Preface
Homework,
with its benefits and drawbacks, is a conundrum I have worried at since the day
I started teaching. I became a teacher
in 1999, and watched the millennium turn with a self-contained class of fifth
grade students in a small, rural school.
Now, after nearly 20 years in the classroom, I think back fondly on
those students and shudder at the myriad mistakes I made. I was an intern with no credential and only a
handful of teaching courses to my name.
Since then, I have become much more confident and at ease as an
educator. I am comfortable not having
all the answers, secure in my ability to work with peers, parents, and
students. I have embraced change and a
growth mindset, always ready to try new strategies and refine old ones. As such, I often wish that I could go back
and reteach that first class, give them the benefits of my own years of
learning. I am certain I could do a
better job now than I did then. I’m certain
about many things—but not about homework.
Homework remains a conundrum.
I
think that most teachers would agree that homework is one of the three most
frustrating aspects of teaching, right up there with paperwork and behavior
management. It seems as if, no matter
what you do, no matter what you try, no one is ever satisfied. Parents either want more homework, less
homework, or none at all. Students,
especially struggling learners, are usually unhappy with their homework. They want it to be challenging, but not
hard. They want it to be easy, but also
interesting. They want to have choices,
but they usually default to doing to same things again and again. Many are overwhelmed by even the simplest assignments. They avoid, deflect, dodge, dump, complain,
groan, cry, or suffer in silence.
Sometimes the parents do these things, too. Still, no matter how frustrating it becomes,
we can’t get away from homework. As the researchers
Bempechat, Li, Neier, Gillis, and Holloway (2011) said, homework remains an “…enduring
aspect of students’ educational experience” (p. 250).
Definition of Key Terms
Anxiety. “In context of schoolwork, anxiety is the feeling of helplessness, tension and/or psychological distress that occurs when a student finds it difficult to cope with the said schoolwork” (Cheema & Sheridan, 2015, p. 247).
Conflict. “Mental struggle resulting from incompatible or opposing needs, drives, wishes, or external or internal demands” (Conflict in Merriam-Webster.com).
Homework. Assigned work that is intended to be completed outside of school during non-curricular hours without the supervision of the teacher (Cooper, Robinson & Patall, 2006).
Resources. For the purposes of this study, resources is taken to mean tools and services required for the successful completion of homework, such as textbooks, writing materials, project materials, calculators, computer access, and internet access.
Stress. “…a particular relationship between the person and the environment that is assessed by the person to be taxing, dangerous to his or her well-being, or exceeding his or her resources” (Crystal, Chen, Fuligni & Stevenson, 1994, p. 750).
Abstract
Homework-Related Stress and Mental Health in Adolescents
It often appears as if the debate
surrounding homework will never end but merely rise and fall with the passage
of time (Cooper, 2001; Corno and Xu, 2004; Frey & Fisher, 2011, Watkins
& Stevens, 2013; Murillo & Martinez-Garrido, 2014). Harris Cooper, an educator known for his
research on homework, even went so far as to claim that the homework
controversy runs on a 30-year cycle with the call for more or less homework
occurring every 15 years (Cooper, 2001).
Perhaps it is the unusual nature of homework that engenders the
controversy. Cooper et al. (2006)
described homework as assigned work that is intended to be completed outside of
school during non-curricular hours and without the supervision of the teacher. In this regard, homework is unique in the
experience of teachers and students (Bryan, T., Burstein & Bryan, J.,
2001). It is
generally accepted among educators that homework has some academic benefits (Cooper
et al., 2006; Hattie, 2012), so why does it remain controversial? According to Bennett and Kalish
(2006), Galloway and Pope (2007), Pope (2010), and Kouzma and Kennedy (2004), the
answer may be as simple, and as complex, as stress. The purpose of this review of literature is
to examine how homework-related stress impacts students’ mental health.
Literature Review
Background
In order to understand the impact that homework has on the
mental health of adolescents, it is first important to understand, in a general
way, the purpose behind homework, the context in which it is assigned, and the problems
that affect its planning, preparation, and completion.
Academic advantages
Studies have, for the most part, born out a strong positive association between homework and academic achievement at the high school level (Cooper, 2001; Cooper & Valentine, 2001; Cooper et al., 2006; Houser, Maheady, Pomerantz & Jabot, 2015). There is also a lesser, but still positive, association between homework and academic achievement at the middle school level (Cooper et al., 2006; Cooper, 2001; Cooper & Valentine, 2001; Murillo & Martinez-Garrido, 2014), though researchers found a negligible or non-existent association between homework and academic achievement at the elementary school level (Cooper et al., 2006; Cooper, 2001; Cooper & Valentine, 2001; Murillo & Martinez-Garrido, 2014). Interestingly, Spanish researchers Núñez, Suárez, Rosário, Vallejo, Valle, et al. (2015) noted a significant correlation between homework completion and academic achievement for all three school levels, though they did note that the level of significance decreased from high school to elementary school.
Homework
also has clear benefits when examined by subject matter. Researchers Mau and Lynn (2000) found a
significant positive correlation between homework and academic achievement in
the subjects of math, reading, and science, noting that the correlation was
even more significant for girls than for boys.
In more recent studies, researchers Murillo and Martinez-Garrido (2014),
in their work with an international, Latin American population of nearly
200,000 students, and researchers Cheema and Sheridan (2015) found a
significant positive association between homework and math achievement. Ultimately, Cooper, Robinson and Patall
(2006) describe the association between homework and academic achievement as a
relationship that is positive and “robust” (p. 47), if not conclusive.
While
data to support the academic benefits of homework in the lower elementary
grades are scarce, there are other benefits to homework, even in elementary
school, that should be taken into consideration. Homework and careers have many similar
characteristics. As a result, some
educators suggest that doing homework gives students the opportunity to develop
career-related skills and attributes such as self-direction, self-discipline,
organization, and problem solving (Cooper, 2001). Researchers Corno and Xu, who proclaimed
homework the “quintessential job of childhood” (2004, p. 227), noted that
homework acts as career preparation by teaching students responsibility,
follow-through, self-control, self-motivation, task management, calendar use,
and delay of gratification. To this
list, Bempechat et al. (2011) added the ability to endure boredom; which some
might consider a commentary in and of itself on the basic nature of
homework. Based on the findings of Xu
(2005), despite the boring characteristics of most homework, a majority of
students agree with the idea that homework has value, believing it teaches them
discipline and work habits that they will one day need for a career. Based on these findings, it seems that most
educators—and even students—see meaning in at least some aspects of homework. Nevertheless, homework remains controversial
(Van Voorhis, 2011; Bennett & Kalish, 2006; Kohn, 2006).
