Can Online Homework Improve Completion Rates and Test Scores

Why is Homework a Dirty Word?

Can Online Homework Improve Completion Rates and Test Scores?

A Field Project Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Education

TOURO UNIVERSITY - CALIFORNIA

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

In

Education

with Emphasis in

Educational Technology

By

Lauren Nourse

December 2010

Why is Homework a Dirty Word? Can Online Homework Improve Completion Rates

and Test Scores?

In partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the

MASTER OF ARTS DEGREE

In

EDUCATION

By

Lauren Nourse

TOURO UNIVERSITY – CALIFORNIA

December 2010

Under the guidance and approval of the committee and approval by all the members, this
field project has been accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree.

Approved:

___________________________ ___________________
Pamela A. Redmond, Ed.D. Date

__________________________ ___________________
Jim O’Connor, Ph.D, Dean Date

TOURO UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIA
Graduate School of Education
Author Release

Name: Lauren S. Nourse

The Touro University California Graduate School of Education has permission to use my
MA thesis or field project as an example of acceptable work. This permission includes
the right to duplicate the manuscript as well as permits the document to be checked out
from the College Library or School website.

Signature: __________________________________

Date: ______________________________________

i

Table of Contents

List of Tables
................................................................................................................................................
iii

List of Figures
................................................................................................................................................
iii

LIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................III

LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................III

FIGURE 1: PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS IN NURSERY SCHOOL AND
STUDENT IN K-12 USING COMPUTERS ON THE INTERNET 20....................III

ABSTRACT...........................................................................................................IV
Chapter I..........................................................................................................................................................1

AFTER READING STUDIES THAT COMBINED EDUCATION AND
TECHNOLOGY, ONE REALIZES THE PROBLEMS FACED BY TEACHERS
ARE COMMON THROUGHOUT THE ACADEMIC DISCIPLINES. ONE
REASON FOR TEACHERS TO INVESTIGATE THE USE OF EDUCATIONAL
TECHNOLOGY IS TO DISCOVER A WAY FOR TEACHERS TO BETTER
CONNECT WITH OUR STUDENTS WHO HAVE GROWN UP AS
TECHNOLOGY NATIVES. OVER THE PAST DECADE, STUDENTS HAVE
FELT MORE AND MORE DISCONNECTED FROM SCHOOL AS
TECHNOLOGY ADVANCES. THEY QUESTION THE RELEVANCE OF THE
SUBJECT BEING TAUGHT IN THE TRADITION MANNER AND DON’T
UNDERSTAND HOW THIS VARIETY OF TOPICS CAN FORM A MAJOR
FOUNDATION FOR THEIR FUTURE EDUCATION AND, MORE
IMPORTANTLY, FOR THEIR LATER SUCCESS IN THE WORK PLACE
(PRENSKY, 2008). IN OUR EFFORTS TO FIND WAYS TO HELP STUDENTS
WANT TO ENGAGE, WE MUST INVESTIGATE HOW WE AS TEACHERS CAN
USE THE NEW TECHNOLOGIES THAT STUDENTS USE DAILY (OR EVEN
HOURLY) IN OUR CLASSROOM PRACTICE. ...................................................1

CHAPTER III.........................................................................................................22
Results............................................................................................................................................................32

Results for the pre-treatment and post treatment final exams are detailed in .....................................35

ii

Table 5 below. The average score for the pre-treatment chapter final for the whole class was 78%
compared to 63 % on the post treatment final. Paper and pencil completers scored 76% on the pre-
treatment final and 63% on the post treatment final. Online selectors scored 85.4% on the pre-
treatment final and 71% on the post treatment final................................................................................35

Analysis ........................................................................................................................................................35

CHAPTER IV........................................................................................................40
Limitations of the Study ..............................................................................................................................43

REFERENCES......................................................................................................46

APPENDICES.......................................................................................................51

APPENDIX A........................................................................................................52

EVALUATION OF HOMEWORK EXPERIMENT.................................................59

iii

List of Tables

Table 1: Summary of Recent Studies on Effectiveness of Homework
................................................................................................................................................
17

Table 2: Homework Motivation and Preference Profile
................................................................................................................................................
26

Table 3: Summary of Homework Habit Survey
................................................................................................................................................

28

Table 4: Summary of student participation pre-treatment vs. treatment
................................................................................................................................................

31

Table 5: Comparison of scores on pre- and post treatment final exams
................................................................................................................................................
34

List of Figures

Figure 1: Percentage of students in nursery school and student in K-12 using computers
on the internet
.................................................................................................................................
20

iv

Figure 2: Comparison of homework completion for all students’ pre- and post treatment
................................................................................................................................................
32

Figure 3: Homework turn in for all students pre-treatment ………………………..
................................................................................................................................................
33

Figure 4: Homework turn in for all students post treatment
................................................................................................................................................
33

Figure 5: Frequency distribution of homework compliance Chapter 1 vs. Chapter 2
................................................................................................................................................
35

Figure 6: Change in homework compliance post treatment minus pre-treatment
................................................................................................................................................
36

Figure 7: Percentage of homework non-compliance by class period
................................................................................................................................................
43

Abstract
There is an ever increasing complaint from high school teachers that the students we are

sending from the junior high are not prepared for the rigors of their classes. Given the

premise that homework is a necessity when learning to work independently and in

v

developing self-discipline and responsibility, the teachers at MJHS, a suburban middle

school, instituted a homework lunch for students who did not complete math and science

homework when due. The purpose was to provide a location for homework completion

with teacher assistance. In spite of this intervention, the rates of completion of

homework stayed static. Can we create more opportunities for homework to be done on

line and will this increase homework completion rates?

Chapter I

After reading studies that combined education and technology, one realizes the

problems faced by teachers are common throughout the academic disciplines. One

reason for teachers to investigate the use of educational technology is to discover a way

for teachers to better connect with our students who have grown up as technology

natives. Over the past decade, students have felt more and more disconnected from

school as technology advances. They question the relevance of the subject being taught

in the tradition manner and don’t understand how this variety of topics can form a major

foundation for their future education and, more importantly, for their later success in the

work place (Prensky, 2008). In our efforts to find ways to help students want to engage,

we must investigate how we as teachers can use the new technologies that students use

daily (or even hourly) in our classroom practice.

A debate that has raged on for an even longer period of time is that of the

effectiveness of homework: does it translate into higher test scores? How does one cover

the language of science and insure students have the background needed to understand

the curriculum without asking for some effort on their part outside of the classroom day?

Overwhelming evidence confirms that homework improves student achievement

(Cooper, Robinson, & Patall, 2006). With that evidence in mind, how can we insure that:

a) homework gets done; b) that homework is deemed to be meaningful to both students

and teachers and; c) the methods to deliver homework stimulate its completion?

Statement of the Problem

Research has shown improved student learning when meaningful homework

assignments are completed and returned to students with constructive comments

2

(Mendicino, Razzaq, & Heffernan, 2009). In addition, students benefited from

completing homework and learning to work independently. Homework also helped to

develop self-discipline and responsibility. Given this information it seemed important to

find research that supported the hypothesis that homework was an essential part of

student learning and, more importantly, was important for student retention of

information.

An ongoing struggle has existed between schools and parents over the necessity,

amount, and usefulness of homework. There were studies for (Cooper et al., 2006) and

against (Kravlovec & Buell, 2001) homework, but the majority of studies concluded that

homework does improve academic achievement. In spite of these studies, the perception

persisted and in fact grew among teachers and administrators that homework is no longer

an essential piece of the educational puzzle (Kralovec & Bell, 2001).

