DOCUMENT RESUME ED 433 234 AUTHOR Swank, Anne

3mentally retarded. Secondly, more than one unit in the math curriculum wascovered during the course of this research project. The differences in difficulty and studentneeds may have had some impact on the study. For example, units on numeration tend tobe much easier for fourth grade students than do the units covering multiplication anddivision. The research was done in one school and one classroom and was completed in arelatively short amount of time (only nine weeks). Finally, the students were allowed tochoose whether to do homework each week. This was a limitation because data changedweekly with the students who chose to do the homework assigned for that week. Theresearcher considered the possibilities of all or none of the students completing thehomework assignments in a given week. If all students opted to do all the homework (ornone of the homework in a given week of the research), this data was excluded from thestatistical part of the study. It would then be addressed in the Conclusions section of thisresearch project. All of these limitations may have had an impact on the study.Assumptions in the StudyThe following assumptions were made in this study: every child had an equalopportunity to learn in this classroom; there was a fair sampling of students to represent thetotal fourth grade population of an elementary school in Eastern Tennessee; and some of thechildren in the classroom may have had a natural intelligence for mathematics (Gardner,1993, p. 15). Howard Gardner describes this as the Logical-Mathematical Intelligence,which enables students to reason logically in mathematics and science and solvemathematical problems quickly (Gardner, 1993, p. 15). For these students homework mayhave made no difference in the academic achievement on quizzes. However, they were stillincluded in the study because it represented a typical classroom situation. This situation willbe addressed in the Conclusions section of this action research project.12

4Hypothesis of the StudyThere is no significant difference in academic success between children whocomplete weekly math homework assignments and those who do not complete weekly mathhomework assignments at the .05 level of significance. This academic success includesscores on weekly math quizzes.13

Chapter IIREVIEW OF RELATED LITERATUREHomework has always been a topic of debate in school systems across the UnitedStates. From elementary school to college, teachers, principals, and professors haveconsidered the positive and negative effects of homework on their pupils. However theresearch on homework is sparse. Educators deal with homework every day but still have noproof as to whether or not homework actually improves academic performance. Moststudies focus on the attitudes that students have toward homework and the relationshipsamong homework and student achievement. This study takes the research one step fartherand focuses on a specific subject and whether or not homework plays a role in studentachievement.Homework has been distinguished by major shifts in policy and practice over thecourse of this century. However, as the twentieth century comes to a close, a strongconsensus supports homework as a vital and integral requirement of American schooling(Walberg, et. al., 1985, p. 77). Many educators now agree that the more homework given thebetter. This was not always the case. Homework's history is filled with bitter battles toeliminate it from schools. Many "progressive" educators of the early twentieth centuryregarded homework as inconsistent with the best pedagogical thinking (Gill and Schlossman,1996, p. 27).Homework in the earlier part of this century was very repetitious focusing totally onthe "trinity"drill, memorization, and recitation (Gill and Schlossman, 1996, p. 31).Teachers expected students to spend two to three hours each night memorizing math facts,presentations for history, and lengthy passages of literature, which had to be recited in class.5

6Parents were the first to disagree with the amounts of homework. Often theyneeded their children to help with chores and other survival tasks. This is the main reasonthat most children dropped out of school at such a young age. School, because of theincredible amount of homework, was a full-time job.As progressive education rose in popularity, the anti-homework sentiment grew aswell. General Francis A. Walker, a Civil War hero who served as the president of theBoston, Massachusetts school board in the early 1900's, gave two concerns that eventuallybecame the central argument of anti-homework crusaders. "First, he doubted the utility ofhomework as a pedagogical tool. Second, he worried that homework sapped children'shealth, mentally and emotionally as well as physically" (Gill and Schlossman, 1996, p. 32).Opposition to homework eventually became something to be proud of to educators wholabeled themselves as progressive.The public also became vocal in the fight against homework. Magazines andnewspapers wrote article after article opposing homework. One editor claimed thathomework was a severe hazard to children's mental and physical health and that it was "themost barbarous part of the whole system" (Gill and Schlossman, 1996, p. 33). Articles suchas this enraged progressive educators and parents in large cities throughout the United Statesand soon began to spread across the country. Homework was restricted in the elementarygrades in school systems nationwide. Progressive educators continued to argue thathomework was detrimental to the health of children and even began to argue that it workedagainst the family unit.Finally, the question of whether or not homework increased academic performancecame into the debate. Progressive educators believed that students should experience activelearning. Homework, with its repetition and recitation, was very passive, as were manyclassrooms during this time. These classrooms and the homework assigned in them did notinclude any type of hands-on or meaningful learning. Instead, students sat at their desks and15

