Running Head: THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
The Purpose of Homework:
Its Challenges, Benefits, and Opportunities
Tanya Winship
University of British Columbia
March 17, 2014
Inquiry Paper for EDUC 451
1
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
2
The Purpose of Homework:
Its Challenges, Benefits, and Opportunities
Oh, to be a student, or even a teacher, with their six hour days limited to Monday to
Friday. Too often there is an assumption that school fits into these little boxes with nothing
overflowing beyond this neat time frame. The reality though is that students are being
overloaded with science projects, independent reading, math practice, and grammar exercises.
Homework: the controversy of our generation. So, what is homework? What is its purpose? Why
do we assign it? And who is it for? These are the questions that I plan to explore throughout my
inquiry paper. This inquiry will take form in entering the debate, exploring my own beliefs
alongside research that helps frame these ideas.
In my own experience, I have witnessed an epidemic: students do not complete their
homework. After much frustration, I realized it was the same students who had not done their
homework, but more alarmingly perhaps was that it was the same students who had homework to
begin with. Many students completed the work in class and, generally, homework in my
experience is restricted to unfinished work; only students who did not complete their work
during the allotted class time were assigned homework. Not surprisingly, it is these students who
should perhaps not be doing homework or at least not for the reasons proposed. What I mean
here is that these students typically do not complete homework in class for one of two reasons:
either they are not able to focus in class and misuse time or they don’t understand the concept or
materials. By sending these students home with unfinished work, it merely passes the burden
onto the parent to either focus their attention or assist them in their work. While it would be ideal
for a parent to assist in their child’s education, this is not always practical. Conversely, parents
may offer too much support, completing the homework for the student in which case the student
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
3
does not learn on their own (or at all). Home also offers more distractions, less structure, and
varying assistance. As a result, homework is very often not completed or not completed by the
child themselves. This poses the question then of why we assign homework at all.
The history of homework is steeped in controversy. According to Cooper (2001), the
cycles of homework controversies have followed thirty-year cycles (p.1). Since the late 1800s,
homework has been an important matter of discussion for administrators, teachers, and parents.
In the early 1880s, Francis A. Walker, president of the Boston School Board lamented:
Over and over again have I had to send my own children, in spite of their tears,
to bed, long after the assigned tasks had ceased to have any educational value
and had become a means of nervous exhaustion and agitation, highly prejudicial
to body and mind (Goodman, 2007, p. 25).
This bold statement reflected the turn of the century anti-homework debate; there was great
discussion over whether homework had any educational value. Instead homework was perceived
to be a “threat to the physical, emotional, and mental health of the child” (Kravolec and Buell,
2000, p. 42). In 1900, Edward Bok, editor of Ladies Home Journal, argued that “five hours of
brainwork was all we could ask of our kids; homework intruded on family life and interfered
with the rights of children and parents” (Goodman, 2007, p. 26). Bok “called for homework to
be abolished entirely for those under fifteen and limited to an hour a night for older students”
(Kravolec and Buell, 2000, p. 43). Parents were invited to take the lead and demand restrictions
surrounding homework.
In response to the movement against homework and the understanding that play played a
vital role in development, cities across the country began to re-examine education as a whole. In
1912, the Ethical Culture School in New York City established its own Open-Air Department
(Kravolec and Buell, 2000, p. 45). The Open-Air Department opened a rooftop school with openair education, “complete with movable walls, windows, and desks [and a] classroom [that] was
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
4
often transformed into a playground as students flowed smoothly from academic work to
rigorous outdoor play” (Kravolec and Buell, 2000, p. 45). The concept of the rooftop school
directly corresponded with the benefits of fresh air and sunshine and homework became a core
innovation; students were not allowed to do homework until grade six with the exception of
reading and catching up (Goodman, 2007, p. 25-26). By the 1930s, homework had been
abolished completely from elementary schools in Los Angeles (Goodman, 2007, p. 26). Hours of
memorization common in homework were considered counterproductive to the evolving
educational thinking; the focus of education had shifted towards problem-solving and practical
applications, leading towards “questions of how to define learning and how to measure it [which]
remain at the heart of the debate that still rages [today] about the value of homework” (Kravolec
and Buell, 2000, p. 46).