In an attempt to increase homework completion rates in eighth grade science

classes at a suburban California Middle School, hereafter known as MJHS, a tally was

kept of students who did not turn in assignments on time. Non-completers were given a

lunchtime detention with the principal and an opportunity to complete the work. The

assumption was that this intervention would improve the homework turn in rates. In the

four months that the program ran in the spring of 2010, there was little or no

improvement in percentage of homework turned in. Forty to fifty percent of students

routinely did not turn in their assignments on time. In an effort to improve this turn in

rate, studies were investigated that offered options outside of the traditional pen-and-

paper homework cycle.

3

A fifth grade study (Mendicino, Razzaq, & Heffernan, 2009) concluded that there

was a significant improvement in learning for students who completed homework using a

web-based model. In 2002, Liang’s college level physics study, results were negligible.

That study concluded that web-based homework was a good alternate, but not necessarily

a replacement for traditional general homework (Liang, 2002).

Even though the college level physics study did not show any significant

difference in learning outcomes, it did report a higher level of homework completion for

those who completed the web-based homework. Students also reported that they found

the web-based homework more “interesting” even though they spent more time

completing it.

Background and Need

There was a need to find a new tech-savvy way to allow students to participate in

homework. In our continuing efforts to engage students in the academic process it

appeared we must learn from them and employ some new web-based methods for

completing homework. Pew Research Center (2010) reports stated that students routinely

used cell phones to access the internet. A similar student technology assessment would

be needed to be completed to discern whether all students have access to and know how

to routinely use the internet and other technology. This survey helped to find out what

technology literacy existed among the sample population. Questions regarding access to

computers, access to the internet, and the ability of the student’s computer to handle the

graphic and video components anticipated in the homework events should be included.

Following the lead of several other teachers doing research on this topic, the suggestion

was to also assess the conditions under which students did their homework. Survey items

4

included: a) when and where homework is done; b) lighting conditions; c) study space or

surface; and d) music, television, or other noise level factors. From this information,

online homework parameters could be established and a research time frame set.

Purpose

While the larger question of whether homework improves academic achievement

is important, the purpose of this project was to compare the rates of homework

completion between students using traditional traditional pen-and-paper versus online

homework and the concomitant effect on student performance. The study questioned

whether there would be an increase in homework completion rates as indicated by several

prior studies (Bonham, Beichner, & Deardorff, 2001; Cooper, Robinson, & Patall, 2006;

Salend, Duhaney, Anderson, & Gottschalk, 2004) or whether the novelty of the web as an

educational homework resource had already begun to fade.

Study Objectives

This study tested the hypothesis that students will have a greater homework turn in

rate if they are given options for ways to submit the work and that there would be a

related effect on student performance. The study called for implementation of the use of

online homework assignments for at least one unit of instruction at a public middle

school in northern California. The researcher found it necessary to have routine weekly

homework assignments that could be done online. It was hoped that the project would

open dialogue and debate at the school as to the effectiveness and worth of homework in

our specific community.

5

Definitions:

Computer-based homework: general term for any type of homework graded by a

computer, including web-based homework.

Critical pedagogy: process of learning and relearning

Digital Literacy: the ability to use digital technology, communication tools or networks

to locate, evaluate, use and create information. (Wikipedia, n.d.)

Digital Native: a digital native is a person who has grown up with digital technology

such as computers, the internet, mobile phones and MP3 players. (Wikipedia, n.d.)

Digital Immigrant: a person who was not born into the digital world but has adopted

many or most aspects of the new technology. (Prensky, 2001)

High quality homework: well prepared cognitively engaging tasks of varying difficulty

and involving careful class discussion of homework assignments (Trautwein & Ludke,

2007)

Homework: any task assigned to students that is to be done outside the hours of the

school day; any paper and pencil activity given by the classroom teacher that the student

must complete at home. The activity or activities are not constrained to one subject or

content area, but it can also be based on abstract thinking skills and requires mental effort

and discipline (adapted from Cooper et al., 2006, Corno, 2000, Taback, 2005).

Meaningful learning: occurs when students select and organize relevant visual and

verbal information and systematically integrate the newly constructed visual and verbal

representations.

6

Paper-based homework: the more traditional method of students working out their

solutions on paper, turning these in for grading, and, after a delay of a few days to a few

weeks, receiving the papers back with written comments on them.

Web-based homework system: a service which (1) can be accessed from any standard

browser and internet connection (2) password authenticates the user, (3) delivers

assignments to students and receives their answers (4) grades student work automatically

and (5) keeps a permanent record of student scores which the instructor can access at a

latter time (Bonham, Deardorff, & Beichner, 2003).

Summary

The question of whether homework is important to student achievement has been

hotly debated. The performance at MJHS and many schools in the nation show poor

student completion of homework assignments. This study questioned whether improved

homework completion rates would have a resultant increase in student academic

performance and additionally, whether the option to complete homework online would

effect either of these components. Could web-based homework provide a viable

alternative to traditional types of homework? If more opportunities were created for

homework to be done online would this increase homework completion rates and by

extension improve student test scores? Would online homework improve understanding

of the material? Lastly, this study questioned whether online homework was just a

novelty to students who are interested in trying out this new style initially but quickly tire

and return to old habits.

7

Chapter II

Introduction

Why did students at MJHS stop completing homework in ever increasing

numbers in 2009? What was it about homework that made it become a battleground for

teachers, administrators, and students? Why assign homework? What do parents and

teachers want students to gain from completing the assigned tasks? If, in fact, homework

was becoming a lightning rod for educational change, how could we facilitate that change

and still keep the components of homework that were important to teachers and parents?

Some investigators suggested that the reasons for non-completion involved the difficulty

of the assignment or the inability of students to work independently (Latto-Auld, 2005).

Other studies suggested that students did not have adequate facilities at home to complete

work (Krovalec & Buell, 2001). Marzano and Pickering (2007) maintained that the

assigned homework was inappropriate, while Noguera (2007) maintained that the student

voice was neglected and should be incorporated.

In our continuing efforts to engage students in the academic process, it appeared

we must learn from these various studies and employ some new web-based methods for

completing homework. Hong, Milgram, and Rowell (2004) noted that it was a “difficult

but worthwhile challenge for creative teachers to offer alternate homework assignments

in terms of the perceptual preferences of the learners” (p. 197). Teens were frustrated

with teachers who were out of sync with the current environment (P. Strom, R. Strom,

Wing and Beckert, (2009). Even though teachers realized that the internet was the

student’s most important resource, students were puzzled that teachers rarely used the

internet and rarely assigned work that requires use of the internet. As reported by

8

Solomon & Schrum (2007), only 5% of students credited school for teaching them how

to apply technology. In spite of this statistic, the study by Strom et al. (2009) found that

students felt internet homework increased their understanding of curriculum and

promoted independent learning (p 117).

Homework is such a complicated issue. The ever-changing demographics of a

community and the classroom continually clouded the issue of homework’s worth.

