Occasional Paper No. 37
Homework:
A
Literature Review
Center
for Research and Evaluation
College
of Education & Human Development
University
of Maine
5766
Shibles Hall
Orono,
ME 04469-5766
April 2001
A publication of the College of
Education & Human Development at the University of Maine and the Penquis
Superintendents’ Association.
The
Occasional Paper Series is intended to provide educators and
policymakers in Maine with information that can assist them as they address the
complex problems confronting their communities, education systems, or
students. Papers are distributed
periodically as topics vital to educational improvement are addressed by
faculty and graduate students at the University of Maine. The opinions and information obtained in the
Occasional Paper Series are the authors’ and do not necessarily represent those
of the University of Maine or the College of Education & Human Development.
The
Center for Research and Evaluation is a nonprofit research unit
within the College of Education & Human Development at the University of
Maine. Since 1985, the Center has
linked the College of Education & Human Development to Maine’s schools,
communities, and public agencies to more effectively address the complex issues
confronting educational systems in the state.
To stimulate discussion and promote policy developments, the Center
designs and conducts qualitative and quantitative research about school
conditions and practices. It
disseminates research findings through analytical reviews and bulletins, and
publishes original research in The
Journal for Research in Rural Education and in a series of occasional
papers produced in conjunction with the Penquis Superintendents’
Association. The Center also provides
evaluation services, including fiscal, curricular, and administrative reviews.
The Center for Research and Evaluation is funded by the University
of Maine and through project grants. It
is administered and staffed by social science research and evaluation
professionals in conjunction with College and University faculty.
Copyright © 2001 by the Center for Research and Evaluation. This paper may be photocopied for individual
use.
Center for Research & Evaluation
College of Education & Human Development
University of Maine
5766 Shibles Hall
Orono, ME 04469-5766
Phone 207-581-2493 •
Fax 207-581-2423
Equal Opportunity Statement
In complying with the
letter and spirit of applicable laws and in pursuing its own goals of
diversity, the University of Maine System shall not discriminate on the grounds
of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin or
citizenship status, age, disability, or veterans status in employment,
education, and all other areas of the University. The University provides reasonable accommodations to qualified
individuals with disabilities upon request.
Questions and complaints about discrimination in any area of the
University should be directed to Office of Equal Opportunity, University of
Maine, Room 101, 5754 North Stevens Hall, Orono, ME 04469-5754; (207) 581-1226 (voice and TDD)
A Member of the University of Maine System
Introduction
The issue
of homework has historically been of concern to educators, parents, and
students alike. Most agree that the
purpose of homework should be to further facilitate learning, promote the
development of strong study and organizational skills, and encourage students
to become self-disciplined, independent learners. However, with the increase in nonacademic commitments and
pressures placed on students, researchers of the last century have begun to
explore not only the advantages of homework, but also the associated
disadvantages. As educators, it is our
responsibility to be aware of the literature that is available and to integrate
the findings into our own curriculum and our own homework policies.
Psychologist Harris Cooper of the University of Missouri
is, by far, the most prolific researcher of homework and its effects on
students’ academic achievement and social/moral development. Cooper defines homework as “tasks that are
assigned to students by school teachers that are intended to be carried out
during non-school hours” (Cooper, 1989, p. 7).
Through his research, he has concretely identified the many positive and
negative effects homework has on both students and their families (see Table
1). According to Cooper (1994), the
positive effects of homework can be organized by four categories: immediate
academic effects, long-term academic effects, nonacademic effects, and effects
on parental appreciation and involvement.
The negative effects of homework described by Cooper are
often the result of misuse of homework as a teaching and learning strategy
(i.e., assigning too much homework, assigning “busy work,” putting too much
pressure on students, and not allowing for individual differences). When students are repeatedly presented with
“busy work” (i.e., homework designed to make sure the child is doing something,
but that does not require the student to push her/his academic development or
utilize creativity), they may reach a point of satiation indicated by signs of
fatigue and loss of interest in the material.
