homework affects teachers

• Future Students
• Current Students
• Faculty/Staff

News and Media

• News & Media Home
• Research Stories
• School’s In
• In the Media

You are here

More than two hours of homework may be counterproductive, research suggests.

A Stanford education researcher found that too much homework can negatively affect kids, especially their lives away from school, where family, friends and activities matter.   "Our findings on the effects of homework challenge the traditional assumption that homework is inherently good," wrote Denise Pope , a senior lecturer at the Stanford Graduate School of Education and a co-author of a study published in the Journal of Experimental Education .   The researchers used survey data to examine perceptions about homework, student well-being and behavioral engagement in a sample of 4,317 students from 10 high-performing high schools in upper-middle-class California communities. Along with the survey data, Pope and her colleagues used open-ended answers to explore the students' views on homework.   Median household income exceeded $90,000 in these communities, and 93 percent of the students went on to college, either two-year or four-year.   Students in these schools average about 3.1 hours of homework each night.   "The findings address how current homework practices in privileged, high-performing schools sustain students' advantage in competitive climates yet hinder learning, full engagement and well-being," Pope wrote.   Pope and her colleagues found that too much homework can diminish its effectiveness and even be counterproductive. They cite prior research indicating that homework benefits plateau at about two hours per night, and that 90 minutes to two and a half hours is optimal for high school.   Their study found that too much homework is associated with:   • Greater stress : 56 percent of the students considered homework a primary source of stress, according to the survey data. Forty-three percent viewed tests as a primary stressor, while 33 percent put the pressure to get good grades in that category. Less than 1 percent of the students said homework was not a stressor.   • Reductions in health : In their open-ended answers, many students said their homework load led to sleep deprivation and other health problems. The researchers asked students whether they experienced health issues such as headaches, exhaustion, sleep deprivation, weight loss and stomach problems.   • Less time for friends, family and extracurricular pursuits : Both the survey data and student responses indicate that spending too much time on homework meant that students were "not meeting their developmental needs or cultivating other critical life skills," according to the researchers. Students were more likely to drop activities, not see friends or family, and not pursue hobbies they enjoy.   A balancing act   The results offer empirical evidence that many students struggle to find balance between homework, extracurricular activities and social time, the researchers said. Many students felt forced or obligated to choose homework over developing other talents or skills.   Also, there was no relationship between the time spent on homework and how much the student enjoyed it. The research quoted students as saying they often do homework they see as "pointless" or "mindless" in order to keep their grades up.   "This kind of busy work, by its very nature, discourages learning and instead promotes doing homework simply to get points," said Pope, who is also a co-founder of Challenge Success , a nonprofit organization affiliated with the GSE that conducts research and works with schools and parents to improve students' educational experiences..   Pope said the research calls into question the value of assigning large amounts of homework in high-performing schools. Homework should not be simply assigned as a routine practice, she said.   "Rather, any homework assigned should have a purpose and benefit, and it should be designed to cultivate learning and development," wrote Pope.   High-performing paradox   In places where students attend high-performing schools, too much homework can reduce their time to foster skills in the area of personal responsibility, the researchers concluded. "Young people are spending more time alone," they wrote, "which means less time for family and fewer opportunities to engage in their communities."   Student perspectives   The researchers say that while their open-ended or "self-reporting" methodology to gauge student concerns about homework may have limitations – some might regard it as an opportunity for "typical adolescent complaining" – it was important to learn firsthand what the students believe.   The paper was co-authored by Mollie Galloway from Lewis and Clark College and Jerusha Conner from Villanova University.

Clifton B. Parker is a writer at the Stanford News Service .

More Stories

⟵ Go to all Research Stories

Get the Educator

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter.

Stanford Graduate School of Education

482 Galvez Mall Stanford, CA 94305-3096 Tel: (650) 723-2109

• Contact Admissions
• GSE Leadership
• Site Feedback
• Web Accessibility
• Career Resources
• Faculty Open Positions
• Explore Courses
• Academic Calendar
• Office of the Registrar
• Cubberley Library
• StanfordWho
• StanfordYou

Improving lives through learning

• Stanford Home
• Maps & Directions
• Search Stanford
• Emergency Info
• Terms of Use
• Non-Discrimination
• Accessibility

© Stanford University , Stanford , California 94305 .

Is homework a necessary evil?

After decades of debate, researchers are still sorting out the truth about homework’s pros and cons. One point they can agree on: Quality assignments matter.

By Kirsten Weir

March 2016, Vol 47, No. 3

Print version: page 36

• Schools and Classrooms

Homework battles have raged for decades. For as long as kids have been whining about doing their homework, parents and education reformers have complained that homework's benefits are dubious. Meanwhile many teachers argue that take-home lessons are key to helping students learn. Now, as schools are shifting to the new (and hotly debated) Common Core curriculum standards, educators, administrators and researchers are turning a fresh eye toward the question of homework's value.

But when it comes to deciphering the research literature on the subject, homework is anything but an open book.

The 10-minute rule

In many ways, homework seems like common sense. Spend more time practicing multiplication or studying Spanish vocabulary and you should get better at math or Spanish. But it may not be that simple.

Homework can indeed produce academic benefits, such as increased understanding and retention of the material, says Duke University social psychologist Harris Cooper, PhD, one of the nation's leading homework researchers. But not all students benefit. In a review of studies published from 1987 to 2003, Cooper and his colleagues found that homework was linked to better test scores in high school and, to a lesser degree, in middle school. Yet they found only faint evidence that homework provided academic benefit in elementary school ( Review of Educational Research , 2006).

Then again, test scores aren't everything. Homework proponents also cite the nonacademic advantages it might confer, such as the development of personal responsibility, good study habits and time-management skills. But as to hard evidence of those benefits, "the jury is still out," says Mollie Galloway, PhD, associate professor of educational leadership at Lewis & Clark College in Portland, Oregon. "I think there's a focus on assigning homework because [teachers] think it has these positive outcomes for study skills and habits. But we don't know for sure that's the case."

Even when homework is helpful, there can be too much of a good thing. "There is a limit to how much kids can benefit from home study," Cooper says. He agrees with an oft-cited rule of thumb that students should do no more than 10 minutes a night per grade level — from about 10 minutes in first grade up to a maximum of about two hours in high school. Both the National Education Association and National Parent Teacher Association support that limit.