Those who subscribed to the theory that homework is evil tended to focus on the amount

of time it takes for a student to complete the homework. This created conflict at home

between parents and students (Kohn, 2006a). Simplicio (2005) offered the argument that

because there was little consistency between teachers on amounts and types of assigned

homework students could not adequately plan for homework time. This led to an

investigation of the type of homework assigned which found: routine worksheets based

on the day’s lesson, practice, review, research for a report, or perhaps a response to an

inquiry-based lesson. There were also homework assignments that fell under the non-

instructional design (Xu, 2005). These included punishment assignments, social skill

development, and homework involving parents that was intended to improve

communication between parents and students. Those who supported homework felt that

it promoted a positive attitude towards school, cemented the classroom learning, and

helped to dispel the notion that learning occurs only in school. Homework also

reinforced concepts introduced in the classroom. Students learned to cope with mistakes

and difficulties through homework (Bempechat, 2004). Hong et al. (2004) stated that

“Homework is a powerful tool that can contribute to the advancement of children’s

education, or it can do more damage than good to their education and development. The

9

difference between the two outcomes depends on the quality of decisions as how to

homework is implemented” (p. 203). Van Voorhis (2004) noted that homework offered

students with different learning styles an opportunity to “individually participate and

demonstrate understanding of the topic” (p. 207).

To date, the debate rages on as to the necessity of homework. As one might

expect, this is a very complicated debate. While some felt homework was punitive and a

detriment to students and families, (Kohn, 2006a), other research showed improvements

in student learning when the assigned homework was completed (Mendicino, Razzaq, &

Heffernan, 2009). Coutts (2004) argued that more homework was needed to achieve

educational excellence. Cooper, Robinson, and Patall (2006), in their seemingly

exhaustive meta-analysis of research on the effects of homework, found that homework

improved learning but they left the door open for more study. Some of the studies they

investigated suggested significant correlation between homework and achievement.

There were, however, differing conclusions based on grade level and subject matter,

which left the topic open to future investigation.

Theoretical Rationale

Killoran (2003) identified four theories of development that could be applied to

the homework question. These development theories could be used to explain many of

the reasons for non-completion of homework and could also be used to specify what

interventions could be applied.

1. Behaviorism identifies the homework problem as being an issue of

reinforcement. It is anything that results in a behavior increasing or staying

10

the same. One must find a way to reinforce the desired behavior. (Killoran,

2003).

2. Constructivism suggests that a child should be the initiator of activity and is

the person responsible for interacting with the environment. The child will

manipulate the environment. The teacher would set up the environment so

that the child could progress up the developmental scale. (Killoran, 2003).

3. Maturational theory believes in the biological reasons behind the development

level. In order for the student to be successful the teacher must give

homework that is at the appropriate developmental level. (Killoran, 2003).

4. Ecological systems theory maintains that there are extraneous issues that

should be resolved before the student can be successful. (Killoran, 2003).

The researcher applied the constructivist view to the proposed research. The

research supported active learning that allowed students to investigate new ways to solve

old problems. Students used the web and internet to complete routine homework

assignments. The researcher in this study wanted to see if the students could become

active learners using a medium they embraced. Xu (2005) suggested that if students

completed homework for intrinsic reasons, the result would be a higher grade. He defined

intrinsic characteristics as ones that developed responsibility, allowed the learner to work

independently, helped them to learn study skills, developed good discipline and

reinforced school learning.

An important component of the homework puzzle was why a teacher assigned the

homework in the first place. What did the teacher hope students would get out of the

assignment and how long did the teacher think it would take the student to complete the

11

assigned work? The research of Marzano and Pickering (2007) demonstrated concern

over the value of the assigned homework in general. Less research has been done on

computer-based homework. Several studies looked at the effects of web-based versus

paper and pencil homework at the university and upper high school level (Cole & Todd,

2003; Roth, Ivanchenko, & Record, 2008; Pritchard & Morote, 2002).

This research held to the premise that homework can be a good way to help

students create the foundation they need for science literacy and comprehension. Could a

teacher create homework that combined the student’s love of the computer and its instant

gratification with instant feedback on assigned homework? Would this translate into

better understanding of the topic? Would this create better science literacy? More

importantly, would this create a greater interest in science learning? Being born into an

era where technology surrounds them, today’s students could be considered Digital

Natives. While they access technology and the internet daily through their computers and

cell phones, it was usually for social networking purposes rather than for educational

reasons (Pew Research Center, 2007, 2010). It was becoming increasingly important to

integrate the student’s use of technology into classroom instruction. Strom et al. (2009)

stated that the custom of students having a passive role in the learning process should be

left behind. This opened the door for studying the effects of web-based homework, its

completion rates, and the effect of completing that homework on quiz and test scores.

Differing Opinions: What makes Homework Bad?

As noted previously, there are differing opinions as to the value of homework.

Marzano and Pickering (2007) looked at both sides of the homework issue. They

reviewed the work of seven studies and articles. Kralovec and Buell (2000) suggested

12

that homework “teaches students to overvalue work and increase a sense of competition”

(p. 74). Analyzing Bennett and Kalish (2006), they ascertained that too much homework

can harm students’ health and family time. They also suggested that most homework is

not designed well and teachers are not trained in how to assign homework. Kohn (2006b)

took aim at other homework researchers and said that they failed to show that homework

is effective. Homework should be designed to involve activities appropriate for the

home. Marzano and Pickering (2007) take note that Kohn (2006b) may have

misunderstood or misrepresented the research which then sent the wrong message that

research does not support homework. The Marzano and Pickering (2007) study

suggested that inappropriate or poorly designed homework may even decrease student

achievement.

Krovalec and Buell (2001) suggested that homework punished students in poverty

who may not have the time, place, or equipment to adequately complete homework. In

their follow up to a study in the 1990s on why students drop out, an inability to complete

homework was a major factor. This study led them to a further analysis of other research

reports and interviews with teachers, parents, high school dropouts, and current high

school students. In addition to being punitive on those who are poor, their investigations

showed that homework could be a major factor in disrupting family life and be a major

cause of family conflict. They suggested that the academic skills that are needed to

complete long-term independent projects should be taught within the school day. The

drill and practice that is often assigned as homework was better placed within the school

day to allow students to get help when needed when they need help. Krovalec and Buell

(2001) go on to tackle and debunk three homework myths:

13

1. homework increases academic achievement

2. homework is needed for improved test scores

3. the lack of homework will dilute the curriculum and cater to lazy students.

Kohn (2006b) in his article Abusing Research; The study of homework and other

examples, tackled several studies and argued against their findings by reinterpreting the

results of the various studies. His investigations rebut those studies that show a positive

effect of homework on younger children. He suggested that giving homework is a form

of punishment.

Why does a teacher bother assigning homework? Connor (2004) reported that

teachers assigned homework with the notion that they do it to “promote good attitudes

toward school, to improve study habits, to dispel the notion that learning occurs only in

school, and to allow parents the opportunity to express to children how much they value

education” (p. 31). Conversely, Van Voorhis (2004) pointed out that teachers have very

little training and little professional development in what constitutes effective and well-

designed homework.

Schuster’s (2009) study involved ninth grade geography students. In addition to

measuring the impact of homework on learning, the study also measured the impact of

student homework preferences on homework completion and on learning. Schuster’s

investigation involved a study of the homework environment, time management, the

handling of distractions, a monitoring of motivation, and the controlling emotions related

to homework. This research did not find an improvement in quiz scores for those

students assigned homework.

The more research that is done, the more confusing the questions becomes.

14

Differing Opinions: What makes Homework Good?