Cooper notes that, “an activity can only be rewarding for so long. If students are required to spend too much
time on academic material, they are bound to grow bored with it” (Cooper, 2001,
p. 35). Assigning an overload of
homework may also cause the student to miss out on valuable leisure time and
other community activities which may be important for personal, spiritual,
moral, and social development. Cooper
argues that these forms of development may be as essential for personal growth
as is academic development. Another
issue explored by Cooper is cheating.
Cooper supports that students are more likely to cheat when placed under
a great deal of pressure to complete over-burdening homework assignments
(Cooper, 1994).
Table
1
Positive and Negative Effects
of Homework (Cooper, 1994)
Positive Effects of Homework Negative
Effects of Homework
Immediate
Achievement and Learning Satiation
—Better retention of factual knowledge —Loss of interest in academic material
—Increased understanding —Physical and emotional fatigue
—Better critical thinking,
concept formation, Denial
of access to leisure time and community
and information processing activities
—Curriculum enrichment —Parental interference
Long-term
academic —Pressure to complete and perform well
—Encourage learning during leisure time —Confusion of instructional technique
—Improved attitude toward school Cheating
—Better study habits and skills —Copying from other students
Nonacademic —Help beyond tutoring
—Greater self-direction Increased differences between low and high
—Greater self-discipline achievers
—Better time organization
—More
inquisitiveness
—More
independent problem solving
Greater
parental appreciation of and
involvement in
schooling
Finally,
Cooper (1994) and other researchers have begun to explore the concept of a
“level playing field.” This refers to
the wide variety of home life situations in which children reside. Whereas one child may have a warm meal
waiting for him/her and a well-lit, clean, and quiet area in which to complete
homework assignments, another child hurries home to cook dinner and take care
of his/her siblings and has little time to complete assignments. In some homes there is a lack of value
placed on academics and the importance of homework is not reinforced. The home conditions of some children are not
conducive for completing lengthy, thought-provoking homework assignments. The concept of a “level playing field”
challenges the notion that just because students attend the same school, they
are provided with the same access to and opportunities for education.
In
their book, The End of Homework,
Kralovec and Buell (2000), take the stance that while doing homework may
instill a “sense of responsibility in students and help them to budget their
time, ” (p. 2) much larger negative implications exist for homework and its
effect on students, families, and the community at large. The concern of the authors is that students
are missing out on valuable family and personal time and are instead sent home
with backpacks that wrench their backs and necks only to spend several hours
agonizing over homework that they may not understand or have the resources at
home to complete (Kralovec & Buell, 2000).
Kralovec
and Buell (2000) emphasize that the several hours spent each night doing
homework takes away from invaluable time that could be better spent with family
and other social commitments. “[Schools] separate parents and children from
vital interaction with each other and from true curiosity about each other’s
lives. Schools stifle family
originality by appropriating the critical time needed for any sound idea of
family to develop—then they blame the family for its failure to be a family”
(p. 10). Family dinners are often
missed due to the many hours of homework that needs to be planned around
after-school sport and club schedules.
Activities such as Girl or Boy Scouts are often nonexistent after eighth
grade due to overloaded student schedules.
The concern here is that at a time when top colleges and universities
are increasingly seeking the “well-rounded” individual, students are being
forced to limit their creative and community interests in order to concentrate
on homework and grades.
Like
Cooper, Kralovec and Buell are concerned about the notion of a level playing
field. When a student takes an
assignment home, several factors will affect how it is completed, including the
student’s other time commitments, the home environment, and the involvement of
others. “Homework may increase time-on-task for better students from better
homes, but at the same time, for disadvantaged children, create frustrating
situations that are detrimental to learning.