Reasons for controversy
One
reason that homework continues to generate resistance among educators and
parents may be the discrepant nature of the findings of homework studies
conducted over the last few decades. Many studies on the value and
effectiveness of homework contradict each other (Cooper & Valentine, 2001;
Galloway & Pope, 2007; Cheema & Sheridan, 2015). This can raise doubts among stakeholders in
the homework process. However, even when
all stakeholders view homework as valuable, they may find it difficult to know
what form of homework is most likely to benefit students as it can vary widely
based on the subject of study or the student’s grade level, ability level,
ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or gender (Cooper et al., 2006; Corno &
Xu, 2004; Hong, Wan & Peng, 2011).
Though Hattie (2012), Cooper and Valentine (2001), and Cooper et al.
(2006) demonstrated that it is possible to examine many seemingly contradictory
research studies in a systematic manner and identify common patterns and
general “truths,” such meta-analysis is time-consuming and unlikely to be
undertaken by classroom teachers, the educators most in need of the
information.
Also,
while homework can provide distinct academic benefits in middle school and high
school—which one might assume would make homework of value to teachers—some
researchers claim that teachers don’t value homework at all (Chen &
Stevenson, 1989) while other researchers assert that teachers do value the
results of homework but do not value the time-consuming homework process (Corno
& Xu, 2004). According to researchers Núñez, Suárez,
Rosário, Vallejo, Cerezo, et al. (2015) and Cooper et al. (2006), the most
beneficial forms of homework, as perceived by teachers, appear to be the most
time consuming to plan and prepare.
According to Cooper et al. (2006), teachers complain that they simply
are not given enough time to plan and prepare effective homework.
Yet,
teachers are not the only frustrated participants in the homework process. As evidenced by the popularity of books such
as The Case Against Homework: How
Homework is Hurting Children and What Parents Can Do About It (2007), The Battle Over Homework:
Common Ground for Administrators, Teachers, and Parents
(2007), and The Homework Myth: Why Our
Kids Get Too Much of a Bad Thing (2006), some parents are opposed to homework
either as it currently exists or to any homework at all. Bryan et al. (2001) noted that some mothers
have reported no longer providing homework assistance to their children in
order to avoid conflict at home.
Sheridan (2009) stressed that homework has the ability to “wreak havoc
in the lives of many children and families who fail to master behavioral and
environmental routines that create conditions and patterns conducive for
optimal performance” (p. 334).
Conflict
is not the only reason that some parents object to homework, however. Even when little conflict exists, homework
can be exceptionally time-consuming for students and their parents. Researchers Axelrod, Zhe, Haugen, and Klein
(2009) demonstrated just how time-consuming homework can be by conducting an
entire study on a homework self-monitoring system for students that requires
lengthy participation from parents to function successfully; and researcher Van
Voorhis (2011) also reported, in her longitudinal study, on a homework
intervention system that requires lengthy time commitments from parents and
teachers. Though it should be noted that
Van Voorhis found the TIPS intervention to have significant positive benefits
for parents, and students.
Most
importantly, parents resist homework because it can place a considerable strain
on the mental health of students (Galloway & Pope, 2007, Conner, Pope &
Galloway, 2009-2010; Corno & Xu, 2004) as many innate characteristics of
homework engender daily stress for U.S. students.
Why Homework Related Stress Matters
There is a popular myth that students
from traditionally high-achieving Asian countries pay for their academic
success with the coin of their mental health, yet a study by Crystal et al.
(1994) found that, when it comes to stress, students in the U.S. far outrank
their Japanese and Chinese counterparts.
The findings of Crystal et al.’s (1994) study were shared more than 20
years ago, but little appears to have changed since then. Homework-related stress is a
sufficiently widespread problem that Corno and Xu (2004) and Australian
researchers Kouzma and Kennedy (2004) suggested that teachers should be
instructing students in coping mechanisms and stress management while Conner et
al. (2009-2010) referred to stress as an epidemic in U.S. schools. Conner et al. (2009-2010) added that students
identify schoolwork as a dominant source of stress in their lives, and the
researchers noted that students more frequently cite schoolwork and homework as
a major source of stress than family problems such as divorce or conflict with
their parents and siblings. In fact, the
majority of students identify homework as one of the top three sources of
stress in their lives (Pope, 2010; Corno & Xu, 2004).
In
a study by Conner et al. (2009-2010), high-achieving, middle-class students
self-reported stress as taking a serious toll on their mental health, physical
health, and their ability to learn. The
researchers noted that the students described themselves as “stressed out,
overworked, and sleep deprived” (Conner at al., 2009-2010, p. 54), all of which
negatively impact a student’s mental health. This is in keeping with the Crystal
et al. (1994) study in which researchers found that the high level of stress
reported by students was the result of “cognitive appraisals that the demands
of their environment exceed their abilities to cope with these demands” (p.
750). Researchers Corno and Xu (2004) and Pope and Simon (2005)
identified similar concerns for high-achieving students as those found by
Conner et al. (2009-2010); additionally, Corno and Xu (2004) noted that
low-achieving students who practice task avoidance in order to avoid looking
incapable are also likely to experience high levels of anxiety and report
mental health problems.
The strain that homework puts on students’ mental health takes a physical toll as well. In Conner et al.’s (2009-2010) study, students reported both persistent exhaustion and getting far less than the recommended amount of sleep due primarily to a high volume of homework. More than 44 percent of high-achieving high school students who reported feelings of homework-related stress also reported physical symptoms (headaches and stomach problems) which they attributed to stress, 25 percent reported feelings of depression within the last month, and 7 percent reported engaging in self-harm (Conner at al., 2009-2010). This is in keeping with the findings of researchers Corno and Xu (2004) who noted that the more time students spend on homework, the more likely they are to report stress-related physical symptoms.