When questioned, most teachers said that they give homework to cement student

understanding, promote responsibility, and provide for practice. Cooper et al. (2006)

completed a major study updating their 1989 study investigating over 69 studies on

homework effectiveness. While other authors debated their conclusions (Kohn, 2006b),

Cooper et al. (2006) found that there was a positive influence of homework on

achievement, particularly in upper grades. In six studies that employed exogenous

manipulations, they all revealed that homework had a positive effect on unit tests.

Because Cooper et al.’s (2006) investigation of homework studies was so vast, there was

difficulty in connecting the effects of homework because of the differences in focus of

each of the studies. Their report included nine studies that used data collected as part of

various waves of the National Education Longitudinal Study. All but one had a positive

association with homework. There were 12 other studies that examined the relationship

between homework and achievement. Again, positive results between homework and

achievement were recorded although caution was advised against drawing conclusions

from this set as their variables and methods were diverse. Cooper et al. (2006)

recommended that future research was suggested because of these variables.

With the debate raging on the value and effectiveness of homework, in this study

it was important to narrow the research to look for the impact of web and internet based

homework on learning. Mendicino, Razzaq, and Heffernan (2009) conducted a study of

54 fifth graders. Using a counterbalanced experimental design they got positive

quantitative results. They ascertained that students learned significantly more with web-

based homework than with paper and pencil homework. In their short one week study,

15

they compared the effects of web-based homework using the ASSISTment system to the

effectiveness of paper and pencil homework. The ASSISTment system is used to provide

tutoring at each step of the homework. Each tutoring session is constructed around a

cognitive model of the problem-solving skills students have and the skills needed to solve

each problem. Modeled as a set of independent production rules which represent

different pieces of knowledge, the ASSISTment system provides both interactive

scaffolding and hints on demand. The results of this study showed that students

performed better on assessments after using the web-based homework.

Salend, Duhaney, Anderson and Gottschalk (2004) found that setting up a

homework site on the internet was an effective tool to guide students and their families

when attempting to complete homework successfully. Several studies (Melis, et al. 2001;

Pritchard & Morote, 2000; Roth, Ivanchenko, & Record, 2008) focused on the

effectiveness of various college level programs. The products researched were Web

Work, Cybertutor, and ActiveMath. All three studies found these programs to be helpful

in alleviating the problem of assessing large numbers of homework assignments. Getting

information back to the student in a timely fashion was shown to be a key in the student’s

better comprehension of material (Razzaq, Mendicino, and Heffernan., 2008). It

appeared that looking at ways to improve assessment was critical.

Cole and Todd (2003) studied the use of computer animation and multimedia

presentations. This was also a college level study. While Cole and Todd found that all

forms of computer based instruction were effective at the college level, their research

showed that computer animation and multimedia presentations were somewhat less

effective at the pre-college level. Strom et al. (2007) found that students considered

16

internet homework to be helpful and found that understanding of topics was increased. In

addition, independent learning was facilitated and the internet allowed for more practice

with research skills. In their study of 294 college physics students, Bonham, Beichner,

and Deardorff (2001) found that there was little difference in performance between web

and paper assignments. However, students generally preferred to do their homework on

the web. This was also the finding of Liang’s 2002 study of students in courses in

introductory college level physics. Below is a summary of homework pros and cons:

Advantages:

• Integrates separately learned skills and concepts

• Dispels notion that learning occurs only in school

• Supplements in-school academic activities; reinforces school learning

• Prompts greater self direction and self discipline

• Promotes better time organization

• Invites more independent problem solving

• Can increase parent involvement

• Prepares students to be prepared for academic demands and obstacles

Disadvantages:

• Major cause of stress in students’ lives

• Major cause of family stress

• Can promote a negative attitude toward school

• Can deny students access to leisure time and community activities

• Can increase differences between high-and low-achieving students

17

Table 1
Summary of Recent Studies on Effectiveness of Homework
Author Date Sample Age, Quantitative Qualitative difference in
Grade and gender difference in performance.
performance
1. Xu 2005 8th grade No Rural students took
significantly less initiative in
monitoring their motivation.
High achieving students made
greater use of all 5 subscales
of homework management
strategies.
2. Cole & Todd 2003 College freshman No measurable Appreciated on line
quantitative effect component of homework
on the students High GALT students preferred
outcome paper and pencil
Low GALT students preferred
web and liked immediate
feedback to HW
3. Mendicino, Razzaq, 2009 5th graders Yes: students Students take hw more
& Heffernan 50% male learned more with seriously when they know it
50% female Web-based hw than will be graded
with paper-and
pencil hw.
4. Cooper, Robinson, 2006 K-12 Yes: doing hw Of 69 studies, 50 were positive
& Patall 1987-2 improved academic and 19 were negative pg 48
003 achievement. Too much hw leads to poor
More effect at attitude towards school
middle and upper
grades than
elementary.
5. Schuster 2009 9th graders No: hw had little Inconclusive relationship
impact on learning between homework and quiz
in geography scores and homework
preferences and homework
completion and homework
preferences and quiz scores

6. Pritchard & 2000 Yes Final exam, weekly tests, and
Morote Socratic tutor
Tutor based assessment was
able to provide more accurate
was to deal fairly with
students’ capabilities (pg 6)
7. Bonham, Beichner, & 2001 College physics Student performance Students overwhelmingly
Deardorff was similar between preferred web-based hw
paper and web system.
sections (pg 294)
8. Bonham, Deardorff, 2003 College physics No statistical More effective for teacher in
& Beichner difference assessing student work
9. Roth, Ivenchecnko, 2008 Postsecondary Students perceptions positive:
& Record math and science liked immediate feedback
Resubmissions of work

18

Every study had unique findings. While studies 1, 2, 5, and 8 showed no

measurable quantitative differences in performance between students assigned homework

and those not assigned homework, studies 3, 4,and 6 do show a measurable improvement.

In addition, studies 2, 6, 7, 8, 9 suggested students preferred using a web-based

homework system.

Student Engagement and Student Perception

Initially it seemed hard to argue with the findings of Cooper et al. (2006) that

there was a distinct and measurable value to homework. However, expanding the scope

of research led to articles and books with distinctly different opinions. Schuster, in his

2009 study of ninth grade Geography students, found inconclusive evidence that

homework improved quiz scores. Kohn, in several books and articles, argued that

homework is usually assigned simply because it is expected of teachers to assign

homework. There was also a body of research that discussed how little teachers really

know about the homework they assign-how long it will take a student and what their

reasons are for assigning it. Often student teachers are given little or no instruction on

how to decide what makes a good homework assignment. Bryan, Burstein, and Bryan

(2004), who are also pro-homework, found that the amount of homework completed had

an effect on student academic achievement, in contrast to the amount of homework

assigned. These arguments gave rise to the idea that students should have more of a

voice in their homework and in their learning. This is where there seemed to be a fit for

homework to be done and submitted on the computer.

19

Students looked for teachers to hop on the digital bandwagon. Mendicino et al.

in their 2009 study of fifth graders found that students learned significantly more with

web-based homework as compared to traditional paper and pencil homework. Strom et

al. (2009) reminded us that students now consider the internet to be their most important

source for most anything. More recent Pew Center (2010) reports suggested that

adolescents spend upwards of 15 hours a week online. This was refuted by another study

suggesting that the amount of time students spend on homework had not changed in 20

years (Van Voorhis, 2004). The U. S. Department of Education survey (DeBell &

Chapman, 2006) found that 26% of 13 year olds had one to two hours of homework per

night while 37% had less than one hour. 30-40% spent no time on homework, either

because they were not assigned any or did not complete it. Even with these statistics,

Coutts (2004) reported that many mid and high school students find homework to be

socially isolating. According to Lenhart and Madden’s 2007 survey, 87 % of students go

online daily after school. Teachers must begin to tap into this technology to facilitate the

digital native’s learning. Students liked the fact that on the internet they could proceed at

their own pace. With student participation in social networking sites so high, there was

an opening for online teamwork tasks and use of the internet to expand group learning. A

student’s perceptions of homework and school in general played a major part in their

future success.