In such cases, homework may contribute to a social ill, rather than help
remedy it” (Cooper, as cited in Kralovec & Buell, 2000, p. 67). A significant concern of many researchers is
that students coming from families of a lower socioeconomic status or those
whose parents did not finish high school, may not have access to the same
resources at home as a child whose family is well-educated and wealthy. Not all children have access to home
computers and vast arrays of educational books and encyclopedias. Not all children are provided with a quiet,
clean, and well-lit area to study. Many
children come home to time consuming chores and other family duties, such as
babysitting for younger siblings or cooking dinner while both parents are at
work. Still, other children return home
to families that are not stable—these children have all they can do to get
through the night, let alone worry about completing their homework.
Another
article presented by Kralovec and Buell (2001) addresses the importance of
teacher involvement in school-related work.
Here, homework is referred to as “a black hole in the learning process,
leaving teachers unaware of each student’s true educational level or progress
and unable to scaffold new knowledge for the students” (p. 40).
They go on to state that with an increase of pressure placed on teachers
to improve test scores for their students, too much of the teaching is being
left to the parents. As opposed to
creating more time for teachers to spend with their students, educational
standards force parents to pick up the slack.
“Understanding students’ mistakes is a crucial part of the teaching
process. When work gets done at home,
teachers have little understanding of the mistakes that students have made on
the material and little control over who does the work” (Kralovec & Buell,
2001, p. 41).
The
effects of vocabulary homework on third grade achievement were explored by
Townsend (1995). A sample of 40 third
graders was broken down into two equal groups of 20 each. One group was assigned vocabulary homework
while the other was assigned no homework.
Each child was then tested on his/her vocabulary knowledge. Test results showed that students who had
been assigned homework had a better understanding of the vocabulary that was
taught. Finally, teachers reported that
they felt homework increased vocabulary understanding.
Brender
(1996) examined the effects of homework completion on the test scores of 401
undergraduate university students attending first and second semester
elementary Spanish courses. A
significant positive correlation emerged between homework completion rates and
test scores based on class level. In
addition, students in their first semester of Spanish were much less likely to
complete the required homework than students in their second semester course.
Some
educators feel that a longer school day is a solution to the homework
debate. Rayburn and Rayburn (1999)
investigated the effects of time spent in the classroom and completed homework
on students’ performance in a management accounting course. The course exams included both multiple
choice questions and exam problems.
Results showed that longer class periods increased the scores when total
exam points earned and exam problems were analyzed. However, this finding was no longer significant when the points
earned on multiple-choice questions were examined. Regardless of class length, students who consistently completed
homework produced higher exam scores than those who did not.
A Negative Outlook
“Something
that infuriates parents, sabotages family time and crowds out so much else in a
child’s life might be tolerable if it also helped kids learn and if it imbued
them with good study habits and a lifelong love of learning” (Begley, 1998, p.
50). However, many researchers support
that homework does not encourage positive school-related behaviors for
children. Some researchers boast that,
especially during the early elementary school years, homework “breeds poor
attitudes and resentment” towards homework and school in general (Cooper, as
cited in Begley, 1998, p. 50).
Swank
(1999) compared quiz scores of 21 fourth grade math students, half of whom were
assigned and completed homework, and half of whom were not assigned
homework. Swank hypothesized that
students who completed homework would achieve higher quiz scores than students
who were not required to complete homework.
The results were surprising to Swank, thereby disproving her
hypothesis. Indeed, no significant
difference was found in academic success between the two groups.
Another
study, conducted by Cooper, Lindsay, Nye, and Greathouse (1998), found there to
be no relationship between time spent on homework and standardized test scores
for students in grades 6 through 12.
However, there was a significant positive relationship between time
spent on homework and student grades.
So
the question remains: Should homework completion be a component of student
grades? Swank (1999) demonstrated that
students who did not complete homework did just as well on a math quiz as
students who did complete homework.
Cooper et al. (1998) supported that completion of homework yields better
grades, but not increased test scores.