In
a study conducted at Stanford, high-achieving high school students reported using
illegal stimulants to keep up with their homework loads (Pope, 2010). In referring to the same Stanford study,
Conner et al. (2009-2010) noted that 24 percent of students reported using
legal stimulants such as caffeine while 8 percent of students reported using illegal
stimulants as well as drinking alcohol to relieve stress, chronic insomnia, and
anxiety. Similar students in a smaller
study (Pope & Simon, 2005) reported loss of sleep, lack of exercise, and
unhealthy diets due to schoolwork overload.
Once again, this is in keeping with Crystal et al.’s (1994) study in
which researchers found that U.S. students suffered from more somatic
complaints than their Japanese contemporaries.
Sources of Homework-Related Stress for Students
After
a review of related homework literature, it is possible to boil down the
sources of homework-related stress and anxiety to quantity of homework, quality
of homework, schedule conflicts, inequality of resources, home support, and
home conflict. Each of these potential
sources of stress bear consideration as they present students with challenges of
which educators need to be aware.
Quantity of homework
How much homework is too much? Though more concerned with the
quality of homework that is being assigned, Frey and Fisher (2011) noted that
“Great debates can be had about the amount of homework that is appropriate for
the age of the learner” (p. 56), and Pressman et al. (2015) reported that the
research on the appropriate quantity of homework for students is decidedly
equivocal. Studies disagree on the
issues of both frequency of homework and length of homework. Researchers Zhu and Leung (2012) and Murillo
and Martinez-Garrido (2014) found that there was no significant correlation
between the frequency of homework academic achievement. Other researchers, such as Mau and Lynn
(2000) and Cheema and Sheridan (2015) have found that homework frequency does
have a positive association with academic achievement. Some researchers claim that infrequent,
longer homework assignments have positive correlations with academic achievement
(Zhu & Leung, 2012). However,
research has more commonly pointed to prolonged time spent on homework as
having a non-significant—or even negative—association with academic achievement
(Kitsantas, Cheema, et al., 2011; Murillo & Martinez-Garrido, 2014; Cooper,
2001; Bryan et al. 2001; Trautwein, 2007; Eldrige, 2009). Given the conflicting results of varied
studies, determining how frequently homework should be given and how long that
homework should take can be a challenging task for teachers.
Equally
challenging is the attempt to ascertain how much homework students are actually
being assigned as there is much disagreement in the literature and even within
individual studies. One possible
explanation for this is that parents’ perceptions of the amount of homework
assigned to students varies based on factors such as grade level, parent
education level, and family ethnicity (Pressman et al., 2015). When examined by education level, Pressman et
al. reported that in primary school, parents of all education levels perceive
an equal amount of homework, at the middle and high school levels,
college-educated parents perceived a great increase in homework load while
parents with a high school diploma, GED, or less than a high school diploma
perceived the amount of homework as dropping significantly. When examined by ethnicity, Pressman et al.
(2011) reported that Hispanic parents perceive their children’s homework loads
as higher in elementary school while non-Hispanic parents perceive the homework
load as higher in middle school and high school. This list of factors impacting the varied
perceptions of homework load doesn’t even account for the varying views of
parents based on student ability level.
Bryan et al. (2007) noted that the parents of students with learning
disabilities view homework as an “added burden” (p. 170) for those already
struggling with school.
Still,
some researchers have attempted to determine how much time students are
devoting to homework (Conner et al., 2009-2010; Pressman et al., 2015; Murillo
& Martinez-Garrido, 2014; Corno & Xu, 2004). When studies examine the number of hours
students spend doing homework, the answer is generally that students do more as
they advance in grade level (Pressman et al., 2015; Murillo &
Martinez-Garrido, 2014). Beyond that,
there are—once again—contradictory findings, sometimes within the same
study. Pressman et al. (2015) reported
that “…the actual homework load increased as students progress from
kindergarten (K) until 12th grade, with a significant spike in the 6th and 7th
grades and the largest average amount of time in the 10th grade at 53.9 minutes
per night” (p. 303). Pressman et al.
(2015) noted, as a point of interest, that high school students had only about
an hour of homework a day at all grade levels, far less than the recommended
90-120 minutes.
However,
Pressman et al.’s (2015) findings were divergent from those of both Corno and
Xu (2004) and Conner at al. (2009-2010) who found that high-achieving high
school students reported spending 3 hours or more a day on homework. According to Australian researchers Kouzma
and Kennedy (2002), high school seniors self-reported spending 39 hours per
week (for girls) and 32 hours per week (for boys) on homework. The researchers doubted these seemingly
extreme figures, but, when questioned, the students’ teachers confirmed that
they should be spending anywhere from 21-32 hours per week on homework. Though lower than the students’ self-reported
estimates, the teachers’ estimates are in keeping with the findings of Corno
and Xu (2004) and Conner et al. (2009-2010).
Additionally, Kouzma and Kennedy (2002) found a significant positive
correlation between the number of hours that students self-reported spending on
homework and their self-reported levels of stress.
If
these figures are accurate, then high school students may regularly face a work
load that would daunt and stress many adults.
“When students spend 6 or 7 hours in
school and another 3 or more hours on homework, they face a longer workday than
most adults” (Corno and Xu, 2004). A
high homework load combined with daily homework spanning most students’ lives
from age 5 to age 18 lead researcher Bruce Jackson (2007) to hypothesize that educators are, in
essence, inoculating students against homework.
Jackson argued that “…for a substantial portion of our students, the
experience of constantly facing routine homework assignments in the name of
developing ‘good homework habits’ during the early elementary years has a
perverse effect on later attitudes toward truly important work” (p. 56). This supposition is supported by Cooper
(2001), who found that one negative effect of homework was the loss of interest
in schoolwork due to homework satiation, and Corno and Xu (2004), who noted
that homework can be stressful for children and that repeated negative homework
experiences can cause children to dislike academic work in general. Even Murillo and Martinez-Garrido (2014), who
found a significant positive correlation between homework and math achievement,
noted that work overload may diminish students’ academic achievement.
Further
examination of the literature demonstrates that the quantity of assigned
homework is not the only factor adding stress to students’ lives. Jackson (2007) argued that, even with the
best of intentions, many teachers inevitably make the wrong decisions about how
much and what kinds of homework to assign because what they think works most
effectively is often counterintuitive to what research supports as
effective. The result is often
low-quality homework, the importance of which is diminished by teachers,
parents, and students alike.