7memorized facts. If homework of this era were placed in the cognitive domain ofBloom's Taxonomy, it would fall in the Knowledge level. Bloom describes this level as rotememorizing of information in a basically word-for-word fashion (Bloom, et. al., 1956, p. 45).Progressive educators not only wanted homework reform but total education reform as well.They felt that children could only succeed in an environment where learning could be at itspeak. These places did not include the home, where there was poor lighting, noise, andmany distractions. Thus, another anti-homework argument arose.By the middle of the twentieth century, progressive education had lost some of itsappeal and popularity. Educators began to seriously reconsider their stance on homework.With the beginning of the race to space, the public cried out for educational reform.Students were not as smart as their foreign counterparts, and this worried parents and schoolofficials. Thus, homework was reintroduced to schools almost as quickly as it was removed.The past forty years have passed with a general agreement that homework was a positivetool that enabled learning. Although debate still occurs, it usually comes in the form of whatkind of homework is best or how much is too much.Attitudes about homework vary. In the American culture, students usually viewhomework and school as negative aspects of their lives. However, in other countries,especially those of Eastern Asia, most students view schoolwork and homework asimportant tools for success. Hong researched this phenomena with American and Koreanchildren. The study involved 182 Korean fifth and sixth graders and 93 American fifth andsixth graders. Homework achievement and attitudes toward homework were examined. Theresearchers also studied how parental involvement impacted the attitudes and achievementof the selected students. They used the following instruments to test the children on thesefactors: the Learning Style Inventory, used to measure each child's learning style; theHomework Style Scale, which indicated how each child preferred to learn at home; and theHomework Behavior Scale, which consisted of items that measured homework achievement16

8and homework attitudes (Hong, et. al., 1995, p. 199). Each of these instrumentswere adapted to meet the needs of the Korean students.Significant differences were found between the two countries and among the threelevels of homework achievement (high, medium, and low) on the overall combined score forhomework styles (Hong, et. al., 1995, p. 200). The researchers used twenty-one univariateanalyses of variance to study the country differences on the individual homework-stylesscores. Fourteen of the twenty-one homework styles showed significant differences betweenthe Korean and the American children (Hong, et. al., 1995, p. 200). Korean childrenpreferred a more structured learning environment, while the American children preferred alearning environment that was very comfortable. While the Korean children were muchmore persistent than the Americans were, the children from the United States were moreparent-motivated and teacher-motivated in doing homework. When attitudes towardshomework were investigated between the two countries, significant differences were found.The Korean children had much more positive attitudes towards homework than Americanchildren (Hong, et. al., 1995, p. 202).The researchers found other significant factors. While all parents of the 182 Koreanchildren who participated in the study returned the questionnaire, only 33 parents of the 93American children returned the questionnaire (Hong, et. al., 1995, p. 204). This showedmore parental involvement of the Korean students, which could have impacted the attitudesand achievement of these Korean participants.Other articles dealing with homework focus on more practical ideas to offer toteachers, parents, and students. For example, in an article by Culyer entitled, "MakingHomework Work," he gives twelve guidelines to teachers and other educators that helpmake homework more effective. Some of these include informing parents, making thehomework assignments relevant, assigning homework at each student's individual level, andexplaining to students why homework is assigned (Culyer, 1996, p. 52-53). While Culyer did17

9not state any research to back up these guidelines, all of these ideas encourageteachers to create more meaningful homework for their students. Meaningful homework isthe key to making homework successful. Researchers agree that there is little doubt thatproperly assigned and processed homework can be advantageous for learning (Kelley andKahle, 1995, p. 8). However, the key is that homework needs to be meaningful and not justbusywork. Teachers often assign homework to their students to practice and strengthen theconcepts and skills taught in class (Miller, et. al., 1993, p. 184). This is an important tool tocheck for student understanding, but it is not the only one.Homework takes four steps to become meaningful (McLean, 1997, p. 212). First,teachers must motivate students to do the homework. Second, teachers should carefully planhomework assignments that are not repetitive and monotonous. These assignments shouldcontribute to the learning of the overall unit of study. Third, teachers must make thegrading standards clear and precise and discuss them in advance with the students. Finally,teachers must focus on consistency. Standards should be maintained throughout the courseof study.Researcher Harris Cooper has reported extensively on homework in Americaneducation and probably knows more about it than anyone. For years, he has studied itshistory and effectiveness in large-scale studies. He has found many positive effects fromhomework. These include improving students' study skills, helping students learn morefactual information, developing their self-direction and responsibility, and involving parentsin their children's education (Cooper, et. al., 1998, p. 70). However, Cooper finds thenegative effects of homework just as substantial. It can overwhelm students and cause themto turn off from school and studying in general. It can prevent their using after-school timefor more active pursuits and cause them to take shortcuts (such as copying or cheating) toget an assignment completed on time. It can promote interference by parents in theirchildren's learning.18