Results like these may lead one to question just what role homework is
playing in schools and the level of impact successful completion of homework
assignments should have on grades. If a
child is scoring well on tests, then should that child be graded on homework
that clearly was not needed to enhance understanding of the material? On the other hand, is it more important to
reward strong study skills and effort, assuming that these contribute to
lifelong learning skills?
The most
persuasive argument for assigning homework is the assumption that doing
homework raises students’ academic achievement. In a meta-analysis of 20 studies completed
since 1962, Cooper (1994) discovered the presence of a strong grade-level
effect when assessing homework’s effect on academic achievement as defined by
school grades. High school students,
14-16 years of age, who were assigned homework performed 69% better than
students in a class without assigned homework.
For students in junior high school, 11-13 years of age, the average
homework effect was only half this size.
Finally, in elementary school, homework appeared to have no effect on
achievement.
An
analysis of another group of studies compared homework with in-class supervised
study (Cooper, 1994). Perhaps the most
significant finding of these studies is the emergence, once again, of a strong
grade-level effect. For elementary
students, in-class supervised study proved superior to homework. In junior high, homework was superior to
in-class supervised study, and in high school, homework’s effect was the
strongest.
Balli
(1997) conducted a study of 67 math students in the sixth grade. Each student completed 20 homework
assignments designed to involve parents.
Results revealed that students performed better in school when their
parents helped them with their homework.
However, there were mixed perceptions when it came to how much the
students enjoyed the experience. Some
students felt their parents helped too much or further confused their
understanding of the concepts. Others
were grateful for the help and expressed an interest in continuing this type of
assignment. Balli suggested that
educators might develop a system to support parents’ understanding of homework
concepts, to teach parents ways to help their children without actually doing
the work for them, and to educate parents about how to work at the child’s
developmental level.
Nadon
and Normandeau (1997) investigated the effect of both quantity and quality of
parental involvement with homework on their second grade children’s school
achievement. French was the native
language of all participants and all children were from two parent
families. Parents were asked to
identify themselves as being either the primary or secondary parent involved
with helping their child complete his/her daily homework assignments. Interestingly, results revealed that the
longer primary parents were involved with their children’s homework, the poorer
their children’s achievement in French and mathematics. The greater the quality of the relationship
of the secondary parental involvement with homework the greater their
children’s achievement.
Going back
to Cooper’s (1989, 1994) studies and those of Kralovec and Buell (2000), it is
important to keep in mind that while parental involvement may be helpful for
some children, it may not be a possibility for others. Some children return home to parents that
work the night shift or are too tired and stressed from their daily duties to
help with homework. Whereas placing an
emphasis on parental involvement may increase the value and effectiveness of
homework for some children, it may hinder or disable others. In a later study, Cooper (2001) warns that
in some cases, “parental involvement can turn into parental interference” (p.
35).
In support
of the importance of homework as the route to academic success, several schools
throughout the United States now require students to use a designated notebook
to record daily assignments. Anliker, Aydt, Kellams, and Rothlisberger (1997)
aimed to increase homework completion rates of high school biology and algebra
students by enhancing their organizational skills and reinforcing their
responsibility for their own academic performance. Teachers issued standard homework assignment notebooks and
encouraged students to not only write down their daily assignments, but to also
keep a record of all grades received.
To reinforce the notion of responsibility, detention slips were given to
students who failed to turn in homework.
Findings of the study revealed a positive change in student attitude
toward the importance of academic success and a noticeable increase in use of
school time to complete homework assignments.
Glazer and
Williams (2001) presented information on four types of after school programs
that are aimed at improving homework completion rates at the middle school
level. Each program is based on four
“key ingredients for achieving academic success” (p. 43). These “ingredients” are compilations of
suggestions offered by post-graduate high school seniors. They include, “successful students come to
school prepared for work,” “students must take personal responsibility for
their own learning,” “school work takes effort,” and “successful students
complete their homework every day” (p. 43).
Below are brief explanations of the four types of after school programs
presented by Glazer and Williams (2001).
