Conrad, T. (2013, November 14). Todd Conrad: Collaborative competition. [Video file]. Retrieved 21 February 2016 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN_r0DjF8Ls

This talk, given by Todd Conrad at a TEDx event in Muskegon, Michigan, puts forth a few ideas that points out some flaws in the concept of using competition to motivate. The first being the historical fallacy of “the most effective way to get the most of people is to have them compete against one another.” This hyper-competitive state that Conrad discusses is what we view as the negative incarnation of competition casing all the negative emotions associated with the competitive spirit. This marginalizes the “others” through isolation by searching for external validation through putting oneself ahead. This “social competition” that is a product of this environment and ultimately does not result in an outcome that is beneficial to anyone. The cyclical nature of such a system will result in those who were marginalized to continue to be so, pushing these individuals further and further to the peripheries, never being able to succeed. Is it any wonder we have seen such a blowback against having competition exist in our classrooms? The historical reality is that this hyper-competitive, alienating system has been at the forefront of our classrooms for over a hundred years so it is no surprise that many have looked at it and said to competition “never again”.

But does this make competition inherently bad? I say with fervor, NO! As Conrad states, such a system is a product of the environment. If the environment is aggressive and hyper-competitive, then it makes sense that the students who participate in the system will mirror these traits. However, as he discusses, what if we make that competitive model more reflective of collaborative practices? Would our students reflect those traits as well? Communication, motivation, engagement, trust, a drive to succeed would all exist if the environment supports it. This model focuses on the process, not the result. It takes away the dependency the participants have on striving to win, but in its place it pushes them to drive for success, in whatever form that takes. Additionally, it replaces the traditional concept of “us vs. them”, with a model that makes your opponent’s allies, and tools to learn from. The motivation comes from within and the participants strive for excellence not for others, but for themselves. Without competition we fall into the participation ribbon syndrome, which takes away meaning for putting in your best, your hardest work. But without collaboration, we fall back into the historical model of aggressive hyper-competitiveness. Therefore, through collaborative competition we accomplish the desired result of blended system, taking the best of both concepts and molding it into a system that stresses both the drive to achieve the goal, but also the process it took to get there.