10When Cooper examined research on homework and student achievement,he found different effects at different grade levels. In high school, homework substantiallyraises student achievement. In middle school, it raises student achievement about half asmuch. In the elementary grades, it has no discernible effect (Cooper, 1989, p. 7). In fact,Cooper states, "Piling on massive amounts of homework will not lead to gains, and may bedetrimental by leading children to question their abilities" (Cooper, 1989, p. 8). He also goeson to say that homework is not entirely negative. "Homework has benefits that go wellbeyond its immediate direct impact on what's going on in school. Doing homework isimportant for honing organizational skills, learning how to manage time, and developing theability to learn autonomously" (Cooper, 1989, p. 21).In Cooper's most recent study to date, he investigated the relationships amongattitudes about homework, the amount of homework assigned and completed, and studentachievement. Students, teachers, and parents completed a questionnaire concerning theamount of homework assigned by teachers, the portion of assignments completed bystudents, and attitudes about homework (Cooper, et. al., 1998, p. 70). Cooper used what hereferred to as a triad in this study to achieve the desired sample size. This triad included ateacher, at least one student in that teacher's class, and one parent of that student (Cooper,et. al., 1998, p. 72). A total of 709 complete triads were used in this study. The responserate among the questionnaires was very low. This was due to several factors. First, thequestionnaire was much longer than ones given in previous studies, requiring parents tospend a longer amount of time completing it. Second, the study required only completetriads. This lowered the response rate when either a parent or a student could or did notparticipate. Finally, the response rate was lowered because there was no pre-screening toeliminate those students without current home addresses.Three school districts were involved in Cooper's study (Cooper, et. al., 1998, p. 72).One was a large metropolitan public school district in the state of Tennessee. The second1S

11was a suburban school district, and the third was a rural school district, both in thestate of Tennessee. Cooper used the Homework Process Inventory (HPI) as hisquestionnaire for the study. This was developed specifically for this study and was meant toassess numerous aspects of homework practices and procedures. The questionnaire was amulti-item survey that had six different versions, one each for lower and upper gradestudents, their teachers, and their parents. The different versions included parallel questionsso that consistency of responses across the six versions could be examined (Cooper, et. al.,1998, p. 73). The survey included questions about attitudes toward homework, how muchtime was spent on homework, how much homework was assigned, and how much of theassigned homework was typically finished. Cooper used the standard achievement test inTennessee, the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (or TCAP), to measureachievement in the study. This was done to save time and money, as this test is part of thenormal testing schedule of all Tennessee school districts. Teacher-assigned grades were alsoused as a measure of achievement for the study. In the lower grades, the teachers providedan overall grade for all subjects, while in the upper grades, teachers provided grades for eachindividual subject.Cooper and his colleagues found that the amount of homework assigned was averageacross the grade levels. Cooper states, "The means revealed that most responses concerningthe amount of homework teachers assigned centered around the middle of the scale, or '15to 30 min' each night, except for parents of upper-grade students, whose responses werecloser to '30 to 60 min"' (Cooper, et. al., 1998, p. 75). In general, teachers thought that theyhad assigned more homework, while their students thought this amount was average.Students also reported being assigned less homework than their parents thought they wereassigned. Reports of how much homework students completed revealed a more skeweddistribution. Among parents, about 75% reported that their child completed all homework.Among students, 65% reported completing all homework (Cooper, et. al., 1998, p. 76).

12Attitudes towards homework were proven to be quite positive in the lowergrades. Teacher and parent responses were well above the set midpoint. However, uppergrade responses were more negative. Student responses were somewhat below themidpoint. Teacher attitudes toward homework seemed to be much more positive for theupper and lower grades than did parent attitudes. Reports of teacher-assigned homeworkwere negatively, but not significantly, correlated with TCAP scores (Cooper, et. al., 1998, p.76). The amount of homework assigned by teachers was not significantly related toachievement in either the lower or upper grades. However, when Cooper explored therelationships between homework attitudes and achievement, he found that, in the lowergrades, teachers who had more positive homework attitudes also had students who averagedpoorer scores on the TCAP. For the upper grades, he found negative but nonsignificantrelations between teacher attitudes, both their average students' TCAP score, and theaverage grade they assigned (Cooper, et. al., 1998, p. 78).Cooper suggests in his research that teachers, students, and parents may holddifferent expectations about homework (Cooper, et. al., 1998, p. 80). Because each person isinvolved in a different aspect of the homework process, each person views homeworkdifferently. For example, teachers are only involved in the school-related affairs, whileparents and students are involved at home as well. In sum, this study's results indicatedgenerally weak yet positive relations between reports of the amount of homework teachersassigned and student achievement (Cooper, et. al., 1998, p. 80). However, there was nosignificant correlation to show that the more homework assigned the better the studentachievement. Likewise, the research did not show that assigning less homework providedany difference on students' levels of achievement.The current research went one step farther than the research mentioned. It focusedon the relationship of homework to a specific subject and grade levelfourth grade math.The researcher believed that the completion of weekly homework would have an impact on2

13weekly quizzes. Although this study is not nearly as advanced as those mentionedabove, the researcher believed that it would still hold implications for teachers and othereducators.22

Chapter IIIMETHODS AND PROCEDURESSubjects of the StudyThe subjects of this study included twenty-one nine and ten year old fourth graders.There were thirteen males and nine females in the study, with twenty Caucasians and oneAfrican-American. Three children were considered to be learning disabled and had IEP's, orIndividual Education Plans. These three children were included in this study because theywere considered to be

complete the weekly math homework assignments. The experimental group consisted of the students who completed weekly math homework. The experimental factor in this research project was the optional weekly math homework. The researcher used an independent sample t-test to evaluate the weekly quiz scor