Keep in mind that all four of these programs are currently being
instituted collectively in one middle school.
1. After-School
Academic Sessions
During four of the five days of the
school week, teachers work with students for one hour after the end of
classes. (No extra funding is necessary
for this extra time, as teachers are contracted to work until 4 p.m.
regardless.) Students may choose which
teacher they wish to spend this hour with.
During this time, no sports or other extra-curricular activities are
allowed to take place. The school
department has arranged with the transportation system to pick all students up
from school one hour later than in previous years. Finally, for those students who wish to participate in school
sports or other activities, they must have a pass from a teacher verifying that
they attended the after-school session.
For other students, the session is optional. (Glazer and Williams go on to state that this is a weakness of
the program because often the students who do not participate in
extra-curricular are the ones that most need the help.)
2. The
Homework Center
During four of the five days of the
school week, students have the option to study in the homework center for an
additional 1 1/4 hours following the after-school academic sessions (see
above). The center is located in
classrooms adjacent to the exit closest to the bus pick-up area so that
students may study while waiting for the bus if the wish. Two teachers receive extra pay to staff the
center.
3. The
Homework Hotline
This is a 24-hour homework assignment
hotline designed to accommodate all students, from the one who forgot to bring
home his/her assignment book to the one who was out sick for the day. Teachers leave a recording of all homework
assigned that day, and in some cases, for days in advance. Teachers can also leave messages announcing
upcoming tests, field trips, and other special events on the hotline.
4. The
University Tutorial Program
University sophomores and juniors are
paired with one or two students who have been identified as needing individual
tutoring in certain subject areas. The
tutorial sessions meet during the after-school academic session one or two
afternoons a week and are coordinated by school teachers.
Suggestions for School
Homework Policies
Cooper (1994) suggests that each elementary, middle, and high
school should instill a homework policy that addresses the needs of its
students and the community as a whole.
He emphasizes the need for policies characterized by clarity that, at
the same time, allow for communication and flexibility. Cooper proposes strong guidelines for
increasing the clarity of homework assignments and controlling homework load,
especially for students with a different teacher for each subject.
Table
2. Cooper (1994)
A Recommended Homework Policy
for Schools
The
frequency and duration of homework assignments should be further specified to
reflect local school and community circumstances.
In
schools where different subjects are taught by different teachers, teachers
should know:
1. What days of the week are available to them
for assignments
2. How much daily homework time should be spent
on their subject
Administrators
should:
1. Communicate the district and school homework
policies to parents
2. Monitor the implementation of the policy
3. Coordinate the scheduling of homework among
different subjects, if needed
Teachers
should clearly state:
1. How the assignment is related to the topic
under study
2. The purpose of the assignment
3. How the assignment might best be carried out
4. What the student must do to demonstrate the
assignment has been completed
Cooper (2001) continues to
expand on his proposed guidelines for effective homework policies by further
defining the amount of homework each student should be doing based on his and
others theory of the presence of a strong grade-level effect. Cooper proposes “the amount and type of
homework students do should depend on their developmental level and the quality
of their support at home” (p. 37). In a
guide for parents, the National Parent Teacher Association and the National
Education Association (2000) state, “most educators agree that for children in
grades K-2, homework is most effective when it does not exceed 10-20 minutes
each day; older children, in grades 3-6, can handle 30-60 minutes a day” (as
cited in Cooper, 2001, p. 37). Cooper
goes on to support that teachers should assign homework based on the 10-minute
rule, or 10 minutes multiplied by the student’s grade level per night.
Conclusions
·
Evidence
supports a strong grade-level effect for homework’s effect on academic
achievement. High school students
experience the greatest advantage from homework completion. For students in junior high school, the
effect is only half that of those in high school. Finally, homework appears to have no effect on academic
achievement for students at the elementary school level (Cooper, 1994).