This evolution corresponded to the movement among the workforce; eight hour days
were being mandated for all employees, but between school and homework, students were
working far beyond these eight hours. The Walsh-Healy Act of 1936 led administrators to
question the workload for its students and in 1937 Bennington High School “abolished
homework and [as a result] the failure rate dropped from 19% to 2%” (Goodman, 2007, p. 2627). Likewise schools in London, England abolished homework for children under the age of 12
because “nervous disorders of some young children are due to anxiety over examinations and
excessive homework undertaken in preparation of them” (Goodman, 2007, p. 27). Educators
believed that homework could “weaken children intellectually and foster poor study habits”
(Goodman, 2007, p. 26).
Following the Second World War, homework returned to prominence, but the definition
of “homework” was often vague. In 1950, a turn towards “educating the whole child”
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
5
(Goodman, 2007, p. 27) introduced motivated reading, community resources, reading the
newspaper, and developing a hobby closely related to class study. According to Goodman
(2007), a study by Gill & Schlossman, “The Lost Cause of Homework Reform,” claimed that a
1956 fact-finding commission on Education in Connecticut called for “a vast overhauling
concerning the theory and practice of homework” (p. 27). There was a question, much like my
own, of what homework was and what purpose did it serve. The American Educational Research
Association stated in the 1960s that “whenever homework crowds out social experience, outdoor
education, and creative activities, and usurps time that should be devoted to sleep, it is not
meeting the basic needs of children and adolescent” (Goodman, 2007, p. 27). Supporting this
research, the National Education Association recommended that
“(a) children in the early elementary school period have no homework
specifically assigned by the teacher; (b) that limited amounts of homework – no more
than an hour a day – be introduced during the upper elementary school and junior high
years; (c) that homework be limited to four nights a week; and (d) that in secondary
school no more than one and a half hours a night be expected” (Kravolec and Buell,
2000, p. 49),
but this was largely ignored by school administrators and policy makers.
The continued evolution of education that followed was largely due to the Cold War and
a growing emphasis on Science and Math which “reaffirmed and rallied support for traditional
values of individual initiative, hard work, corporate enterprise, and technological advance”
(Kravolec and Buell, 2000, p. 47). This push towards academic success and rigour resulted in an
increasing amount of homework. A document, released in 1983, entitled “A Nation at Risk,”
“recommended that, in the interest of keeping America economically viable with other countries,
students should be assigned far more homework; a seven hour school day and a longer school
year being implemented; and additional time above this should be found to meet special needs of
slow and gifted learners and others who need diversity” (Goodman, 2007, p. 29). The prevalence
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
6
of homework was “fueled by educators who used it to help meet increasingly rigorous, statemandated academic standards” (Cooper, 2001, p. 2). As predicted, however, the rebellion against
homework has taken form once more and parents, administrators, and teachers are taking action.
The difference in today’s era of homework is that there is not a focus on abolishing
homework, but rather on beginning to reimagine or rethink homework. This new conception
relates to my own inquiry: thinking about why we assign homework and how we can make it
useful for students. LaConte (1981) argues that homework is a learning experience and that there
are three types of homework used today: practice (which needs to be individualized), preparation
(which needs a clear purpose), and extension (which goes beyond class work) (p. 1). Cooper
(2001) adds that “homework assignments can be classified by their (a) amount, (b) purpose, (c)
skill area, (d) degree of individualization, (e) choice for the student, (f) completion deadline, and
(g) social context” (p. 3). The truth is that homework is being used for a variety of purposes, not
all of which are practical or effective. Due to overwhelming concerns over increasing amounts of
homework, it is being used today in inventive ways, but in order to understand these new
methods, we must first understand the current challenges homework presents to the
administration, educators, students, and their parents.
There is little concrete evidence of policy regarding whether homework is mandatory
and if there is a required amount of homework. Specific school districts comment on it in their
district policies, but my current school district, Surrey (#36), has no such stated regulations. The
Vancouver School Board (1994) states that “homework assignments shall contribute to the
educational growth of the student, shall not require the use of resources not readily available to
the student, and shall be designed so that there is no formal homework in the primary grades.”
They also state that intermediate grades should receive no more than 30 minutes of homework
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
daily (Vancouver School Board Policy on Homework, 1994). In the United States,
comparatively, a national study from 1994 found that 35% of school districts had written
homework policies (Cooper, 2001, p. 50). Cooper (2001) explains that the survey showed that
among those districts that do have written homework policies, the typical policy “suggested that
elementary schools assign homework three or four times a week, middle schools four times a
week, and high schools four or five times a week [with] … the recommended homework per
night [ranging] from about 40 minutes in elementary school to 70 minutes in middle school to
100 minutes in high school” (p. 51).