Beyond that point, kids don't absorb much useful information, Cooper says. In fact, too much homework can do more harm than good. Researchers have cited drawbacks, including boredom and burnout toward academic material, less time for family and extracurricular activities, lack of sleep and increased stress.

In a recent study of Spanish students, Rubén Fernández-Alonso, PhD, and colleagues found that students who were regularly assigned math and science homework scored higher on standardized tests. But when kids reported having more than 90 to 100 minutes of homework per day, scores declined ( Journal of Educational Psychology , 2015).

"At all grade levels, doing other things after school can have positive effects," Cooper says. "To the extent that homework denies access to other leisure and community activities, it's not serving the child's best interest."

Children of all ages need down time in order to thrive, says Denise Pope, PhD, a professor of education at Stanford University and a co-founder of Challenge Success, a program that partners with secondary schools to implement policies that improve students' academic engagement and well-being.

"Little kids and big kids need unstructured time for play each day," she says. Certainly, time for physical activity is important for kids' health and well-being. But even time spent on social media can help give busy kids' brains a break, she says.

All over the map

But are teachers sticking to the 10-minute rule? Studies attempting to quantify time spent on homework are all over the map, in part because of wide variations in methodology, Pope says.

A 2014 report by the Brookings Institution examined the question of homework, comparing data from a variety of sources. That report cited findings from a 2012 survey of first-year college students in which 38.4 percent reported spending six hours or more per week on homework during their last year of high school. That was down from 49.5 percent in 1986 ( The Brown Center Report on American Education , 2014).

The Brookings report also explored survey data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which asked 9-, 13- and 17-year-old students how much homework they'd done the previous night. They found that between 1984 and 2012, there was a slight increase in homework for 9-year-olds, but homework amounts for 13- and 17-year-olds stayed roughly the same, or even decreased slightly.

Yet other evidence suggests that some kids might be taking home much more work than they can handle. Robert Pressman, PhD, and colleagues recently investigated the 10-minute rule among more than 1,100 students, and found that elementary-school kids were receiving up to three times as much homework as recommended. As homework load increased, so did family stress, the researchers found ( American Journal of Family Therapy , 2015).

Many high school students also seem to be exceeding the recommended amounts of homework. Pope and Galloway recently surveyed more than 4,300 students from 10 high-achieving high schools. Students reported bringing home an average of just over three hours of homework nightly ( Journal of Experiential Education , 2013).

On the positive side, students who spent more time on homework in that study did report being more behaviorally engaged in school — for instance, giving more effort and paying more attention in class, Galloway says. But they were not more invested in the homework itself. They also reported greater academic stress and less time to balance family, friends and extracurricular activities. They experienced more physical health problems as well, such as headaches, stomach troubles and sleep deprivation. "Three hours per night is too much," Galloway says.

In the high-achieving schools Pope and Galloway studied, more than 90 percent of the students go on to college. There's often intense pressure to succeed academically, from both parents and peers. On top of that, kids in these communities are often overloaded with extracurricular activities, including sports and clubs. "They're very busy," Pope says. "Some kids have up to 40 hours a week — a full-time job's worth — of extracurricular activities." And homework is yet one more commitment on top of all the others.

"Homework has perennially acted as a source of stress for students, so that piece of it is not new," Galloway says. "But especially in upper-middle-class communities, where the focus is on getting ahead, I think the pressure on students has been ratcheted up."

Yet homework can be a problem at the other end of the socioeconomic spectrum as well. Kids from wealthier homes are more likely to have resources such as computers, Internet connections, dedicated areas to do schoolwork and parents who tend to be more educated and more available to help them with tricky assignments. Kids from disadvantaged homes are more likely to work at afterschool jobs, or to be home without supervision in the evenings while their parents work multiple jobs, says Lea Theodore, PhD, a professor of school psychology at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia. They are less likely to have computers or a quiet place to do homework in peace.

"Homework can highlight those inequities," she says.

Quantity vs. quality

One point researchers agree on is that for all students, homework quality matters. But too many kids are feeling a lack of engagement with their take-home assignments, many experts say. In Pope and Galloway's research, only 20 percent to 30 percent of students said they felt their homework was useful or meaningful.

"Students are assigned a lot of busywork. They're naming it as a primary stressor, but they don't feel it's supporting their learning," Galloway says.

"Homework that's busywork is not good for anyone," Cooper agrees. Still, he says, different subjects call for different kinds of assignments. "Things like vocabulary and spelling are learned through practice. Other kinds of courses require more integration of material and drawing on different skills."

But critics say those skills can be developed with many fewer hours of homework each week. Why assign 50 math problems, Pope asks, when 10 would be just as constructive? One Advanced Placement biology teacher she worked with through Challenge Success experimented with cutting his homework assignments by a third, and then by half. "Test scores didn't go down," she says. "You can have a rigorous course and not have a crazy homework load."

Still, changing the culture of homework won't be easy. Teachers-to-be get little instruction in homework during their training, Pope says. And despite some vocal parents arguing that kids bring home too much homework, many others get nervous if they think their child doesn't have enough. "Teachers feel pressured to give homework because parents expect it to come home," says Galloway. "When it doesn't, there's this idea that the school might not be doing its job."

Galloway argues teachers and school administrators need to set clear goals when it comes to homework — and parents and students should be in on the discussion, too. "It should be a broader conversation within the community, asking what's the purpose of homework? Why are we giving it? Who is it serving? Who is it not serving?"

Until schools and communities agree to take a hard look at those questions, those backpacks full of take-home assignments will probably keep stirring up more feelings than facts.

Further reading

• Cooper, H., 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
• Galloway, M., Connor, J., & Pope, D. (2013). Nonacademic effects of homework in privileged, high-performing high schools. The Journal of Experimental Education, 81 (4), 490–510. doi: 10.1080/00220973.2012.745469
• Pope, D., Brown, M., & Miles, S. (2015). Overloaded and underprepared: Strategies for stronger schools and healthy, successful kids . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Letters to the Editor

• Send us a letter

• About the Hub
• Announcements
• Faculty Experts Guide
• Subscribe to the newsletter

Explore by Topic

• Arts+Culture
• Politics+Society
• Science+Technology
• Student Life
• University News
• Voices+Opinion
• About Hub at Work
• Gazette Archive
• Benefits+Perks
• Health+Well-Being
• Current Issue
• About the Magazine
• Past Issues
• Support Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Subscribe to the Magazine

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Credit: August de Richelieu

Does homework still have value? A Johns Hopkins education expert weighs in

Joyce epstein, co-director of the center on school, family, and community partnerships, discusses why homework is essential, how to maximize its benefit to learners, and what the 'no-homework' approach gets wrong.