More recent studies showed that students preferred using the web and computer

for their homework regardless of its direct impact on test or quiz scores. Prensky (2008)

suggested that students asked for new technologies as they realize how useful they can

be. Strom et al. (2009) reported that students are frustrated with teachers who do not

20

embrace the digital environment. As Digital Natives they are said to prefer receiving

information quickly; are adept at processing information rapidly; prefer multi-tasking and

non-linear access to information; have a low tolerance for lectures; prefer active rather

than passive learning, and rely heavily on communications technologies to access

information and to carry out social and professional interactions (Prensky, 2001).

Figure 1. Percentage of students in nursery school and students in K-12 using computers or the
internet, by grade level: 2003. Reprinted from “Computer and Internet Use by Students in 2003:
A Statistical Analysis Report,” by M. DeBell, and C. Chapman, 2006, National Center for
Education Statistics, p.7. Copyright 2006 by the U.S.Department of Education
Figure 1 demonstrates that students spend increasingly larger amounts of time on

the internet. As adolescents increased their online time, it was important to tap into their

belief that their homework was improved through the use of the internet. (Lenhart &

Madden, 2007).

Summary

21

Proponents of homework cite research that it improved student achievement,

promoted problem solving and self discipline and prepared students for academic

demands and obstacles. Other researchers suggested homework caused major student

and family stress and promoted a negative impact on school. The focus of this study was

to narrow the study of homework on the internet to middle school students. There was

strong evidence that teachers could lead the way in showing students how to employ

technology based tools to optimize the learning experience. The idea was to teach with

technology – not just teach about technology.

If homework was assigned in an effort to improve student achievement, then one

must answer the question of how that achievement was measured. While it would seem

that achievement could be measured in terms of science literacy and curiosity about the

topic, the reality was that achievement must hold to our state and national measures of

judging literacy which is currently measured by standardized tests scores.

Once we improved the completion rate for homework, would that translate into

higher test scores? Would these higher test scores come because the teachers could

devote more in-class time for experiments and work at a lab station? Even though other

studies showed that the same learning can be affected with computer simulations, is there

a way to get students more interested and involved in the classroom during the day? A

higher percentage of students attach little importance to what is happening in the

classroom. Would providing more computer time and/or more time working on hands-on

labs rather than “seat” time make their science education more relevant to them?

Noguera (2007) reminded us to include the student voice in this discussion as students

22

can often come up with acceptable solutions to a problem. How homework was

implemented can determine whether it will be helpful or detrimental (Hong et al., 2004).

Chapter III

Project Development

As detailed in Chapters 1 and 2, the necessity of homework has been a hotly

debated topic. Research supported the idea that homework reinforced and helped to

cement curriculum introduced in the classroom (Cooper, Robinson, & Patall, 2006).

While some suggested that students were overwhelmed with too many hours of

homework and that homework was a waste of time that could lead to major stress within

families (Kohn, 2006a), casual conversations with eighth grade students at the target

school in this study revealed that little time was actually spent on homework or test

preparation. Instead, students spent the majority of after school time participating in

social activities, often involving the internet, cell phone, or computer. Pew Research

Center (2010) study data supported this anecdotal data. Pew indicated sharp increases in

cell phone ownership and usage by middle school aged children. While only 45 % of

teens owned cell phones in 2004, that number jumped to 71 % in 2008 and can be

expected to be even higher today.

This study was an effort to combine the instructional needs of the teacher to have

students do some work at home with the desire of the student to use some form of

technology during their after school hours. The methodology was to adapt routine

23

weekly science homework to be web-based and then to compare homework completion

rates to determine homework’s effect on student performance. As was seen in Table 1 (p.

16), while many prior studies were done on the effectiveness of homework, few

investigated the results of offering the opportunity to do homework through the internet.

The major studies reviewed primarily involved math curricula and took place mostly at

the high school level and above.

Various studies on the reasons students did not do homework came to the

conclusion that students have difficulty working independently (Latto-Auld, 2005), that

they do not have adequate facilities at home to complete their work (Krovalec & Buell,

2001), the assigned work was inappropriate (Marzano & Pickering, 2007), or that the

student voice had not been heeded (Noguera, 2007). To better engage the current

students who are Digital Natives (Prensky, 2008), combining the ability to complete and

submit homework with the power of the computer was necessary. The research approach

offered the opportunity to teach using technology – not just teach about technology.

During the 2009-2010 school year, students attending MJHS, the target school,

had a spotty history of homework completion. Often the percentage of incomplete

homework was as high as 50 %. There was a growing sense from teachers that

increasingly, students at all grade levels were not completing homework. The incidence

of non-compliance with homework was so high that the school instituted an academic

homework lunch for eighth grade science students. Students who did not complete their

routine weekly science homework spent their lunch time with the principal every day

until the work was completed. While the percentage of students turning in their

homework on time did not increase significantly, the school scores on the science portion

24

of the yearly California Standards Test did improve. Was there a connection between

student participation in the homework process and the improvement in test scores?

Certainly, there appeared to be a causal relationship. This study set out to formally test

this hypothesis by investigating how to get a higher number of students to engage in the

homework process by offering the students choices. Since so many students showed an

aversion to a traditional pen-and-paper style of homework, this study posed to increase

student interest in homework by offering the opportunity to complete homework through

the internet.

Sampling and Action Research

MJHS, a suburban school with a student population of approximately 950, has

nearly one-third of its students listed as Title I eligible for free and reduced lunch. All

five eighth grade classes were typical middle school classes with a mixture of below-

average, average, and above-average students. The study was conducted using a

convenience sample of 154 students in the five physical science classes taught by the

researcher. It took place at MJHS from October 1, 2010 through November 16, 2010.

Since this research was initially developed as an attempt to investigate how to improve

homework turn in rates at this middle school, it was important to conduct the research on

students from this school site.

Initially conceived as an action research project, the intent was to assign Period 1

as a control group, periods 2 and 5 being assigned only an opportunity to complete the

assignment online, and periods 3 and 6 being asked to complete their homework using

only the traditional paper and pencil method. Once the project was under way, it quickly

became apparent that this would be punitive to students who did not have ready access to

25

a computer and the internet. Even if students had access to the internet there were issues

of having the necessary computer programs to support the assigned work. It was

necessary to redesign the research. All students were given instruction on accessing the

homework online, completing it, and sending the completed work back to the teacher.

Once these instructions were given, students decided which method of homework

completion they would use. Initially 36% (56 out of 154) students indicated a preference

for completing their homework on line.

As a precursor to the implementation of the study, students were surveyed on their

homework habits (see Appendix A). The survey was an effort to get students thinking

about their personal homework routines. It was also an effort to get them to take a

personal interest in how to get the most out of their study time. Questions asked students

what their opinions were as to why teachers assigned homework in the first place, how

they learned best, what noise levels they preferred, and their preferred type of homework.