Quality of homework
Conner,
Pope and Galloway (2009-2010) reported that 95 percent of 11th and 12th grade
students in their study complained of being “frustrated by tedious assignments
that hold little meaning” (p. 55), frustration which ultimately contributes to
academic stress. According to researchers Frey and Fisher (2011), there are
four basic types of “quality” homework: fluency practice, application, spiral
review, and extension. Each of these types of homework has academic
meaning, which students need, but even with meaningful homework, there are
still potential concerns. Regarding fluency practice homework, a study
by Malaysian researchers Sidhu et al. (2010) recommended caution, noting that
students expressed frustration with repetitive homework practice that only
engages lower order thinking skills (p. 213).
Regarding application, though not speaking specifically of homework,
Frey, Schmitt and Allen (2012) asserted that application is one of the most
authentic forms of student assessment; however, Zhu and Leung (2012) reported
that the small amount of application-based homework being reported by teachers
is a “worrying sign” (p. 921). Meanwhile,
Jackson (2007) noted spiral review homework is frequently ignored by low-achieving
students who suffer few serious consequences for not completing it. Regardless of the form, usefulness is the key
to making homework meaningful and high quality for students. Researchers Corno and Xu (2004) reported that
students who can readily perceive the usefulness of their homework are less
likely to experience mental health problems such as stress and anxiety as well
as the somatic systems that often accompany these mental health concerns.
Quality
homework has meaning and utility for students and teachers. Poor quality homework, the product of too
little planning time or too low expectations, generally has neither meaning nor
utility (Jackson, 2007; Corno & Xu, 2004).
Researchers have shown that poorly designed and implemented homework is
counterproductive in regard to academic achievement (Bennett & Kalish,
2006; Kohn, 2006). According to Bae,
Holloway, Li, and Bempechat (2008), work that demonstrates low teacher
expectations strongly and negatively impacts students’ self-concept. This is further demonstrated by researchers Núñez,
Suárez, Rosário, Vallejo, Cerezo, et al. (2015) who found that students’
perceptions of teacher feedback on homework had a significant correlation with
both homework effort and completion rates.
Students respond strongly to the messages teachers give them—whether
explicit or implicit—so when teachers don’t value homework, students don’t
value homework (Cooper et al., 2006). By
contrast, when students perceive that teachers have high expectations, both
academic achievement and student motivation experience a substantial boost
(Watkins & Stevens, 2013).
All
too often, however, homework isn’t designed at all. Rather, it is a stopgap solution to the
problem of too much curriculum and too little time (Frey & Fisher, 2011; Corno & Xu, 2004; Pressman et al., 2015). According to Frey and Fisher (2011), homework
should never be new concepts; “Homework should come after teachers have modeled
the thinking and procedures required for the task or skill” (p. 56). Unfortunately, homework often consists of
relatively new or entirely new concepts because teachers ran out of time to
finish instructional materials in class and assign it as homework in order to
meet academic requirements or keep up with pacing guides (Frey & Fisher,
2011; Pressman et al., 2015).
Frey
and Fisher (2011, p. 56-57) reported that students’ responses to new concept
homework can be broken into four types and that the student population of every
classroom is a mix of those four types: completer,
neglecter, cheater, and error-maker. The completer will finish new concept
homework and get help to do so if necessary.
They have the resources they need and the motivation to see homework
through regardless of its quantity or quality (Frey & Fisher, 2011).
The
neglecter will leave homework partially or wholly unfinished regardless of the
consequences (Frey & Fisher, 2011; Jackson, 2007). The student’s intention is seldom to be
defiant but is merely a response to a situation the student doesn’t know how to
handle. When faced with an overwhelming
homework load or work that they simply don’t understand, many students choose
to simply ignore the work or complete the bare minimum needed to pass (Pope,
2010). Teachers often respond to the
presence of neglecters in their classes by attempting interventions that don’t
work or can’t be maintained (Reinhardt et al., 2009; Jackson, 2007), and
finally by cutting back on the amount of homework they assign (Watkins &
Stevens, 2013). As frustrating as the
behavior of neglecters is for teachers, it is equally as puzzling and stressful
for the neglecters themselves. According
to Jackson (2007), many students don’t understand why they avoid tackling
homework. Speaking of his own time as a
teacher, Jackson said, “Countless frustrating conversations convinced me that
most students in this situation can’t tell you the real reasons for their
behavior, because they themselves don’t know” (p. 56).
Where
the cheater is concerned, the findings of Frey and Fisher (2011) are in keeping
with the previous findings of Cooper (2001) and Pope (2010), who noted that one
common negative effect of homework is the creation among students of a
disposition to cheat. The cheater will
copy another student’s homework or get someone else to do it for them (Frey
& Fisher, 2011). Ironically, it is
the very fact that many students turn to cheating to keep up with their
homework that may encourage teachers to assign little importance to homework
(Jackson, 2007).
Finally,
the error-maker will attempt to complete homework but will do so largely
incorrectly. New concept homework is a
source of stress for all four types of students, and it is especially egregious
in the case of the error-maker because “Unfortunately, practice does not make
perfect—it makes permanent” (Frey & Fisher, 2011, p. 56).
Schedule conflicts
Schedule
conflicts are another major source of homework-related stress for students and
their families. According to Pressman et
al. (2015), parents want more quality time for their children outside of school
and are tired of trying to “…balance extra-curricular activities with homework
requirements” (p. 298). The combined load of homework and extra-curricular
activities can be especially overwhelming as reported by Pope and Simon (2005)
and Conner et al. (2009-2010), the latter of whom noted that high-achieving
high school students reported spending three hours a night on homework and an
additional two hours a night on extracurricular activities. This is time that parents may not have to
spare or may not wish to devote to homework.
According to Pressman et al. (2015), “Homework may supplant more
enjoyable family leisure pursuits,” which is particularly alarming because
“When homework routines conflict with family leisure time and other family
routines, homework has been found to be associated with lower measures of
emotional well-being among children and parents across several studies” (p.
298).
Pressman
et al.’s (2015) findings are in agreement with the previous findings of Cooper,
Jackson and Nye (2001) who noted that the parent’s attitude toward homework
correlates with the student’s attitude toward homework. As such, positive parent attitude and
involvement in homework is a strong predictor of academic success for students
(Cooper et al., 2001), but when students pick up on a negative parent attitude
toward homework and perceive the experience as negative, stress levels rise.