By Vicky Hallett

The necessity of homework has been a subject of debate since at least as far back as the 1890s, according to Joyce L. Epstein , co-director of the Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships at Johns Hopkins University. "It's always been the case that parents, kids—and sometimes teachers, too—wonder if this is just busy work," Epstein says.

But after decades of researching how to improve schools, the professor in the Johns Hopkins School of Education remains certain that homework is essential—as long as the teachers have done their homework, too. The National Network of Partnership Schools , which she founded in 1995 to advise schools and districts on ways to improve comprehensive programs of family engagement, has developed hundreds of improved homework ideas through its Teachers Involve Parents in Schoolwork program. For an English class, a student might interview a parent on popular hairstyles from their youth and write about the differences between then and now. Or for science class, a family could identify forms of matter over the dinner table, labeling foods as liquids or solids. These innovative and interactive assignments not only reinforce concepts from the classroom but also foster creativity, spark discussions, and boost student motivation.

"We're not trying to eliminate homework procedures, but expand and enrich them," says Epstein, who is packing this research into a forthcoming book on the purposes and designs of homework. In the meantime, the Hub couldn't wait to ask her some questions:

What kind of homework training do teachers typically get?

Future teachers and administrators really have little formal training on how to design homework before they assign it. This means that most just repeat what their teachers did, or they follow textbook suggestions at the end of units. For example, future teachers are well prepared to teach reading and literacy skills at each grade level, and they continue to learn to improve their teaching of reading in ongoing in-service education. By contrast, most receive little or no training on the purposes and designs of homework in reading or other subjects. It is really important for future teachers to receive systematic training to understand that they have the power, opportunity, and obligation to design homework with a purpose.

Why do students need more interactive homework?

If homework assignments are always the same—10 math problems, six sentences with spelling words—homework can get boring and some kids just stop doing their assignments, especially in the middle and high school years. When we've asked teachers what's the best homework you've ever had or designed, invariably we hear examples of talking with a parent or grandparent or peer to share ideas. To be clear, parents should never be asked to "teach" seventh grade science or any other subject. Rather, teachers set up the homework assignments so that the student is in charge. It's always the student's homework. But a good activity can engage parents in a fun, collaborative way. Our data show that with "good" assignments, more kids finish their work, more kids interact with a family partner, and more parents say, "I learned what's happening in the curriculum." It all works around what the youngsters are learning.

Is family engagement really that important?

At Hopkins, I am part of the Center for Social Organization of Schools , a research center that studies how to improve many aspects of education to help all students do their best in school. One thing my colleagues and I realized was that we needed to look deeply into family and community engagement. There were so few references to this topic when we started that we had to build the field of study. When children go to school, their families "attend" with them whether a teacher can "see" the parents or not. So, family engagement is ever-present in the life of a school.

My daughter's elementary school doesn't assign homework until third grade. What's your take on "no homework" policies?

There are some parents, writers, and commentators who have argued against homework, especially for very young children. They suggest that children should have time to play after school. This, of course is true, but many kindergarten kids are excited to have homework like their older siblings. If they give homework, most teachers of young children make assignments very short—often following an informal rule of 10 minutes per grade level. "No homework" does not guarantee that all students will spend their free time in productive and imaginative play.

Some researchers and critics have consistently misinterpreted research findings. They have argued that homework should be assigned only at the high school level where data point to a strong connection of doing assignments with higher student achievement . However, as we discussed, some students stop doing homework. This leads, statistically, to results showing that doing homework or spending more minutes on homework is linked to higher student achievement. If slow or struggling students are not doing their assignments, they contribute to—or cause—this "result."

Teachers need to design homework that even struggling students want to do because it is interesting. Just about all students at any age level react positively to good assignments and will tell you so.

Did COVID change how schools and parents view homework?

Within 24 hours of the day school doors closed in March 2020, just about every school and district in the country figured out that teachers had to talk to and work with students' parents. This was not the same as homeschooling—teachers were still working hard to provide daily lessons. But if a child was learning at home in the living room, parents were more aware of what they were doing in school. One of the silver linings of COVID was that teachers reported that they gained a better understanding of their students' families. We collected wonderfully creative examples of activities from members of the National Network of Partnership Schools. I'm thinking of one art activity where every child talked with a parent about something that made their family unique. Then they drew their finding on a snowflake and returned it to share in class. In math, students talked with a parent about something the family liked so much that they could represent it 100 times. Conversations about schoolwork at home was the point.

How did you create so many homework activities via the Teachers Involve Parents in Schoolwork program?

We had several projects with educators to help them design interactive assignments, not just "do the next three examples on page 38." Teachers worked in teams to create TIPS activities, and then we turned their work into a standard TIPS format in math, reading/language arts, and science for grades K-8. Any teacher can use or adapt our prototypes to match their curricula.

Overall, we know that if future teachers and practicing educators were prepared to design homework assignments to meet specific purposes—including but not limited to interactive activities—more students would benefit from the important experience of doing their homework. And more parents would, indeed, be partners in education.

Posted in Voices+Opinion

You might also like

News network.

• Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Get Email Updates
• Submit an Announcement
• Submit an Event
• Privacy Statement
• Accessibility

Discover JHU

• About the University
• Schools & Divisions
• Academic Programs
• Plan a Visit
• my.JohnsHopkins.edu
• © 2024 Johns Hopkins University . All rights reserved.
• University Communications
• 3910 Keswick Rd., Suite N2600, Baltimore, MD
• X Facebook LinkedIn YouTube Instagram

Donate (opens in a new window)

Curriculum and Instruction

Key Lessons: What Research Says About the Value of Homework

Whether homework helps students — and how much homework is appropriate — has been debated for many years. Homework has been in the headlines again recently and continues to be a topic of controversy, with claims that students and families are suffering under the burden of huge amounts of homework. School board members, educators, and parents may wish to turn to the research for answers to their questions about the benefits and drawbacks of homework. Unfortunately, the research has produced mixed results so far, and more research is needed. Nonetheless, there are some findings that can help to inform decisions about homework. What follows is a summary of the research to date:

The link between homework and student achievement is far from clear.