·
Homework
increases immediate achievement and learning, places an emphasis on long-term
academics, encourages nonacademic self-discipline and inquisitiveness, and
facilitates greater parental appreciation of and involvement in schooling
(Cooper, 1994).
·
Homework
can result in satiation, denial of access to leisure time and community
activities, cheating, and increased differences between low and high achievers
(Cooper, 1994).
·
Not
all children are on a “level playing field.”
Children’s home environments may vary drastically from one child to
another. Therefore, completing homework
assignments may increase academic understanding for some children and be
entirely detrimental to others (Cooper, 1994; Karlovec & Buell, 2000).
·
Junior
high school students perform better in school when their parents help them with
their homework, but respond with mixed perceptions when asked how much they
enjoyed the experience (Balli, 1997).
·
The
effects of parental involvement may not only vary from child to child, but also
from parent to parent. Parental
involvement had different effects on student achievement depending on which
parent was providing the support (Nadon & Normandeau, 1997).
·
Enhancing
students’ organizational skills and reinforcing their responsibility for their
own academic performance resulted in a positive change in attitude toward the
importance of academic success and a noticeable increase in use of school time
to complete homework assignments (Anliker et al., 1997).
The research presented here represents merely a sampling of
the vast array of articles published over the last 20 years addressing how
homework policies are designed and implemented in elementary and secondary
schools. The general themes which
continue to emerge are that homework needs to be assigned with a specific goal
in mind (i.e., not only as work to keep the child busy) and to encourage more
than simple repetition of what was done in class. Rather, homework should be an extension of classroom
experiences. It should require students
to build on the knowledge acquired during the school day by applying the
concepts to other areas of interest or by encouraging the child to take the
next step on his or her own.
Homework assignments need to be designed and implemented
with each student’s best interest in mind.
Individual differences not only in academic abilities, but also in home
life situations, need to be considered at all times. Researchers have placed considerable emphasis on the necessity of
assigning homework that is age/grade-level appropriate. As educators, we need to continuously adjust
our teaching strategies, including the use of homework, to the individual
needs, abilities, and life circumstances of our students.
References
Anliker, R., Aydt, M.,
Kellams, M., & Rothlisberger, J.
(1997). Improving student achievement through encouragement of homework
completion. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 415 022)
Balli, S. (1997).
When mom and dad help: Student
reflections on parent involvement with homework. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 409 103)
Begley, S. (1998).
Homework doesn’t help. Newsweek, 131, 50-52.
Brender, J. R.
(1996). Effects of homework completion on test scores in introductory Spanish
courses. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 395 452)
Cooper, H. (1989). Synthesis of research on
homework. Educational Leadership, 47, 85-91.
Cooper, H. (1994).
The battle over homework: An
administrator’s guide to setting sound and effective policies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Cooper, H. (2001).
Homework for all – in moderation.
Educational Leaderhip, 58,
34-38.
Cooper, H., Lindsay, J.
J., Nye, B., & Greathouse, S. (1998).
Relationships among attitudes about homework, amount of homework assigned
and completed, and student achievement.
Journal of Educational Psychology,
90, 70-83.
Glazer, N. T., Williams,
S. (2001). Averting the homework crisis.
Educational Leadership, 58, 43-45.
Kralovec, E., & Buell,
J. (2000). The end of homework.
Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Kralovec, E.,
& Buell, J. (2001). End homework now. Educational Leadership, 58,
39-42.
Nadon, I., &
Normandeau, S. (1997). Can
parents’ involvement with homework moderate the relation between children’s
cognitive abilities and school achievement? (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 409 120)
Rayburn, L. G.,
& Rayburn, J. M. (1999). Impact of course length and homework
assignments on student performance. Journal of Education for Business, 74,
325-331.
Swank, A. L. G. (1999). The
effect of weekly math homework on fourth grade student math performance. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 433 234)
Townsend, S. (1995).
The effects of vocabulary homework
on third grade achievement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 379
643)