In reality, it is the teacher who determines how much homework is assigned and what its
purpose is. Whether there is a specific policy on homework may affect a teacher’s decision, but
ultimately they can create homework to serve their own purpose. This is why my inquiry is so
important; I must decide how I am going to structure homework, how much to assign, and what
its purpose will be. Through examining homework’s history and connecting that with
contemporary research I will continue to expand my own thoughts. For teachers, there is a
growing belief that teachers are required to teach too much in too little time. Goodman (2007)
asserts that “teachers are under intense pressure to cover more and more curriculum, to teach
larger classes, to handle more behavioural problems, to juggle increased interruptions to class
time, to fill out more detailed reports, to attend more meetings, and to administer an everincreasing number of standards” (p. 2). As a result, teachers are forced to send work home,
“[justifying] homework by saying that they cannot get everything done in the day” (Goodman,
2007, p. 2). Is this an effective way to teach? Simply put, no. Not only does it pass the problem
onto the parents, making it a “frustrating and counter-productive exercise” (Goodman, 2007, p.
2), and, as history as shown us, infringe on children’s development and family environment, but
7
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
8
it also creates more work for the teacher. If the teacher does not check homework or collect it
regularly, there follows a belief that this removes the purpose of homework in many ways
because students are not being held accountable. Checking homework or collecting it, however,
makes more work for the teacher who now has extra marking and has to take time to assign
homework and verify that it is completed, chasing those who do not complete it on time.
Conversely, Bennett and Kalish (2006) argue that this is merely an assumption, that “in order for
it to be worthwhile, it must be graded and count toward a student’s final marks,” but rather
explain that many education experts “think that homework doesn’t have to be graded to be
useful. In fact, it’s better if it’s not” (p. 51). The obvious problem with Bennett and Kalish’s
argument, however, is that this is not the dominant thought amongst teachers and that, in fact, 82
percent of American teachers mark homework (Bennett and Kalish, 2006, p. 51). Regardless of
whether homework is used for marks, teachers who assign homework are still responsible for
ensuring its completion, creating a problematic cycle which results in poor student-teacher
relationships with chronic conflict and power struggles in this vital relationship.
The relationship between the teacher and student is further complicated by the presence
of the home. The school-home connection is often made through the use of homework.
Connecting the teacher, parent, and student, homework acts as a bridge between school and
home; homework is a means for parents to see what their children are doing in school, while
teachers can gain feedback through the completion of assignments and written comments or
during conferences. LaConte (1981) describes this connection as a “bond between parent, child,
and teacher that can be very important to a student’s success in school” (p. 13). According to
Cosden, Morrison, Gutierrez, and Brown (2004), studies show that “parental involvement in
homework is important, not just because it provides immediate assistance to students, but
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
9
because this involvement models positive attitudes and study skills needed to succeed in school”
and that “parents make particularly strong models because children see their parents as both
competent and similar to them” (p. 224). LaConte (1981) explains that “parents expect their
children to have homework and tend to regard teachers and schools that do not assign homework
as inferior” (p. 13). There is a belief that parents “want” homework, assuming it leads to
academic success; parents often “judge the quality of the school by how much homework the
teachers give, often creating a climate that forces teachers to create assignment against their
better judgment” (Goodman, 2007, p. 16). Goodman (2007) cites an e-mail in which a mother
states “homework is a way to allow parents to be involved in education,” but Goodman argues
that “no matter parents justify or demand it, excessive homework is an intrusion into the private
lives of children [and] it needs to be controlled” (p. 16). Too much homework quickly becomes a
detriment to this critical relationship.
Bennett and Kalish (2006) explain that homework often becomes a point of controversy
between parent and child rather than a benefit: “half of the 1200 parents surveyed said they’ve
had a serious argument with their children over homework, and 34 percent said it’s become a
source of struggle and stress for them and their child” (p. 60). Goodman (2007) further contests
that many parents actually lack the sufficient knowledge to help their children succeed or
accomplish homework (p. 35). Goodman (2007) explains that “in some homes, the kids don’t
know how to do the work, and the parents can’t help. In other homes, parents do the work for
them” (p. 35). Cooper (2001) adds that “parents may create confusion if they are unfamiliar with
the material that is sent home for study or if their approach to learning differs from that taught in
school” (p. 9). The inequality of parents’ ability to assist their children with homework is
fundamental in the debate against homework.