There is no conclusive evidence that homework increases student achievement across the board. Some studies show positive effects of homework under certain conditions and for certain students, some show no effects, and some suggest negative effects (Kohn 2006; Trautwein and Koller 2003).

Homework appears to have more positive effects for certain groups of students.

• Older students benefit more from homework than younger students.
• Some studies have shown that older students gain more academic benefits from homework than do younger students, perhaps because younger students have less-effective study habits and are more easily distracted (Cooper 1989; Hoover-Dempsey et al. 2001; Leone and Richards 1989; Muhlenbruck et al. 2000).
• Students from low-income homes may not benefit as much from homework as those from higher-income homes.
• Some researchers believe that students from higher-income homes have more resources (such as computers) and receive more assistance with homework, while low-income students may have fewer resources and less assistance and are therefore less likely to complete the homework and reap any related benefits (McDermott, Goldmen and Varenne 1984; Scott-Jones 1984).
• Students with learning disabilities benefit from homework under certain conditions.
• Students with learning disabilities can benefit from homework if appropriate supervision and monitoring are provided (Cooper and Nye 1994; Rosenberg 1989).
• Asian American students may benefit more from homework than do students from other ethnic groups.
• A national study of the influence of homework on student grades across five ethnic groups found that homework had a stronger impact on Asian American students than on students of other ethnicities (Keith and Benson, 1992).

Homework may have nonacademic benefits.

Certain nonacademic benefits of homework have been shown, especially for younger students. Indeed, some primary-level teachers may assign homework for such benefits, which include learning the importance of responsibility, managing time, developing study habits, and staying with a task until it is completed (Cooper, Robinson and Patall 2006; Corno and Xu 2004; Johnson and Pontius 1989; Warton 2001).

Too much homework may diminish its effectiveness.

While research on the optimum amount of time students should spend on homework is limited, there are indications that for high school students, 1½ to 2½ hours per night is optimum. Middle school students appear to benefit from smaller amounts (less than 1 hour per night). When students spend more time than this on homework, the positive relationship with student achievement diminishes (Cooper, Robinson, and Patall 2006).

The amount of homework completed by students seems to be more positively associated with student achievement than the amount of homework assigned by teachers.

Some research has shown that students who spend more time on homework score higher on measures of achievement and attitude. Studies that have delved more deeply into this topic suggest, however, that the amount of homework assigned by teachers is unrelated to student achievement, while the amount of homework actually completed by students is associated with higher achievement (Cooper 2001; Cooper, Lindsay, Nye, and Greathouse 1998).

After-school programs that provide homework assistance may improve student behavior, motivation, and work habits but not necessarily academic achievement.

Studies of after-school programs that provide homework assistance have found few definite links to improved student achievement. Several studies, however, noted improvements in student motivation and work habits, which may indirectly affect achievement (Cosden, Morrison, Albanese, and Macias 2001; James-Burdumy et al. 2005).

The effect of parent involvement in homework is unclear. Studies of parent involvement in homework have produced mixed results.

Homework assignments that require interaction between students and parents result in higher levels of parent involvement and are more likely to be turned in than noninteractive assignments. Some studies have shown, however, that parent involvement in homework has no impact on student achievement. Other studies indicate that students whose parents are more involved in their homework have lower test scores and class grades — but this may be because the students were already lower performing and needed more help from their parents than did higher-performing students. (Balli, Wedman, and Demo 1997; Cooper, Lindsay, and Nye 2000; Epstein 1988; Van Voorhis 2003).

There is little research on connections between specific kinds of homework and student achievement.

Most teachers assign homework to reinforce what was presented in class or to prepare students for new material. Less commonly, homework is assigned to extend student learning to different contexts or to integrate learning by applying multiple skills around a project. Little research exists on the effects of these different kinds of homework on student achievement, leaving policymakers with little evidence on which to base decisions (Cooper 1989; Foyle 1985; Murphy and Decker 1989).

Liked it? Share it!

Balli, S. J., Wedman, J. F., & Demo, D. H. (1997). Family involvement with middle-grades homework: Effects of differential prompting. Journal of Experimental Education, 66, 31-48.

Cooper, H. (1989). Homework. White Plains, N.Y.: Longman.

Cooper, H. (2001). Homework for all — in moderation. Educational Leadership, 58, 34-38.

Cooper, H., Lindsay, J. J, Nye, B., & Greathouse, S. (1998). Relationships among attitudes about homework, amount of homework assigned and completed, and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 70-83.

Cooper, H., & Nye, B. (1994). Homework for students with learning disabilities: The implications of research for policy and practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 470-479.

Cooper, H., Nye, B.A., & Lindsay, J.J. (2000). Homework in the home: How student, family and parenting style differences relate to the homework process. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 464-487.

Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research. Review of Educational Research, 76, 1-62.

Corno, L., & Xu, J. (2004). Homework as the job of childhood. Theory Into Practice, 43, 227-233.

Cosden, M., Morrison, G., Albanese, A. L., & Macias, S. (2001). When homework is not home work: After-school programs for homework assistance. Educational Psychologist, 36(3), 211-221.

Epstein, J. L. (1998). Homework practices, achievements, and behaviors of elementary school students. Baltimore: Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED301322]

Foyle, H. C. (1985). The effects of preparation and practice homework on student achievement in tenth-grade American history (Doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University, 1985). Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, 8A.

Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Battiato, A. C., Walker, J. M. T., Reed, R. P., DeJong, J. M. & Jones, K. P. (2001). Parental involvement in homework. Educational Psychologist, 36, 195-209.

James-Burdumy, S., Dynarski, M., Moore, M., Deke, J., Mansfield, W., Pistorino, C. & Warner, E. (2005). When Schools Stay Open Late: The National Evaluation of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program Final Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education/Institute of Education Sciences National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.

Johnson, J. K., & Pontius, A. (1989). Homework: A survey of teacher beliefs and practices. Research in Education, 41, 71-78.

Keith, T. Z., & Benson, M. J. (1992). Effects of manipulable influences on high school grades across five ethnic groups. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 85-93.

Kohn, A. (2006, September). Abusing research: The study of homework and other examples. Phi Delta Kappan, 8-22.

Leone, C. M., & Richards, M. H. (1989). Classwork and homework in early adolescence: The ecology of achievement. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 18, 531-548.