Students were also asked to consider why they might not complete their homework. The

researcher hoped that questions on the survey would motivate students to take ownership

of their school and home routines and consider ways to improve their homework habits to

affect maximum return for time spent.

Referring to Table 2, the majority of students preferred to do their homework

right after school, at a desk or table with music playing. They didn’t mind moderate

background noise. They preferred to do homework with friends or other students and

usually were able to do that. While most of their homework for science consisted of

reading text and answering questions and worksheets, they overwhelmingly preferred

either hands on work or group work. In spite of the push to incorporate technology

26

through the use of the web into our curriculum, 56% of the students responded that they

rarely or never were required to use online resources for their science homework.

Table 2.

Homework Motivation and Preference Profile

Preference Response Ability to do
rate as preferred
Right After School 51 Always 55
When do you prefer to do science
Later in the evening 34 Often 31
homework?
No Preference 20 Sometimes 6
Where do you prefer to do your science Kitchen table 17 Always 45
homework? Living room 16 Often 43
Bedroom 53 Sometimes 6
Library 0
No preference 5
What is your preference for study space Desk 22 Always 38
while you do your science homework? Table 37 Often 46
Lap 12 Sometimes 10
Floor 11 Rarely 3
Bed 11 No preference 2
No preference 6
Do you prefer to have music playing Yes 71 Always 50
while you do your science homework? No 13 Often 31
No preference 5 Sometimes 8
Sometimes 8 Rarely 1
No preference 8
Do you prefer to do science homework Yes 29
in front of television that is on? No 53
Sometimes 4
I have no preference 10
What other noises are around you as you TV 16
study? Video games 3
Talking 50
Music 27
Nothing 2
All 2
What level of noise do you prefer while Complete silence 2
doing your science homework? Mostly quiet 33
Moderate noise and 54
background noise
Loud background noise 2
No preference 8
How often are you able to do your Always 38
science homework according to the noise Often 44
level you like? Sometimes 14

27

Rarely 1
Never 1
Not applicable as I have no
preference 4
Thinking about your science homework Studying maps, charts, 3
from past years, what type was assigned diagrams
most often? Hand on, building sample of 7
experiment
Reading text and
worksheets 90

What was your preferred type of science Studying 4 Always 14
assignment? Hands on 28 Often 31
Reading and worksheets 66 Sometimes 23
Rarely 27
No preference 1
Which of the following best describes Alone 28 Always 31
your preferences while doing science With other students or 53 Often 38
homework? friends 3 Sometimes 13
With a teacher around 7 Rarely 13
With a parent around 7 No preference 3
With students or friends and
with a parent or teacher 6
around
No preference
How often do you go online to help you Always 2
with your science homework? Often 10
Sometimes 21
Rarely 53
Never 28
I learn best when_______. Discuss with classmates 48
Direct instruction 21
Read textbook 18
Watching TV 13
Internet 4
In the past science homework required Once a week 19
me to go online Twice a week 4
Daily 5
Never 52
Rarely 13
Once in a while 11
n=104 Note: Although the survey was administered at school and all students indicated they had completed
the study, only 104 responses were recorded.

After assessing the responses to the initial survey, a second survey was conducted

prior to the start of the research period (see Appendix B)

A summary of the student responses was as follows:

• 87% generally spent one hour per night on all homework.

• 61% agreed that homework did help understand class work.

28

• 88% stated that they returned their homework daily.

• 72% felt they would do homework more often and more

completely if they could find it, complete it, and return it online.

• 70% did not think that doing homework improved their

understanding of the science material and did not help them do

better on science tests.

The student survey was conducted using an online questionnaire. The

questionnaire was administered at school to insure that all students could

participate. The questionnaire was offered and assigned to all 154 students. Either

due to time constraints or student unfamiliarity with the program, only 84 student

responses were recorded.

Table 3.

Summary of Homework Habit Survey

Item Survey Question Majority Response Percent with this
response
1. Time spent on homework 1-2 hours 87%

6. Homework helps with classwork Yes 61%

7. Do you expect your parents to help you with your Yes 77%
homework if you are having trouble understanding it?

9. Do you return your homework every day? Yes 88%

12. How many hours a day do you spend on your 1 hour 33%
computer or smart phone-exploring internet sites of 3 + hours 33%
talking to friends or texting friends or any other social
interactions?

14. Do you think you would do your homework more Yes 72%
often and more completely if you could find the
homework online, complete it and turn it in online?

29

15. Homework improves their understanding of the No 70%
science material and did not help me do better on
science tests

16. How many hours a day do you spend watching TV? Responses split 50%
evenly.
n = 84

30

Methodology

This quasi-experimental study took place over a six week period covering one

chapter of the textbook on the topic of force and motion. Each student was given a

“consumable” science notebook from the textbook publisher at the beginning of the

school year (Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, 2002). It served as a way to guide students to the

important information to be gleaned from the chapter. There were typically three to four

pages per lesson and three to four lessons per chapter. The routine assignments were the

science notebook pages for one lesson (three to four pages) per week. Casual inquiry of

the test subjects suggested that it took twenty to thirty minutes for most students to

complete all the assigned pages for the week. During the research period there were

additional homework assignments such as completing lab work or other supplemental

worksheets. These were not offered for completion online. Students had been assigned a

similar style of homework over the prior 6 weeks (pre-treatment period) to insure that

they had a familiarity with the length and style of a typical homework assignment. The

study was restricted to homework pages from the science notebook and chapter outline.

Homework was assigned on Monday and due on Thursday. The routine was not varied

for the length of the research. A final exam was conducted at the conclusion of the

research period.

In order to make the notebook pages easily accessible to students, links were

embedded in the school-maintained teacher web page. Students opened the web page and

downloaded the necessary science notebook pages to their own computers. Once

completed, the completed pages were emailed back to the teacher. The teacher review of

the completed work and a grade was emailed back to the student the next day.

31

Comments were attached along with the grade. This afforded the opportunity to give

feedback to the student in a more timely fashion. This was an important feature to the

study as prior studies such as Mendicino, Razzaq, and Heffernan (2009) had indicated

that getting feedback to the student in a timely fashion was instrumental in an improved

comprehension of the material.

Sequence of events. The following list demonstrates the sequence of events in

this study:

Baseline period: while teaching Chapter 1

1. Survey of student homework tactics

2. Survey of student perception of homework assignments

3. Pre-data collection

a. Homework turn in rates (all paper and pencil)

b. Chapter 1 (pre-treatment) final exam

Treatment period: while teaching Chapter 2

4. Post-data collection

a. Homework turn-in rates (paper and pencil and online)

b. Chapter 2 (post treatment) final exam

5. Analysis

As initially proposed, the research hoped to use products already offered online

by the textbook publisher. These products proved to be unusable because the same work

could not be offered to students not doing their homework via the internet.

32

Results

Initially 36 % of the target population indicated they would participate in the

online component of the study. Ultimately only 17.5 % of students participated (Table

4). While students were initially excited about the prospect of online homework, the

reality was that some students did not have the necessary technological acumen to

complete the task while others had not been able to understand the level of computer

required for the assignments.

Table 4.