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
10
The environment at home can present a series of further challenges. The level of support
from parents is, of course, a factor, but is only a part of the home environment. Distractions such
as video games, television, extracurricular activities, and sports are only the tip of the iceberg;
there are larger issues at play including transportation arrangements, socioeconomic status, and
family dynamics. Understanding the home environment is essential not only for understanding
why the student may not complete their homework, but also why the student did not finish the
work in class. The home connection may surround the issue of homework, but it may also shed
light on a number of issues that extend beyond a math assignment or book report. Kravolec and
Buell (2000) are among researchers who present class as a key issue, stating that “the story of the
relationship between class and academic achievement is important to us because homework
affects people of different classes differently, and therefore the practice of homework appears to
further disadvantage the already disadvantaged” (p. 70). Goodman (2007) sums these issues up,
explaining that
“in some homes sports, music, dancing, and martial arts are important. In other
homes the child arrives home tired and depressed and just wants to unwind…
Some homes have computers; some do not… Some children live in cramped
quarters with no room to work…In some homes drugs and alcohol are being
abused, while in other homes the parents are quarreling and perhaps in the
process of separating” (p. 35-36).
Goodman (2007) concludes with a thought-provoking question: “If parents are not equal,
situations are not equal, conditions for doing homework are not equal and not all students are
equal to the task, why do we insist on assigning homework equally?” (p. 36). This question is at
the heart of my inquiry and reflects much of my own experiences.
Homework has not been controversial due simply to the burden of teachers and the
reaction of parents; there is an incredible impact on children. Alfie Kohn (2007) argues that
negative effects of homework on students “include children’s frustration and exhaustion, lack of
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
11
time for other activities, and possible loss of interest in learning” (p. 1). According to a 2000
report by the American Psychological Association, “typical schoolchildren today report more
anxiety than [those] in the 1950s and a 2006 survey…found that more than 42 percent reported
that homework caused them ‘a lot of stress;’ nearly 16 percent said it cause ‘extreme stress’
(Bennett and Kalish, 2006, p. 32). The effect on students is, of course, dependent on their
personal or home situations, but students generally report a disdain for homework which is
reflected in a number of surveys. Kohn (2006) blames “the ‘tougher standards’ fad that has
American education in its grip [for] more and more homework for younger and younger
children” and states that “the proportion of 6- to 8-year- olds who reported having homework on
a given day had climbed from 34% in 1981 to 58% in 1997, and that the weekly time spent
studying more than doubled during the same period” (p. 1) Furthermore, Kohn (2007) argues that
“there is absolutely no evidence of any academic benefit from assigning homework to children
under the age of about fourteen [and states that,] for younger students, in fact, there isn’t even
a correlation between whether children do homework (or how much they do) and any
meaningful measure of achievement” (p. 1). The research clearly demonstrates the strong
consequence or challenge of homework for students and history illustrates the importance of free
time for children. Bennett and Kalish (2006) state that in a study of 546 kids between ages six
and twelve, “those who engaged in five hours of physical activity per week had better math
scores than [those] who engaged in physical activity for just forty minutes per week – even
though the first group spent 14 percent less time [on their studies]” (p. 91). This is reflective of
what was seen throughout history: play and development are seen as increasingly important and
more beneficial than rigid math drills or reading exercises.
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
12
There are, however, some opportunities that arise for homework to be beneficial to
students, but this is heavily dependent on the type of homework assigned and its designated
purpose. Ramdass and Zimmerman (2011) explain that homework can be used as a tool for selfregulation; their article, “Developing Self-Regulation Skills: The Important Role of Homework,”
examines the “quality measures of homework such as managing distractions, self-efficacy and
perceived responsibility for learning, setting goals, self-reflection, managing time, and setting a
place for homework completion” and argue that these are more effective that the quantifiable
evidence many researchers attempt to derive from homework (p. 195). Ramdass and Zimmerman
(2011) claim that “during homework completion, students engage in self-regulation by
motivating themselves, inhibiting distractions, using strategies to complete homework, managing
time, setting goals, self-reflecting on their performance, and delaying gratification” (p. 195). The
results from their study can be found from elementary-aged students to college students. In order
for homework to positively correlate to self-regulation skills, Ramdass and Zimmerman (2011)
assert that the homework assignments that are “adequately challenging and interesting help
struggling and at-risk students develop motivation and self-regulation skills and achieve success”
(p. 195). If teachers use homework to engage students in meaningful and purposeful ways,
students may be able to gain some valuable skills that go beyond the academic prescriptions of
the assignments they complete.