McDermott, R. P., Goldman, S. V., & Varenne, H. (1984). When school goes home: Some problems in the organization of homework [Abstract]. Teachers College Record, 85, 391-409.

Muhlenbruck, L., Cooper, H., Nye, B., & Lindsay, J. J. (2000). Homework and achievement: explaining the different strengths of relation at the elementary and secondary school levels. Social Psychology of Education, 3, 295-317.

Murphy, J. & Decker, K. (1989). Teachers’ use of homework in high schools. Journal of Educational Research, 82(5), 261-269.

Rosenberg, M. S. (1989). The effects of daily homework assignments on the acquisition of basic skills by students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 314-323.

Scott-Jones, D. (1984). Family influences on cognitive development and school achievement. Review of Research in Education, 11, 259-304.

Trautwein, U., & Koller, O. (2003). The relationship between homework and achievement — still much of a mystery. Educational Psychology Review, 15, 115-145.

Van Voorhis, F. L. (2003). Interactive homework in middle school: Effects on family involvements and science achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 96(6), 323-338.

Warton, P. M. (2001). The forgotten voice in homework: Views of students. Educational Psychologist, 36, 155-165.

Related Topics

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Homework’s implications for the well-being of primary school pupils—perceptions of children, parents, and teachers.

1. Introduction

1.1. homework—perspectives of students, teachers, and parents, 1.2. homework practices in primary education in romania, 1.3. present study, 2. methodology, 2.1. design, data collection methods, and procedures, 2.2. participants, 2.3. data analysis, 3. research findings, 3.1. homework not liked by students.

