails to meet the requisites.
The Harvest of Winners is a Council of Student Organizations (CSO) project that acknowledges outstanding performances of its organizations and individuals. Awards are categorized into Activity Awards, Organization Awards, Individual Awards and CSO Awards.
Applicants of the Harvest of Winners must pass the paper screening before proceeding to the panel interview. Requirements for the paper screening include filled out forms, essays, recommendation letters, a copy of grades and post activity documents.
Thirteen awards are given every year during the Harvest of Awards. This volume is too much that it fails to preserve the reputation of the awards, defeating the purpose of recognizing accomplishments that stood out throughout the year. This makes the Harvest of Awards border on self- gratification.
Some awards are given redundantly. Under the Activities Awards, for example, different awards are given for the best fund-raising, socio-civic and academic activities when they can actually be sorted under long-term and short-term activities.
For example, the prestigious Ten Outstanding Students of the Philippines awards don’t have sub-categories.
Moreover, acknowledging the Outstanding Executive Vice President, Outstanding Vice President, Outstanding Assistant Vice President, Outstanding Secretary and Outstanding Treasurer seems like an invitation for egocentricity. This is most especially true since candidates for the Harvest of Awards do not get nominated; they apply. These awards are not even necessary since the truly good leaders get satisfaction from the sheer success of the organization, not a gold medal at the end of his or her term.
In addition, while the paper requirements and panel interview are probably the closest CSO can get to objectivity, they are not the best reflections of the grueling year of the organization. The process that the Harvest of Winners uses is not the most appropriate for the type of awards they give; it only highlights the continuing bureaucratic paperwork of the CSO.
An award is supposed to provide elation to its recipient. When too many of it is given away, it loses its prestige and becomes a disservice to the aspirants. This will just be a form of encouraged mediocrity.
That awards are given based on application does not guarantee that the truly good ones are those awarded. Those who do not fall under the trap of award application, but are good leaders based on testimonies and results, deserve awards more than those who are able to compile pieces of paper containing “impressive” background information and good recommendation.
Awards are not like the rewards credit card companies give—just because you have accumulated the number of points required, you get free Starbucks coffee or Charles and Keith shoes. Awards are supposed to be genuine milestones. Remember that those who receive awards (including the Harvest of Winners), especially in this University, become an inspiration to other Lasallians. We certainly do not want our future leaders admiring people who are not the most deserving.