Perhaps
more important from the adolescent’s perspective is the fact that homework interferes
with leisure activities that are often students’ main priority. Conner et al. (2009-2010) noted that more than 60 percent of
high-achieving students reported being unable to spend time with family and
friends and having to drop an extracurricular activity they greatly enjoyed due
to homework. This bolsters the findings
of Cooper (2001), Corno and Xu (2004), and Núñez, Suárez, Rosário, Vallejo,
Cerezo, et al. (2015), all of whom reported that students complain of being
denied access to leisure pursuits, hobbies, and community activities because of
homework. High-achieving U.S. students
may suffer even more stress than their low-achieving counterparts because they
are more likely to try and do it all (Crystal et al., 1994). Meanwhile, Jackson (2007) argued that
spending time on homework has a social stigma for low-achieving students—and
even for some high-achieving students who will go to great lengths to hide the
fact that they are actually doing their homework—because it reduces the amount
of time that adolescents can spend on those things which earn them respect from
their peers such as social media, movies, music, and video games. Whether or not homework causes them problems
with extracurricular activities, students face difficulties completing homework
successfully when there resources aren’t up to the task.
Inequality of resources
Like
a job, homework requires the appropriate use of resources to be successful
(Corno & Xu, 2004), but when students lack those resources, homework
becomes a stressful exercise in inequality (Kitsantas, Cheema & Ware,
2011). In addition, Kitsantas and his
colleagues suggested that knowledge of their students’ lack of physical resources
may cause teachers to assign homework which is below their students’ academic
potential. Being given work below their
ability level may contribute to a negative self-concept for students and
thereby adversely impact their mental health (Bae et al., 2008, Bempechat et
al., 2011).
Cognitive and academic ability—their
own form of resources—are other factors which make homework an uneven playing field for
students because all students and families are different. As noted in the section on the quality of
homework, students with learning disabilities are at an especial disadvantage
when dealing with homework (Bryan et al., 2001; Axelrod et al., 2009; Sheridan,
2009). There are a number of potential
factors working against these students when it comes to completing
homework. According to Bryan et al.
(2001), learning disabled students may struggle with organization, off-task
behaviors, and language deficits while Sheridan (2009) and Axelrod et al.
(2009) suggested that these same students may also struggle with attention,
persistence, and emotional and behavioral regulation. As a result, for the more than 2.5 million
students struggling with learning disabilities, homework can be overwhelming,
take hours to complete (even when the assignments are meant to be short), and require
constant monitoring by parents (Bryan et al., 2001). Despite learning disabled students’ increased
need for monitoring and support, Bryan et al. (2001) claimed that the parents
of special education students report being less involved in their children’s homework
than the parents of general education students.
Teachers
sometimes try to address this inequality of ability by differentiating homework
assignments, but this can create problems of its own. Bryan et al. (2001) reported that parents
want individualized assignments. Teachers
may try to differentiate in order to engender feelings of self-efficacy in
students working at different ability levels (Kitsantas et al., 2011); however,
students do not appear to want differentiated work. For students who base their self-concept on
their perceptions of teacher expectations, being given work of lesser
difficulty may cause them to view themselves as “not so good students” (Bae et
al., 2008, p. 211). Bryan et al. (2001)
contended that visibly differentiated homework may even result in a stigma for
some students which can only add to the stress these students already feel. Unfortunately, physical resources and
cognitive ability are not the only areas in which students are unequal.
Home support
All
students need some form of home support, but they may not have it (Corno &
Xu, 2004). Corno and Xu noted
that high-achievers
may not appear to need support but still desire it. By contrast, low-achievers may not admit they
want support, but they definitely need it.
Contemporary researchers (Shumow et al., 2008; Bempechat et al., 2011)
have reported that homework is a startlingly solitary activity for the majority
of students. Though students don’t like
to be alone when doing homework, Bempechat at al. (2011) claimed that they
usually are and that this is known to have negative associations with mental
health. This is in keeping with the
findings of Shumow et al. (2008), who reported that students were alone
approximately half the time when working on homework and that this negatively
impacted their affect. Shumow et al.
(2008) did point out; however, that being alone did not necessarily mean that homework
time was unproductive. Productive or
not, most students prefer to spend their homework time working with peers and
especially with friends (Bempechat et al., 2011). Parental support, however, may be the most
meaningful in the long term. Swedish
researchers Westerlund, Rajaleid, Virtanen,
Gustafsson, Nummi, and Hammarstrom (2015) reported that parental support during
homework time, as part of a larger involvement in children’s education, can
have a significant impact on the mental health of adolescents and actually
lessen the likelihood that they will suffer from mental health issues later in
life.
The
manner of support parents provide directly impacts both students’ stress levels
and academic achievement (Corno & Xu, 2004). Parental provision of a structured homework environment,
defined by O’Sullivan, Chen, and Fish (2014) as “a set of circumstances
conducive to homework completion” (p. 179), is the most common type of math
homework support provided by low-socioeconomic (low-SES) parents (O’Sullivan et
al., 2014). Parental provision of a structured
homework environment increased academic achievement (Cooper et al., 2001; Corno
& Xu, 2004; O’Sullivan et al., 2014); however, this may be an especially
difficult form of homework support for low-SES parents to provide due to a
smaller living space, the need to work multiple jobs, or other similar economic
factors (Cooper, 2001). This finding is supported by Pressman et al. (2015) who
found that Latino families, many of which are low-SES, are less likely to
provide the structured environment students need to be successful. Additionally, provision of structure appears
to decrease
from most parents as students progress through the grades regardless of SES,
ethnicity, and ability due to parent resistance to providing a
time-consuming structure for older adolescents (Axelrod et al., 2009).
Similar
to the case with provision of structure, the amount of direct academic support
that students receive from their parents varies widely, but it generally
decreases as students progress through the grade levels (Axelrod et al., 2009). Researchers Pressman et al. (2015) found this
troubling because there are distinct negative academic outcomes when students
think they can’t go to their parents for help, a situation which may be
exacerbated for Latino students who believe that education or language barriers may prevent their parents from helping them
(find reference). Research has
shown that the type of homework support provided by parents varies in part
based on parents’ perception of their own self-efficacy. On the positive side, O’Sullivan et al.