3.2. Students’ Negative Reactions When Doing Homework

3.3. Homework That Makes Children Feel Good

3.4. Homework Students Like

3.5. Checking and Assessing Homework

3.6. Suggestions for Improving Educational Practices Regarding Homework

4. Discussions

5. conclusions, author contributions, institutional reviewer board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Rosário, P.; Núñez, J.C.; Vallejo, G.; Cunha, J.; Nunes, T.; Suárez, N.; Fuentes, S.; Moreira, T. The effects of teachers’ homework follow-up practices on students’ EFL performance: A randomized-group design. Front. Psychol. 2015 , 6 , 1528. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Williams, K.; Swift, J.; Williams, H.; Van Daal, V. Raising children’s self-efficacy through parental involvement in homework. Educ. Res. 2017 , 59 , 316–334. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tam, V.C.; Chu, P.; Tsang, V. Engaging in self-directed leisure activities during a homework-free holiday: Impacts on primary school children in Hong Kong. J. Glob. Educ. Res. 2023 , 7 , 64–80. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moorhouse, B.L. Qualities of good homework activities: Teachers’ perceptions. ELT J. 2021 , 75 , 300–310. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McGuire, S.Y.; McGuire, S. Teach Students How to Learn: Strategies You Can Incorporate into Any Course to Improve Student Metacognition, Study Skills, and Motivation , 1st ed.; Stylus Publishing: Sterling, VA, USA, 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sayers, J.; Petersson, J.; Marschall, G.; Andrews, P. Teachers’ perspectives on homework: Manifestations of culturally situated common sense. Educ. Rev. 2020 , 74 , 905–926. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Norhayati, E.; Rahya, R. Teacher’s Strategy in Shaping the Responsible Character of the Primary School Students toward Homework. Indones. J. Prim. Educ. Res. 2023 , 1 , 36–44. Available online: https://ejournal.aecindonesia.org/index.php/IJPER/article/view/6 (accessed on 2 June 2023).
• Negru, I.; Sava, S. Reflections, perceptions and practices in formulating and evaluating homework in primary education. J. Pedag. 2022 , 52 , 93–120. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dolean, D.D.; Lervåg, A.; Visu-Petra, L.; Melby-Lervåg, M. Language skills, and not executive functions, predict the development of reading comprehension of early readers: Evidence from an orthographically transparent language. Read. Writ. 2021 , 34 , 1491–1512. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Syla, L.B. Perspectives of Primary Teachers, Students, and Parents on Homework. Educ. Res. Int. 2023 , 7669108. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moè, A.; Katz, I.; Cohen, R.; Alesi, M. Reducing homework stress by increasing adoption of need-supportive practices: Effects of an intervention with parents. Learn. Individ. Differ. 2020 , 82 , 101921. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rodríguez, S.; González-Suárez, R.; Vieites, T.; Piñeiro, I.; Díaz-Freire, F.M. Self-Regulation and Students Well-Being: A Systematic Review 2010. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 2346. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dettmers, S.; Yotyodying, S.; Jonkmann, K. Antecedents and Outcomes of Parental Homework Involvement: How Do Family-School Partnerships Affect Parental Homework Involvement and Student Outcomes? Front. Psychol. 2019 , 10 , 1048. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Epstein, J.L.; Van Voorhis, F.L. More Than Minutes: Teachers’ Roles in Designing Homework. Educ. Psychol. 2001 , 36 , 181–193. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Medwell, J.; Wray, D. Primary homework in England: The beliefs and practices of teachers in primary schools. Int. J. Prim. Elem. Early Years Educ. 2018 , 47 , 191–204. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rodríguez, S.; Núñez, J.C.; Valle, A.; Freire, C.; Ferradás, M.d.M.; Rodríguez-Llorente, C. Relationship Between Students’ Prior Academic Achievement and Homework Behavioral Engagement: The Mediating/Moderating Role of Learning Motivation. Front. Psychol. 2019 , 10 , 1047. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Róiste, A.; Kelly, C.; Molcho, M.; Gavin, A.; Nic Gabhainn, S. Is school participation good for children? Associations with health and wellbeing. Health Educ. 2012 , 112 , 88–104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• OECD. Measuring What Matters for Child Well-Being and Policies ; OECD: Paris, France, 2021. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Anderson, D.L.; Graham, A.P. Improving student wellbeing: Having a say at school. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. 2015 , 27 , 348–366. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lewis, A. Examining the concept of well-being and early childhood: Adopting multi-disciplinary perspectives. J. Early Child. Res. 2019 , 17 , 294–308. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aulia, F.; Hastjarjo, T.D.; Setiyawati, D.; Patria, B. Student Well-being: A Systematic Literature Review. Psychol. Bull. 2020 , 28 , 1–14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wikman, C.; Allodi, M.W.; Ferrer-Wreder, L.A. Self-Concept, Prosocial School Behaviors, Well-Being, and Academic Skills in Elementary School Students: A Whole-Child Perspective. Educ. Sci. 2022 , 12 , 298. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Looney, J. Happiness in children: Measurement, correlates and enhancement of positive subjective well-being. Camb. J. Educ. 2014 , 45 , 393–394. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, Y.; Sang, B.; Liu, J.; Gong, S.; Ding, X. Parental support and homework emotions in Chinese children: Mediating roles of homework self-efficacy and emotion regulation strategies. Educ. Psychol. 2019 , 39 , 617–635. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Konu, A.; Rimpelä, M. Well-being in schools: A conceptual model. Heal. Promot. Int. 2002 , 17 , 79–87. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Raghavan, R.; Alexandrova, A. Toward a Theory of Child Well-Being. Soc. Indic. Res. 2014 , 121 , 887–902. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ben-Arieh, A.; Casas, F.; Frønes, I.; Korbin, J.E. Multifaceted Concept of Child Well-Being. In Handbook of Child Well-Being. Theories, Methods, and Policies in Global Perspective ; Ben-Arieh, A., Ed.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2014; pp. 1–27. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Choi, A. Emotional Well-Being of Children and Adolescents: Recent Trends and Relevant Factors ; OEDC Education Working Papers; OEDC Publishing: Paris, France, 2018; p. 169. [ Google Scholar ]
• Valle, A.; Piñeiro, I.; Rodríguez, S.; Regueiro, B.; Freire, C.; Rosário, P. Time spent and time management in homework in elementary school students: A person-centered approach. Psicothema 2019 , 31 , 422–428. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Institute of Education Sciences. Homework-National Consultation on the Role, Consistency, and Effectiveness of Homework. 2017. Available online: https://www.ise.ro/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Raport_Teme-acasa_final.pdf (accessed on 3 May 2023).
• Holland, M.; Courtney, M.; Vergara, J.; McIntyre, D.; Nix, S.; Marion, A.; Shergill, G. Homework and Children in Grades 3–6: Purpose, Policy and Non-Academic Impact. Child Youth Care Forum 2021 , 50 , 631–651. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhou, Y.; Siu, A.F.Y.; Tse, W.S. Influences of Unhealthy Sleep Behaviors on the Excessive Daytime Sleepiness and Depressive Symptoms in Children. J. Child Fam. Stud. 2014 , 24 , 2120–2126. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schrat Carr, N. Increasing the Effectiveness of Homework for All Learners in the Inclusive Classroom. Sch. Community J. 2013 , 23 , 169–182. [ Google Scholar ]
• Calarco, J.M.; Horn, I.S.; Chen, G.A. “You Need to Be More Responsible”: The Myth of Meritocracy and Teachers’ Accounts of Homework Inequalities. Educ. Res. 2022 , 51 , 515–523. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rosário, P.; Cunha, J.; Nunes, T.; Nunes, A.R.; Moreira, T.; Núñez, J.C. “Homework Should Be…but We Do Not Live in an Ideal World”: Mathematics Teachers’ Perspectives on Quality Homework and on Homework Assigned in Elementary and Middle Schools. Front. Psychol. 2019 , 10 , 6–7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rønning, M. Who benefits from homework assignments? Econ. Educ. Rev. 2011 , 30 , 55–64. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cooper, H.; Robinson, J.C.; A Patall, E. Does Homework Improve Academic Achievement? A Synthesis of Research, 1987–2003. Rev. Educ. Res. 2006 , 76 , 1–62. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fernández-Alonso, R.; Álvarez-Díaz, M.; García-Crespo, F.J.; Woitschach, P.; Muñiz, J. Should we Help our Children with Homework? A Meta-Analysis Using PISA Data. Psicothema 2022 , 34 , 56–65. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• O’keeffe, L.; Clarke, C.; McDonald, S.; Comber, B. Mathematics homework and the potential compounding of educational disadvantage. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 2023 , 44 , 1–17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Solomon, Y.; Warin, J.; Lewis, C. Helping with Homework? Homework as a Site of Tension for Parents and Teenagers. Br. Educ. Res. J. 2002 , 28 , 603–622. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Watts, R.; Pattnaik, J. Perspectives of Parents and Teachers on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Children’s Socio-Emotional Well-Being. Early Child. Educ. J. 2022 , 50 , 1–12. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ma, X.; Shen, J.; Krenn, H.Y.; Hu, S.; Yuan, J. A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Learning Outcomes and Parental Involvement During Early Childhood Education and Early Elementary Education. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2015 , 28 , 771–801. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hampden-Thompson, G.; Guzman, L.; Lippman, L. A cross-national analysis of parental involvement and student literacy. Int. J. Comp. Sociol. 2013 , 54 , 246–266. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, J. Why Do Students Have Difficulties Completing Homework? The Need for Homework Management. J. Educ. Train. Stud. 2012 , 1 , 98–105. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Katz, I.; Buzukashvili, T.; Feingold, L. Homework Stress: Construct Validation of a Measure. J. Exp. Educ. 2012 , 80 , 405–421. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kennewell, E.; Curtis, R.G.; Maher, C.; Luddy, S.; Virgara, R. The relationships between school children’s wellbeing, socio-economic disadvantage and after-school activities: A cross-sectional study. BMC Pediatr. 2022 , 22 , 297. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Payne, K.; Walton, E.; Burton, C. Steps to benefit from social prescription: A qualitative interview study. Br. J. Gen. Pract. 2020 , 70 , e36–e44. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bradley, M.; Harrel, M. Data Collection Methods. Semi-Structured Interviews and Focus Groups ; RAND, National Security Research Division: Santa Monica, CA, USA, 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Seidman, I. Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences , 5th ed.; Teachers College Press, Columbia University: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• McNulty, K. The Impact of Homework on a Child’s Motivation to Learn in Primary Education. Ph.D. Thesis, Letterkenny Institute of Technology, Donegal, Ireland, 2018. [ Google Scholar ]
• Costa, M.; Cardoso, A.P.; Lacerda, C.; Lopes, A.; Gomes, C. Homework in Primary Education from the Perspective of Teachers and Pupils. Procedia—Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016 , 217 , 139–148. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Grant, K.B.; Ray, J.A. Home, School, and Community Collaboration-Culturally Responsive Family Engagement , 4th ed.; SAGE Publications: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheridan, S.M.; Smith, T.E.; Kim, E.M.; Beretvas, S.N.; Park, S. A Meta-Analysis of Family-School Interventions and Children’s Social-Emotional Functioning: Moderators and Components of Efficacy. Rev. Educ. Res. 2019 , 89 , 296–332. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Holte, K.L. Homework in Primary School: Could It Be Made More Child-Friendly? Stud. Paedagog. 2016 , 21 , 13–33. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Clarke, V.; Braun, V. Thematic analysis. J. Posit. Psychol. 2017 , 12 , 297–298. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cunha, J.; Rosario, P.; Macedo, L.; Nunes, A.R.; Fuentes, S.; Pinto, R.; Suarez, N. Parents’ conceptions of their homework involvement in elementary school. Psychothema 2015 , 27 , 159–165. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kaldi, S.; Filippatou, D.; Govaris, C. Project-based learning in primary schools: Effects on pupils’ learning and attitudes. Int. J. Prim. Elem. Early Years Educ. 2011 , 39 , 35–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tam, V.C.; Chan, R.M.C. What Is Homework For? Hong Kong Primary School Teachers’ Homework Conceptions. Sch. Community J. 2016 , 26 , 25–44. [ Google Scholar ]
• Locke, J.Y.; Kavanagh, D.J.; Campbell, M.A. Overparenting and Homework: The Student’s Task, But Everyone’s Responsibility. J. Psychol. Couns. Sch. 2016 , 26 , 1–15. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Monsillion, J.; Zebdi, R.; Romo-Desprez, L. School Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Youth, and Considerations for Anxiety, Depression, and a Positive School Climate—A Systematic Literature Review. Children 2023 , 10 , 861. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]