Summary of student participation pre-treatment vs. treatment

Subject Focus Pre-Treatment Treatment Percent of Students Percent of Students
Period Period Completing Paper completing Online
& Pencil (treatment)
Chapter 1 Sept – Oct 100% 0%
Chapter 2 Oct- Nov 82.5% 17.5%
n=154

During the baseline research period, an analysis was made of homework

completion rates for students from the beginning of the quarter until the start of the

treatment period. Turn in rates for the four weekly homework assignments for Chapter 1

(baseline period) were calculated. This compliance rate was then compared to the turn in

rates for students completing their four weekly homework assignments for Chapter 2

(treatment period) regardless of the method used to complete the homework (see Figure

2). Homework compliance was measured on a scale from zero to four for each period

representing the number of assignments submitted per chapter and did not represent their

grade on the assignment. Results for all students are indicated in Figure 2 below.

33

All Students Ch 1 vs Ch 2 Completion

120 105
Number of Students

100
76
80
60
40 27
20 21 20
20 9 7 11 8
0
Ch 1 Ch 2
0 Assignments 9 21
1 Assignment 7 8
2 Assignments 11 27
3 Assignment 20 20
4 Assignments 105 76
Number of Assignments Completed

Figure 2. Comparison of homework completion for all students pre- and post treatment

For the pre-treatment phase, 68% of the students completed all four assignments

with only 6% completing none. For the post-treatment phase 49% of the students

completed all four assignments and 13.6% completed none.

The homework completion rates were then compared by method of completion.

Figures 3 and 4 below demonstrate the distribution of completion of assignments with a

range from zero to four. Figure 3 details the completion rates for students who used

paper and pencil for completion and those who later self selected the online option. The

completion rate was 73% for those completing all four assignment using paper and pencil

and 46% for those who later selected to complete homework online. Post treatment

homework completion is shown in Figure 4. The completion rate was 49% for those

completing four assignments using paper and pencil and 53.5% for those completing all

four homework assignments online.

34

Chapter 1 Pre-Treatment Homework Turn In

100 92
90
80
Number of Students

70
60
50
40
30
20 14 13
9
10 5 5 6 6
0 2
0
1
0 2
1 3
2 4
3 5
4
Ch 1 Paper and Pencil 9 5 5 14 92
Ch 1 Future on-liners 0 2 6 6 13
Number of Assignments

Figure 3. Homework turn in for all students pre-treatment: frequency distribution of
homework compliance. Students using paper and pencil n = 126; Students completing
online n = 28

Chapter 2 Post Treatment Homework Turn In

80
62
Number of Students

60

40
25
18 15
20 11 8 10
0 2 3
0
1
0 2
1 3
2 4
3 5
4
Ch 2 Paper and Pencil 18 11 25 10 62
Ch 2 On-Line 0 2 8 3 15
Number of Assignments

Figure 4. Homework turn in for all students post treatment: frequency distribution of
homework compliance. Students using paper and pencil n = 126; Students completing
online n = 28

35

Results for the pre-treatment and post treatment final exams are detailed in

Table 5 below. The average score for the pre-treatment chapter final for the whole class

was 78% compared to 63 % on the post treatment final. Paper and pencil completers

scored 76% on the pre-treatment final and 63% on the post treatment final. Online

selectors scored 85.4% on the pre-treatment final and 71% on the post treatment final

Table 5

Comparison of scores on pre- and post treatment final exams

Ch 1 Ch 1 Final Ch 1 Final Ch 2 Ch 2 Final Ch 2 Final
Final Paper & Online Final Paper & Online
All pencil selectors All Pencil Selectors
78% 76% 85.4% 63% 60.38% 71%

The post treatment questionnaire revealed the following information:

• Of the 28 online participants, 67.8% (19/28) liked having the homework option,

35.8% (10/28) found the homework easier to do, and 53.6% (15/28) indicated

they had more interest in doing the homework

• Of the 62 respondents who chose paper and pencil, 61% (38/62) were never

interested in doing their work online and 19% (12/62) had no access to the

internet. Three felt their skills were too poor to attempt the project.

• Of the 62 respondents who chose paper and pencil, 17.7% (11/62) felt there

would be no difference in their learning

Analysis

Analysis of the raw data from all students revealed that it took a non-parametric

distribution that was skewed. A Wilcoxan matched pairs signed rank test was performed

36

to discern the difference between all students’ performance pre- and post treatment. It

revealed a W=1792 with P=0.1913. The test was not significant.

Breaking the data down further, when looking at only the students who attempted

to complete their homework online (treatment group), W= P= 0.0001 considered not

significant. Looking at the students who only employed the paper and pencil method, the

two-tailed P value was < 0.0001, considered extremely significant.

Looking at the medians of pre-treatment (Chapter 1) compliance for all students,

using the Mann-Whitney Test the two-tailed P value was 0.5099, considered not

significant. The medians for post treatment (Chapter 2) compliance for all students using

the Mann-Whitney Test the two-tailed P value was 0.5228, considered not significant. A

summary of these results can be seen in Figure 6 below.
All Students Homework Compliance

4
3.5
Homework Compliance

3
2.5
On-Line
2
Paper & Pencil
1.5
1
0.5
0
1 2
Pre Treatm ent Post Treatm ent

Figure 5. Frequency distribution of homework compliance Chapter 1 vs. Chapter 2. All
Students n = 154; Online Users n = 28; paper and pencil n = 126

When data were tested for normality it did not conform to a Gaussian distribution

so the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test was used to compare homework

completion rates before the study (Chapter 1) to the completion rates during the study

37

(Chapter 2). The test for all students revealed a two-tailed P value of < 0.0001, which is

considered extremely significant.

Figure 6 below illustrates the homework completion performance of students over

the entire study period. It is important to note that 37.5 % of the students went down in

performance, 54 % stayed about the same and only 8.5 % went up in performance.

38

All Students Ch 1 VS Ch 2

4

3
Ch 2 compliance minus Ch 1 compliance

2

1

0
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96 101 106 111 116 121 126 131 136 141 146 151

-1

-2

-3

-4

-5
Students

Figure 6. Change in homework compliance post treatment minus pre-treatment

Analysis of the results of the pre-treatment (Chapter 1) versus post treatment

(Chapter 2) research showed a deterioration of homework turn in rates when an online

option was offered to the students. Additionally, student scores on the final exam for the

post treatment period (Chapter 2) were lower than for the pre-treatment period (Chapter

1). The research indicated that the homework turn in rates were not increased when

students were offered options for methods of completion.

Summary

There was a large decrease in completion rates for all students between pre-

treatment (Chapter 1) and post treatment (Chapter 2). Even though there was not an

improvement in compliance in Chapter 2 with the students who did homework online, it

was a smaller drop than was seen with the whole class.

39

Homework turn in rates were not increased when students were offered options

for methods of completion. However, those that chose to use the online component for

homework completion had a higher percentage of homework turned in (85.4% compared

to 76%) and averaged higher test scores (71% compared to 60.38%). Since those who

turned in homework online had higher completion rate than those using paper and pencil

and also scored higher on the Chapter final exam, a conclusion can be drawn that

completing homework led to improved test scores overall.

40

Chapter IV

Research has shown that the necessity of homework is a hotly debated topic. It

has been a long held tradition in education to ask students to work on studies beyond the

hours of the school day. Some teachers firmly believe in the value of homework. Others

in education suggest that students are overwhelmed with too many hours of homework

and that most homework is a waste of time and leads to major stress within families.

This study combined the needs of the teacher to have students do some work at

home with the desire of the student to use some form of technology during many of their

after school hours. The project offered students an opportunity to complete routine

science homework in the traditional way – using paper and pencil, or using their

computer and the internet.