(2014) reported that parents with high feelings of self-efficacy are more
likely to provide the structured homework environment that students need to be
successful. On the negative side,
Pressman et al. (2015) reported that as parents’ feelings of self-efficacy
decrease, family stress rises accordingly.
Bryan
et al. (2001) suggested that feelings of self-efficacy may be lower for parents—mothers
in particular—when students are already struggling. These parents feel more “…fatigue from
efforts to help their children than other mothers. Low-achieving students
may need help, but giving them help may increase their parent’s feelings of
frustration and helplessness” (p. 172). That
feeling of helplessness and frustration is likely worsened by the fact that,
according to Pressman et al. (2015), the parents of students who are struggling
academically are more inclined to feel pressure to assist their children with
their homework.
The
frustration of needing to do something to help their child, but not feeling
confident about how to help, can lead parents to provide the wrong kind of
support, thereby increasing the stress level of both parents and their
children. Unfortunately, parents often
respond to this pressure by being overly authoritative which, as reported by researchers
Núñez, Suárez, Rosário, Vallejo, Valle, et al. (2015), has the effect of
lowering academic achievement, especially in junior high and high school. Pressman et al. (2015) argued that the
results may be even worse when the student is low-achieving or learning
disabled, noting that “Children are particularly vulnerable to negative
parental involvement with homework when they are struggling academically” (p.
299), further increasing the likelihood of negative academic outcomes such as
stress and anxiety.
Home conflict
According
to Pressman et al. (2015), homework is a major source of conflict between
students and their parents, an assertion supported by Bryan et al. (2001) who
noted that “…if helping with homework raises tension between parents and
children and causes frustration and disappointment, it may be
counter-productive to the child’s functioning in school, and their general
well-being” (p. 172). Bryan and his colleagues added that parents’ negative attitudes toward
homework, feelings of lack of self-efficacy, low expectations, and frustration
can “…diminish the likelihood that homework contributes in positive ways to
family life” (2001, p. 172). At least
one parent put it far more simply when describing the discord and tension
around homework: “Homework has dominated and ruined our lives for the past
eight years” (Baumgartner, Bryan, Donahue & Nelson, 1993, as cited by Bryan
et al., 2001, p. 172). A variety of factors, such as confusing assignments, overly
long assignments, lack of needed skills, and controlling or frustrated parents,
can cause homework to become “…an emotionally charged event in families” (Corno
& Xu, 2004).
Over
the years of controversy, some teachers have attempted to combat the problems
presented by homework—especially those of inequality of resources and home
support—by giving students time to work on homework in class. Researchers such as Shumow et al. (2008) and Zhu
and Leung (2012) are troubling by this solution. Shumow et al. (2008) argued that in-class
homework time takes away from precious instructional time, and Zhu and Leung
(2012) contended that there is strong evidence to support the claim that
students who spend in-class time working on homework are more likely to score
lower on math assessments than students who do not work on homework in
class. In summary, a variety of factors,
such as confusing assignments, overly long assignments, lack of needed skills,
and controlling or frustrated parents, can cause homework to become “…an
emotionally charged event in families” (Corno & Xu, 2004). So, what is to be
done about homework and adolescents’ mental health?
Conclusion
The
problem of homework-related stress is not unique to the United States but
appears to be a significant issue for U.S. students. The impact that stress takes on adolescents’
immediate mental health is very real, but there are also ongoing consequences
to consider. Among the long-term dangers
of homework-related stress and its impact on adolescents’ mental health is how
it may alter their view of school and learning, potentially creating a
perpetual distaste for both as argued in Jackson’s inoculation hypothesis
(2007). Are educators, as proposed by
Pope (2010) and Pope and Simon (2005), churning out a generation of zombies who
only regurgitate information in response to an overwhelming homework load that
allows them no time for independent, critical thought? Too much homework, poor quality homework, a lack
of homework resources, difficulties with homework support, and the challenge to
family life that these factors present may be taking a toll on their mental
health that adolescents cannot afford to pay.
More
worrying than how homework-related stress may impact students’ view of school,
is how it may impact their burgeoning self-concept, their long-term view of
themselves, and their overall mental health.
In their 2008 study on the perceptions of Mexican-American students, Bae
et al. found that low-achieving students—unlike their high-achieving peers—view
success and failure as absolutes. In
order to be a “good” student, these adolescents believe that you must turn in
all your work, every time, on time, with no exceptions (pp. 217-219). If you slip up even once, you are a “not so
good” student, basically, a failure.
These findings were supported by those of Bempechat et al. (2011) and
also strongly resemble Dweck’s description of the fixed mindset (2016, updated ed.).
In
reviewing the results of a study she conducted with college students, Dweck
reported that students with “the fixed mindset had higher levels of depressions…they
ruminated over their problems and setbacks, essentially tormenting themselves
with the idea that the setback meant they were incompetent or unworthy” (2016,
updated ed., p.38). When students think in
absolutes, as reported by both Dweck (2016, updated ed.) and Bae et al. (2008),
even a small number of failures can permanently alter their self-concept. For those students who routinely struggle
with homework, the fixed mindset combined with homework-related stress or
anxiety could create a vicious cycle from which adolescents will find it
difficult to escape (Dweck, 2016, updated ed.; Bae et al., 2008, Galloway &
Pope, 2007).
Still, it’s hard for educators to write homework off as long as the possibility exists that homework will boost achievement. Just as homework can cause mental health concerns such as stress and anxiety, anxiety and stress are associated with – and may even cause—a lowering of academic achievement (Hattie, 2012; Cheema & Sheridan, 2015). In Visible Learning for Teachers: Maximizing Impact on Learning (2012), researcher John Hattie shared the updated results of his ground-breaking meta-analysis of more than 900 educational studies in which he determined the effect sizes (ES) that various factors have on learning. Reducing anxiety was rated with an ES of .40, placing it exactly at the hinge-point of learning whereas homework only has an ES of .29 on learning. Could this mean that homework is doing more harm than good in education? While that is not a question that can be answered unequivocally by current research, it is a question that bears further exploration.[MB1]
Recommendations for Further Research
It is critical that research continue into the impact that homework has on the mental health of adolescents, how it varies based on students’ demographic identifiers, and what educators and parents can do to lessen the toll that homework is currently taking on students without sacrificing the academic benefits that may be gained from its successful application. With this is mind, the following studies are recommended.