Share and Cite

Negru, I.; Sava, S. Homework’s Implications for the Well-Being of Primary School Pupils—Perceptions of Children, Parents, and Teachers. Educ. Sci. 2023 , 13 , 996. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13100996

Negru I, Sava S. Homework’s Implications for the Well-Being of Primary School Pupils—Perceptions of Children, Parents, and Teachers. Education Sciences . 2023; 13(10):996. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13100996

Negru, Iasmina, and Simona Sava. 2023. "Homework’s Implications for the Well-Being of Primary School Pupils—Perceptions of Children, Parents, and Teachers" Education Sciences 13, no. 10: 996. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13100996

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• Our Mission

What’s the Right Amount of Homework?

Decades of research show that homework has some benefits, especially for students in middle and high school—but there are risks to assigning too much.

Many teachers and parents believe that homework helps students build study skills and review concepts learned in class. Others see homework as disruptive and unnecessary, leading to burnout and turning kids off to school. Decades of research show that the issue is more nuanced and complex than most people think: Homework is beneficial, but only to a degree. Students in high school gain the most, while younger kids benefit much less.

The National PTA and the National Education Association support the “ 10-minute homework guideline ”—a nightly 10 minutes of homework per grade level. But many teachers and parents are quick to point out that what matters is the quality of the homework assigned and how well it meets students’ needs, not the amount of time spent on it.

The guideline doesn’t account for students who may need to spend more—or less—time on assignments. In class, teachers can make adjustments to support struggling students, but at home, an assignment that takes one student 30 minutes to complete may take another twice as much time—often for reasons beyond their control. And homework can widen the achievement gap, putting students from low-income households and students with learning disabilities at a disadvantage.

However, the 10-minute guideline is useful in setting a limit: When kids spend too much time on homework, there are real consequences to consider.

Small Benefits for Elementary Students

As young children begin school, the focus should be on cultivating a love of learning, and assigning too much homework can undermine that goal. And young students often don’t have the study skills to benefit fully from homework, so it may be a poor use of time (Cooper, 1989 ; Cooper et al., 2006 ; Marzano & Pickering, 2007 ). A more effective activity may be nightly reading, especially if parents are involved. The benefits of reading are clear: If students aren’t proficient readers by the end of third grade, they’re less likely to succeed academically and graduate from high school (Fiester, 2013 ).

For second-grade teacher Jacqueline Fiorentino, the minor benefits of homework did not outweigh the potential drawback of turning young children against school at an early age, so she experimented with dropping mandatory homework. “Something surprising happened: They started doing more work at home,” Fiorentino writes . “This inspiring group of 8-year-olds used their newfound free time to explore subjects and topics of interest to them.” She encouraged her students to read at home and offered optional homework to extend classroom lessons and help them review material.

Moderate Benefits for Middle School Students

As students mature and develop the study skills necessary to delve deeply into a topic—and to retain what they learn—they also benefit more from homework. Nightly assignments can help prepare them for scholarly work, and research shows that homework can have moderate benefits for middle school students (Cooper et al., 2006 ). Recent research also shows that online math homework, which can be designed to adapt to students’ levels of understanding, can significantly boost test scores (Roschelle et al., 2016 ).

There are risks to assigning too much, however: A 2015 study found that when middle school students were assigned more than 90 to 100 minutes of daily homework, their math and science test scores began to decline (Fernández-Alonso, Suárez-Álvarez, & Muñiz, 2015 ). Crossing that upper limit can drain student motivation and focus. The researchers recommend that “homework should present a certain level of challenge or difficulty, without being so challenging that it discourages effort.” Teachers should avoid low-effort, repetitive assignments, and assign homework “with the aim of instilling work habits and promoting autonomous, self-directed learning.”

In other words, it’s the quality of homework that matters, not the quantity. Brian Sztabnik, a veteran middle and high school English teacher, suggests that teachers take a step back and ask themselves these five questions :

• How long will it take to complete?
• Have all learners been considered?
• Will an assignment encourage future success?
• Will an assignment place material in a context the classroom cannot?
• Does an assignment offer support when a teacher is not there?

More Benefits for High School Students, but Risks as Well

By the time they reach high school, students should be well on their way to becoming independent learners, so homework does provide a boost to learning at this age, as long as it isn’t overwhelming (Cooper et al., 2006 ; Marzano & Pickering, 2007 ). When students spend too much time on homework—more than two hours each night—it takes up valuable time to rest and spend time with family and friends. A 2013 study found that high school students can experience serious mental and physical health problems, from higher stress levels to sleep deprivation, when assigned too much homework (Galloway, Conner, & Pope, 2013 ).