Alfie Kohn (2007), author of “The Homework Myth,” is very opinionated when it comes
to homework, maintaining that the “negative effects of homework are well-known, while the
positive effects of homework are largely mythical” (p. 1). That being said, Kohn does not
suggest we eliminate homework altogether, but rather rethink its purpose, how we assign it, and
when we assign it. Rethinking homework needs to be made a priority and a goal of both teachers
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
13
and administrators. Luckily Alfie Kohn, as well as many other scholars, have made considerable
contributions to the process of rethinking homework and outlined what teachers, administrators,
parents, and even students, can do in order to “solve” the homework problem. Kohn (2007)
summarizes what many researchers suggest and organizes his ideas into nine key suggestions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Educate yourself and share what you’ve learned with colleagues and parents.
Rethink standardized “homework policies.”
Reduce the amount – but don’t stop there. Decrease quantity and increase quality.
Change the default.
Ask the kids.
Assign only what you design.
Use homework as an opportunity to involve students in decision-making.
Stop grading.
Experiment.
Kohn’s suggestions surround the idea of making homework purposeful for the students and for
teachers. Vatterot (2009) suggests that homework support programs are another valuable option,
particularly for students with diverse learning needs; she proposes a number of options to find
time for homework during the school day, such as dedicated study blocks, and insists that
scheduling time, whether daily or weekly, is an accessible strategy to assist all students (p. 141145). By assigning a purpose to homework and providing time and support for students to
complete their work, teachers can easily overcome many of the obstacles that accompany
homework.
When I began the process of inquiry, I thought there would be a clear answer to the
problem of homework, but as I explored, I realized homework was a debate I would enter into.
The conclusion I came to, however, is that homework has its purpose and value and that it is the
teacher’s responsibility to assign this purpose and value rather than creating “busywork” for both
themselves and the students. Teachers must re-evaluate and identify the purpose of each
homework assignment; in order for homework to have a purpose, teachers must give it a purpose
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
14
and share this purpose with the students. My question itself was “what is the purpose of
homework,” but the reality is that the only purpose of homework is the one the teacher delegates.
The question then becomes, for me, how do I know homework will be meaningful and how can I
implement the strategies of rethinking homework into my own teaching style and my classroom.
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
15
References
Bennett, S., & Kalish, N. (2006). The Case Against Homework: How Homework Is Hurting Our
Children and What We Can Do About It. New York: Crown Publishers.
This book is heavy in American content and provides a number of statistics that are applicable
to education in the United States. The Case Against Homework is written using accessible
language; Bennett and Kalish use anecdotes from parents and teachers to explore research and
connect it to real-life examples. The main purpose of the book was to make a case against
homework and provide parents with useful strategies to address the problem and make sure
their children succeed in their academic pursuits.
Cooper, H. (2001). The Battle Over Homework: Common Ground for Administrators, Teachers,
and Parents. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Harris Cooper is a leading researcher in the homework issue. The Battle Over Homework is
written in a question-answer format and includes a comprehensive examination of a number of
studies and surveys. Although the book consists mostly of American content, it goes deeper
than most research and examines how the length, subject matter, and frequency of homework
and the age and ability of the students can greatly affect the effectiveness of homework.
Cooper utilizes a number of tables and charts to clearly illustrate his findings.
Cosden, M., Morrison, G., Gutierrez, L., & Brown, M. (2004, Summer). The Effects of
Homework Programs and After-School Activities on School Success. Theory Into
Practice, 43(3), 220-226.
Cosden et al. look at the effects of homework programs, particularly how these programs can
be useful in helping students complete and understand homework as well as how these
programs can lead to general academic success and better study skills. The article presents
after-school programs as an alternative to daycare and suggests that the supervision and
structure of the programs, along with academic support, lead to students who have reduced
levels of stress and are more likely to want to attend school. Cosden et al. also examine the
effect of parental involvement and explore how decreased involvement can be seen as both a
negative and a positive.
Goodman, V. (2007). Simply too much Homework! Calgary: Reading Wings Inc.