- More extensive research looking specifically at the impact
of homework on the mental health of U.S. middle school students, middle school
here taken to mean the range of grade levels from 5th to 8th. - Studies looking specifically at conflict between parents and
students over homework and attempting to answer questions regarding the
frequency of conflict and its impact on academic achievement as well as
adolescent mental health would be of use to educators. - Of benefit to educational research would be a study examining
conflict between parents and teachers over homework—touched on in Bryan et al.
(2001)—and looking specifically at the frequency of conflict, its impact on
academic achievement, its impact on grading, and its impact on adolescent
mental health. - An interesting aspect of homework to explore, and of
critical importance for special education educators and parents, would be a
look at the ways in which the student homework experience varies between
general education and special education students. Such research has been advocated for by Bryan
et al. (2001) and Sheridan (2009). - A study looking at the academic benefit of completing
homework at school, but outside of instructional class time, compared to
completing homework actually at home, could provide useful information for
future homework interventions.
Limitations of Research
There are a number of limitations to
this review of literature regarding homework-related stress and adolescents’
mental health. First, this is by no
means an
exhaustive review. In total, 53 sources
were examined by the author, but that is only a small percentage of the
material available on the dual topics of homework and adolescent mental
health. Additionally, this review did
not consider any of the interventions, systems, trainings, or programs which
could be used to ameliorate the factors which make homework a source of stress
and anxiety for students. To look
closely at interventions which might be used to address even one source of
homework-related stress would be a study in and of itself.
With these limitations understood, it is still possible to draw certain general conclusions regarding homework and adolescent mental health based on this review of the literature. Homework is not universally good. Nor is homework universally bad. It is a mixed lot with many potential impacts on the lives of students. As such, school administrators should regularly monitor both the quantity and quality of the homework being assigned to students (Corno & Xu, 2004), teachers should carefully consider the repercussions of the homework they plan, prepare, and assign (Corno & Xu, 2004; Frey & Fisher, 2011; Jackson, 2007; Galloway & Pope, 2007), and parents should continue to make an effort to be involved in their children’s homework process—via provision of structure—even if they do not feel themselves capable of providing direct assistance (O’Sullivan et al., 2014; Pressman et al., 2015). Ultimately, all stakeholders in the homework process need to keep an open mind when examining homework and the impact it has on the mental health of adolescents. As Jackson (2007) argued “One might hope for less heat and more light from the experts–perhaps even a nuanced understanding of homework that recognizes its complexity, variability, and potential for both positive and negative effects” (p. 55-56).
References
Axelrod, M. I., Zhe, E. J., Haugen,
K. A. & Klein, J. A. (2009). Self-management of on-task homework behavior:
A promising strategy for adolescents with attention and behavior problems. School Psychology Review, 38(3),
325-333.
Bae,
S., Holloway, S. D., Li, J. & Bempechat, J. (2008). Mexican-American
students’ perceptions of teachers’ expectations: Do perceptions differ
depending on student achievement levels? Urban
Review, 40(2), 210-225. doi:10.1007/s11256-007-0070-x
Baumgartner,
D., Bryan, T., Donahue, M. & Nelson, C. (1993). Thanks for asking: Parents
comments about homework, tests, and grades. Exceptionality,
4(3), 177-183.
Bempechat,
J., Li, J., Neier, S. M., Gillis, C. A. & Holloway, S. D. (2011). The
homework experience: Perceptions of low-income youth. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(2), 250-278.
Bennett,
S. & Kalish, N. (2006). The Case
Against Homework: How Homework Is Hurting Our Children and What Parents Can Do
About It. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.
Bryan,
T., Burstein, K. & Bryan, J. (2001). Students with learning disabilities:
Homework problems and Promising Practices. Educational
Psychologist, 36(3), 167-180.
Cheema, J., & Sheridan, K.
(2015). Time spent on homework, mathematics anxiety and mathematics achievement:
Evidence from a US sample. Issues in Educational Research, 25(3),
246-259.
Chen, C. & Stevenson, H. W.
(1989). Homework: A cross-cultural examination. Child Development, 60, 551-561.
conflict. (2017). In Merriam-Webster.com. Retrieved May 23,
2017, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conflict
Conner, J., Pope, D. & Galloway,
M. (2009-2010). Success with less stress. Educational
Leadership, 67(4), 54-58.
Cooper, H. M. (2001). Homework for
all in moderation. Educational
Leadership, 58(7), 34-38.
Cooper,
H. M. (2007). The Battle Over Homework:
Common Ground for Administrators, Teachers, and Parents. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Cooper, H. M., Jackson, K. &
Nye, B. A. (2001). A model of homework’s influence on the performance
evaluations of elementary school students. Journal
of Experimental Education, 69(2), 181-199. doi:10.1080/00220970109600655
Cooper, H. M., Robinson, J.C. &
Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A Synthesis
of research, 1987-2003. Review of Educational
Research, 76(1), 1-62. doi:10.3102/00346543076001001
Cooper,
H. M. & Valentine, J. C. (2001). Using research to answer practical
questions about homework. Educational
Psychologist, 36(3), 143-153.
Corno, L. & Xu, J. (2004).
Homework as the job of childhood. Theory
into Practice, 43(3), 227-233.
Crystal, D. S., Chen, C., Fuligni,
A. J. & Stevenson, H. W. (1994). Psychological maladjustment and academic
achievement: A cross-cultural study of Japanese, Chinese, and American high
school students. Child Development, 65(3),
738-753.
Dweck, C. S. (2015). Growth. British Journal of Educational Psychology,
85(2), 242-245. doi:10.1111/bjep.12072
Dweck, C. S. (2016). Mindset: The new psychology of success
(updated ed.). New York, NY:
Ballantine Books.
Duckworth, A. (2016). Grit: The power of passion and perseverance. New York, NY: Scribner.
Eldridge,
G. (2009). Homework and student achievement. International Educator, 23(3), 31.
Frey, N. & Fisher, D. (2011).
High-quality homework. Principal
Leadership, 12(2), 56-58.