With technology as an increasing distraction for students, melding daily student

homework with the use of the internet seemed necessary. An additional benefit was to

bring the student voice into the mix by giving them some choice in how they completed

homework. Studies showed improved student learning when meaningful homework

assignments are completed and returned to students with constructive comments. The

research intended to investigate the hypothesis that homework is an essential part of

student learning and, more importantly, important for student retention of information.

Study Outcomes

Study Objectives:

• Increase student turn in rates on routine weekly homework

• Improve test scores on material covered by the homework.

41

To meet the first objective, increasing homework turn in rates, students were

offered a choice as to how to complete their weekly science homework. They could be

traditional and use paper and pencil or they could go paperless and complete and submit

the homework online. Literature suggested students would prefer an online option to

their homework (Bonham, Beichner, & Deardorff, 2001, Roth, Ivenchecnko, & Record,

2008). However, both these studies involved college level students.

Statistics were gathered for the period prior to the study covering approximately

the same volume of material. Homework completion rates for the pre-test period were

compared with homework completion rates for the test period. For pre- treatment

homework (Chapter 1), the students who later self selected online homework did not have

a significantly different compliance from the rest of the class. Even though there wasn’t

improved compliance in post treatment homework (Chapter 2), there was less of a drop

with students who completed the work online than was found with the whole class.

Homework’s effect on achievement proved negligible. Overall, student scores on

the Chapter 2 final compared to their Chapter 1 final decreased from an average grade of

78 % to 63 %. This differential was consistent for those that opted to complete their

homework online (see Table 5).

These results do not mirror the results from Mendicino, Razzaq, & Heffernan

(2009) who found that fifth grade students learned more with Web-based homework than

with paper-and pencil homework.

42

Proposed Audience and Implementation Timeline

Even though the results of the study do not support the hypothesis that the

opportunity to complete homework online would increase student homework completion

rates, 72 % of respondents indicated that they would do homework more often and more

completely if they could complete and turn it in online. Offering options for school work

that include digital technologies may help to bridge the gap between the Digital Natives

and Digital Immigrants. Using online homework was a comfortable first step for both

teachers and students.

Evaluation of the Project

A post research questionnaire was given. Of the 27 online participants, 19 liked

having an option, 10 found the homework easier to do, and 15 found they had more

interest in doing the homework with the online capability.

Of the 62 respondents who chose paper and pencil, 38 were never interested in

doing their work online and 12 had no access to the internet. Only three felt their

computer skills were too poor to attempt the project. Other reasons for not participating

with the online option were evenly split between no access, their computer was too old,

the homework was too hard, and it was too inconvenient. Eleven students felt there

would be no difference in their learning. These numbers don’t coincide with the initial

student commitment and are perhaps an indicator that students at this level at MJHS were

not ready for this type of commitment. The questionnaire was perhaps too long to keep

student focus resulting in inaccurate responses.

43

Limitations of the Study

There were limitations to the study. 29% of the students responded that either

their computer was too old to handle the homework requirement or that they had no

access to a computer. 26% said that they didn’t like computers and felt it was too

confusing. 27% felt it was easier to do it the “normal” way, often because it was not

convenient to use the computer. These results revealed significantly less interest in using

computers for school work than indicated in the original survey. They also would seem

to dispute the Pew Research Center (2010) reports.

For future investigation: when more students have better and more regular access

to a computer with online capabilities, the homework can be expanded to a more

interactive type where students can participate in and experiment with virtual labs and

interactive game type programs that can work in combination with classroom activities.

Conclusion – Why is Homework a Dirty Word?

While the idea of completing homework online attracted only a modest number of

students, the post survey indicated that students liked the option even if they did not use it

themselves. Homework and the ramifications of completing or not completing the

assigned tasks have been, and will continue to be, topics of debate among educators,

parents and students. This research attempted to investigate whether offering students a

variety of methods for submitting routine homework assignments would increase the

homework turn-in rate. Even though students expect routine homework to be assigned

and it is expected to be completed by both parents and teachers, statistics for the target

school showed that up to 28 % of students this school year were routinely non-compliant

with their science homework. While this was an improvement from the prior years of

44

40-50% non-compliance, the research was designed to offer students options. The

students were initially enthusiastic and willing to try the new system. The result was that

very few students (28 out of 154) actually participated in the online component of the

project. The post research questionnaire indicated that students at MJHS did not have the

necessary access to computers and the internet needed to integrate the web into their

routine academic work.

This was the first time students at MJHS had been asked to do routine weekly

homework in this way. While students were able to find time and access to computers

for projects and occasional reports they could not for routine weekly homework. The rise

in rates of students not completing their work from the pre-treatment period to the

treatment period might also represent falling enthusiasm and focus routinely associated

with the second nine weeks of school. An additional note was the differential in non-

completion by class period. As seen in Figure 7, period 6 had a significantly higher rate

of non-completion than period 1 for the treatment period. An extension of the research

might be to look further at the student make up of each class to ascertain proficiency

levels. While all classes are intended to be heterogeneously grouped, placement in

leveled math and English classes could effect this population of students.

45

Percentage of Homework Completion

55

50

45

40

35

30
Pre Study
Percentage
During Study
25

20

15

10

5

0
1 2 3 4 5
Non-Completion by Class Period

Figure 7. Percentage of homework non-compliance by class period. All students n = 154

Extending the research period for a longer time, preferably over a whole school

year, would be a better predictor of the effectiveness of the online homework options.

The current project allowed some barriers to be identified. Increasing the time frame for

the study would offer students and teachers the time necessary to resolve these

technology issues.

While the results of the study disprove the initial hypothesis, the researcher will

continue to employ homework as a valid component of the curriculum. Based on student

enthusiasm for the option of completing work online, more project and homework

offerings will be developed to continue to stay ahead of or on a par with these Digital

Natives.

46

References

Bennett, S, & Kalish, N. (2006). The Case against homework: how homework is hurting

our children and what can we do about it. New York: Crown Publishers.

Bempechat, J. (2004). The Motivational benefits of homework: a social-cognitive

perspective. Theory into Practice, 43(3), 189-196.

Bonham, S, Beichner, R, & Deardorff, D. (2001). Online homework: does it make a

difference? The Physics teacher, 39, 293-296.

Bonham, S, Deardorff, D, & Beichner, R. (2003). A Comparison of student performance

using web and paper-based homework in college-level physics. Journal of

Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1050-1071.

Bryan, T, Burstein, K, & Bryan, J. (2004). Improving homework completion and

academic performance; lessons from special education. Theory into Practice, 43(3),

213-219.

Cole, R, & Todd, J. (2003). Effects of web-based multimedia homework with immediate

rich feedback on student learning in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical

Education, 80(11), 1338-1343.

Conner, C.D. (2004) Teacher attitudes toward the assignment of homework. Tennessee

State University, Dissertation

Cooper, H, Robinson, J, & Patall, E. (2006). Does homework improve academic

achievement? a synthesis of research, 1987-2003. Review of Educational

Research, 76(1), 1-62.

Corno, L. (2000). Looking at homework differently. The Elementary School Journal, 100

(5), 529-548.

Can Online Homework Improve Completion Rates and Test Scores

Can Online Homework Improve Completion Rates and Test Scores

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a Can Online Homework Improve Completion Rates and Test Scores

Semelhante a Can Online Homework Improve Completion Rates and Test Scores (20)

Mais de lsnourse

Mais de lsnourse (20)

Can Online Homework Improve Completion Rates and Test Scores