Vera Goodman offers the essential Canadian perspective. Goodman offers examples of
Canadian education policies and links the issue to Canadian curriculum. Simply Too Much
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
16
Homework! presents Goodman’s findings in a clear, easy to read format that covers everything
from overloaded teachers to desperate parents to the historical significance of homework and
concludes with strategies to facilitate change and use homework, when required, as a useful
tool for teachers, parents, and students.
Kohn, A. (2006, September). Down with Homework! Instructor.
Alfie Kohn is one of the best known scholars on the topic of homework. “Down with
Homework!” is one of many articles he has written on the topic. This article focuses on
overcoming the status quo and explains that more and more homework is being piled on
students at an increasingly young age. Kohn clearly states the negative effects of homework
and provides the proven historical perspective that play time really matters.
Kohn, A. (2007, Winter). Changing the Homework Default. Independent School.
Based largely on the findings from his book, Alfie Kohn uses the article “Changing the
Homework Default” to present the concept that the negative effects of homework are wellknown, but the positive effects are largely mythical, and that, despite an absence of academic
value, homework is being piled on at an alarming rate. Kohn’s article present nine core
suggestions (presented in the paper) to rethink homework and make it meaningful for both
teachers and students.
Kohn, A. (2007, January-February). Rethinking Homework. Principal.
Much like in “Changing the Homework Default,” Kohn uses this article to explore themes
present in his book, The Homework Myth (see list of suggested further readings). This article is
essentially an extension of “Changing the Homework Default” and much of the content is the
same, including the list of suggestions to rethink homework.
Kravolec, E., & Buell, J. (2000). The End of Homework: How Homework Disrupts Families,
Overburdens Children, and Limits Learning. Boston: Beacon Press.
Kravolec and Buell present the debate over homework and strongly suggest the abolition of
homework, citing the historical perspective of homework. Rather than provide strategies for
teachers to make homework purposeful, Kravolec and Buell call for parents to come together
and fight the system against homework. The book, which is heavy in American content, seems
to portray only the negative aspects of homework and forsakes the potential homework has.
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
17
LaConte, R. T. (1981). Homework as a Learning Experience: What Research Says to the
Teacher. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
LaConte’s article may be outdated, but his presentation of the types of homework give teachers
a clear indication of how they can and should assign purpose to homework. At the time this
article was written, LaConte states that his research was inconclusive, but establishes an
important link between teacher, parent, and child, a link that has been subsequently proven as
essential. LaConte also provides guidelines and principles to help teachers develop feasible
homework policy. These guidelines have helped shape other research in recent years.
Ramdass, D., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2011, Winter). Developing Self-Regulation Skills: The
Important Role of Homework. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(2), 194-218.
Ramdass and Zimmerman take a unique stance of how work at home can actually be a benefit
to the student and argue that the presence of distractions may actually lead to the
development of self-regulation skills. This article presents homework as a tool of self-regulation
and suggests it may be responsible for increased ability to manage distractions, improved selfefficacy, responsiblility for learning, setting goals, self-reflection, time management, and setting
a place for homework. Ramdass and Zimmerman suggest that delayed gratification leads
students to motivate themselves.
Vatterot, C. (2009). Rethinking Homework: Best Practices That Support Diverse Needs.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Although this book was only cited once, it is definitely worth a read! Vatterot presents clear and
simple examples for teachers to adapt their homework and truly rethink its purpose. Rethinking
Homework is particularly useful for supporting diverse learning needs and understands that
students are unique and individual creatures. Vatterot presents the debate and proceeds to
provide models through which we can understand what it means to rethink homework.
THE PURPOSE OF HOMEWORK
18
Suggestions for Further Reading
Cooper, H. (2006). Duke Study: Homework Helps Students Succeed in School, As Long As There
Isn't Too Much. Durham, NC: Duke University. Retrieved from
http://today.duke.edu/2006/03/homework.html
Kohn, A. (2006, September 14). Kids May Be Right After All: Homework Stinks. USA Today.
Kohn, A. (2006). The Homework Myth: Why Our Kids Get Too Much of a Bad Thing. Boston:
Da Capo Press.
Paulu, N. (1998). Helping Your Students With Homework. US Department of Education: Office
of Educational Research and Improvement. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/PDFDocs/hyc.pdf
Sallee, B., & Rigler, N. (2008). Doing Our Homework on Homework. The English Journal,
98(2), 46-51.