Frey, B. B., Schmitt, V. L. &
Allen, J. P. (2012). Defining authentic classroom assessment. Practical Assessment, Research &
Evaluation, 17(2), 1-18.
Galloway, M. K. & Pope, D.
(2007). Hazardous homework? Encounter, 20(4),
25-31.
Hattie, John. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. London, England: Routledge.
Hong, E., Wan, M. & Peng, Y.
(2011). Discrepancies between students’ and teachers’ perceptions of homework. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(2),
280-308.
Houser, D., Maheady, L., Pomerantz,
D. & Jabot, M. (2015). Effects of Radical Raceway on homework completion
and accuracy in ninth-grade social studies inclusion class. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24(4),
402-417. doi:10.1007/s10864-015-9229-9
Jackson, B. (2007). Homework
inoculation and the limits of research. Phi
Delta Kappan, 89(1), 55-59.
Kitsantas, A., Cheema, J., &
Ware, H. W. (2011). Mathematics achievement: The role of the homework and
self-efficacy beliefs. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(2),
310-339.
Kitsantas, A. & Zimmerman, B. J.
(2009). College students’ homework and academic achievement: The mediating role
of self-regulatory beliefs. Metacognition
& Learning, 4(2), 97-110. doi:10.1007/s11409-008-9028-y
Kohn,
A. (2006). The Homework Myth: Why Our
Kids Get Too Much of a Bad Thing. Cambridge, MA: First Da Capo Press.
Kouzma, N. M. & Kennedy, G. A.
(2002). Homework, stress and mood disturbance in senior high school students. Psychological Reports, 91(1), 193-198.
doi:10.2466/pr0.2002.91.1.193
Kouzma, N. M. & Kennedy, G. A.
(2004). Self-reported sources of stress in senior high school students. Psychological Reports, 94(1), 314-316.
doi:10.2466/pr0.94.1.314-316
Mau, W. & Lynn, R. (2000).
Gender differences in homework and test scores in mathematics, reading and
science at tenth and twelfth grade. Psychology,
Evolution & Gender, 2(2), 119-125. doi:10.1080/14616660050200904
Murillo, F., & Martinez-Garrido,
C. (2014). Homework and primary-school students’ academic achievement in Latin America.
International Review of Education, 60(5),
661-681. doi:10.1007/s11159-014-9440-2
Núñez, J. C., Suárez, N., Rosário,
P., Vallejo, G., Cerezo, R. & Valle, A. (2015). Teachers’ feedback on
homework, homework-related behaviors, and academic achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 108(3),
204-216. doi:10.1080/00220671.2013.878298
Núñez, J. C., Suárez, N., Rosário,
P., Vallejo, G., Valle, A. & Epstein, J. L. (2015). Relationships between
perceived parental involvement in homework, student homework behaviors, and
academic achievement: Differences among elementary, junior high, and high
school students. Metacognition & Learning, 10(3), 375-406.
doi:10.1007/s11409-015-9135-5
O’Sullivan, R. H., Chen, Y. &
Fish, M. C. (2014). Parental mathematics homework involvement of low-income
families with middle school students. School
Community Journal, 24(2), 165-187.
Pope, D. (2010). Beyond ‘Doing
School’: From ‘Stressed-out’ to ‘Engaged in learning.’ Education Canada, 50(1), p. 4-8.
Pope, D. C. and Simon, R. (2005).
Help for stressed students. Educational
Leadership, 62(7), p. 33-37.
Pressman, R. M., Sugarman, D. B.,
Nemon, M. L., Desjarlais, J., Owens, J. A. & Schettini-Evans, A. (2015).
Homework and family stress: With consideration of parents’ self confidence,
educational level, and cultural background. American Journal of Family
Therapy, 43(4), 297-313. doi:10.1080/01926187.2015.1061407
Reinhardt, D. Theodore, L. A., Bray,
M. A. & Kehle, T. J. (2009). Improving homework accuracy: interdependent
group contingencies and randomized components. Psychology in the Schools, 46(5), 471-488. doi:10.1002/pits.20391
Sheridan, S. M. (2009). Homework
interventions for children with attention and learning problems: Where is the
“home” in “homework?” School Psychology
Review, 38(3), 334-337.
Shumow,
L., Schmidt J. A. & Kackar, H. (2008). Adolescents’ experience doing
homework: Associations among context, quality of experience, and outcomes. The School Community Journal, 18(2),
9-27.
Sidhu,
G. K., Fook, C. Y. & Singh, P. (2010). Management of homework: Looking
through the eyes of learners. International
Journal of Learning, 17(5), 209-220.
Steinberg, L. (1996). Beyond the Classroom. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Stokes,
S. R. (2006). [Review of the book Closing
the Book on Homework: Enhancing Public Education and Freeing Family Time by
J. Buell]. Radical Teacher, 75,
38-39.
Trautwein,
U. (2007). The homework-achievement relation reconsidered: Differentiating
homework time, homework frequency, and homework effort. Learning and Instruction, 17, 372-388.
Trautwein,
U. & Ludtke, O. (2007). Students’ self-reported effort and time on homework in six school
subjects: Between-students differences and within-student variation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2),
432-444. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.432
Van
Voorhis, F. L. (2011). Costs and benefits of family involvement in homework. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(2),
220-249.
Watkins,
P. J. & Stevens, D. W. (2013). The Goldilocks dilemma: Homework policy
creating a culture where simply good is just not good enough. The Clearing House, 86, 80-85.
doi:10.1080/00098655.2012.748642
Westerlund,
H., Rajaleid, K., Virtanen, P., Gustafsson, P. E., Nummi, T. & Hammarstrom,
A. (2015). Parental academic involvement in adolescence as predictor of mental
health trajectories over the life course: A prospective population-based cohort
study. BMC Public Health, 15(1),
1-10. doi:10.1186/s12889-015-1977-x
Xu,
J. (2005). Purposes for doing homework reported by middle and high school
students. Journal of Educational
Research, 99(1), 46-55.
Zhu,
Y. & Leung, F. K. S. (2012). Homework and mathematics achievement in Hong
Kong: Evidence from the TIMSS 2003. International
Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 10(4), 907-925.
doi:10.1007/s10763-011-9302-3
[MB1]This is a strong segway into your next section heading.