Homework in high school should always relate to the lesson and be doable without any assistance, and feedback should be clear and explicit.

Teachers should also keep in mind that not all students have equal opportunities to finish their homework at home, so incomplete homework may not be a true reflection of their learning—it may be more a result of issues they face outside of school. They may be hindered by issues such as lack of a quiet space at home, resources such as a computer or broadband connectivity, or parental support (OECD, 2014 ). In such cases, giving low homework scores may be unfair.

Since the quantities of time discussed here are totals, teachers in middle and high school should be aware of how much homework other teachers are assigning. It may seem reasonable to assign 30 minutes of daily homework, but across six subjects, that’s three hours—far above a reasonable amount even for a high school senior. Psychologist Maurice Elias sees this as a common mistake: Individual teachers create homework policies that in aggregate can overwhelm students. He suggests that teachers work together to develop a school-wide homework policy and make it a key topic of back-to-school night and the first parent-teacher conferences of the school year.

Parents Play a Key Role

Homework can be a powerful tool to help parents become more involved in their child’s learning (Walker et al., 2004 ). It can provide insights into a child’s strengths and interests, and can also encourage conversations about a child’s life at school. If a parent has positive attitudes toward homework, their children are more likely to share those same values, promoting academic success.

But it’s also possible for parents to be overbearing, putting too much emphasis on test scores or grades, which can be disruptive for children (Madjar, Shklar, & Moshe, 2015 ). Parents should avoid being overly intrusive or controlling—students report feeling less motivated to learn when they don’t have enough space and autonomy to do their homework (Orkin, May, & Wolf, 2017 ; Patall, Cooper, & Robinson, 2008 ; Silinskas & Kikas, 2017 ). So while homework can encourage parents to be more involved with their kids, it’s important to not make it a source of conflict.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

“i feel enthusiastic, when the homework is done well”: teachers’ emotions related to homework and their antecedents.

• 1 Institute of School and Profession, University of Teacher Education St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
• 2 Department of Educational Science and School of Education, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria
• 3 Institute of Educational Science, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

Emotions are an important factor influencing teaching behavior and teaching quality. Previous studies have primarily focused on teachers’ emotions in the classroom in general, rather than focusing on a specific aspect of teaching such as homework practice. Since emotions vary between situations, it can be assumed that teachers’ emotions also vary between the activities that teachers perform. In this study, we therefore focus on one specific teacher activity in our study, namely homework practice. We explore teachers’ emotions in homework practice and their antecedents. Methodologically, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 Swiss secondary school teachers teaching German and analysed using structuring qualitative content analysis. The results show that teachers experience a variety of positive and negative emotions related to homework practice, with positive emotions predominating. According to the teachers’ reflections, the antecedents of their emotions could be attributed to the context (e.g., conditions at home), teacher behavior and (inner) demands (e.g., perceived workload) and student behavior (e.g., learning progress). Implications for teacher education and training are discussed.

1. Introduction

Schutz and Lanehart (2002) emphasized that “emotions are intimately involved in virtually every aspect of the teaching and learning process and, therefore, an understanding of the nature of emotions within the school context is essential” (p. 67). Since then, research on emotions in education has steadily increased and includes empirical studies on the emotions of students, teachers, as well as parents (e.g., Dettmers et al., 2011 ; DiStefano et al., 2020 ; Burić and Frenzel, 2021 ). The results regarding the teacher uniformly show that they experience a variety of emotions while teaching ( Hargreaves, 1998 ; Sutton and Wheatley, 2003 ; Mevarech and Maskit, 2015 ), which have been identified as significant factors that influence teaching behavior, and consequently, teaching quality and student outcomes ( Frenzel et al., 2009b ; Hagenauer and Hascher, 2018 ; Frenzel et al., 2021 ). Moreover, recognizing, understanding, and expressing these emotions are crucial for teachers’ well-being ( Hagenauer and Hascher, 2018 ; Dreer, 2021 ; Hascher and Waber, 2021 ).

Previous studies have focused predominantly on teachers’ emotions during teaching as broadly defined (e.g., Chen, 2019 ), rather than on a specific facet of teaching practice. Such an approach is valuable because it generates insights into how teaching in general is experienced emotionally by teachers and how these emotions in turn affect students ( Frenzel et al., 2021 ). However, research has shown that students’ emotions vary depending on the subject ( Goetz et al., 2006 , 2010 ) or activity they are engaged in (e.g., emotions in learning, emotions during exams, emotions during homework etc.; Pekrun et al., 2002 ; Goetz et al., 2012 ). The same can be assumed for teachers. The effect of context and situation on emotions is increasingly coming to the fore of academic research (for example, Pekrun and Marsh, 2022 ). In our study, we therefore zoom even more precisely into the different activities or tasks a teacher is required to perform to examine their emotional experience more closely in connection with a very specific activity: namely, homework practice. In this study, homework practice means teachers’ various actions related to homework. It includes planning, assigning, but also checking, giving feedback or integrating homework into the lesson.

We have chosen to focus on the activity of homework practice as homework in schools has been a topic of controversial discussion for decades, especially with regard to its effectiveness and quality ( Baş et al., 2017 ; Fan et al., 2017 ). Homework practice has now been brought even more into focus by the COVID-19 pandemic, as homework also promotes core student skills, such as self-regulated learning ( Pelikan et al., 2021 ). It can be assumed that teachers who experience homework practice positively and implement it with motivation also achieve a higher quality of the homework. Previous research clearly points to the association between teachers’ emotions and teaching quality (e.g., Becker et al., 2015 ). Even though emotions are considered relevant as part of teachers’ professional competence ( Frenzel et al., 2021 ), there is currently a lack of empirical evidence on which emotions teachers experience in homework practice and what triggers them. This is the focus of the present study. Based on an exploratory approach, arising from the limited empirical findings on this topic to date, we examine which emotions teachers experience in relation to homework practice and their antecedents. We adopt Cooper’s (1989) definition of homework as a task that a teacher gives to students to complete out of school. However, the homework process we are interested in as an emotion-triggering source of teachers’ emotions should be thought of more broadly and ranges from planning homework to assigning and correcting it and giving feedback. Therefore, it is not only about activities that the teacher does for themselves (e.g., planning homework), but also about the teacher–student interactions that occur in the course of the homework process, for example, when teachers give feedback to students or discuss homework together in class.

2. Teachers’ emotions

2.1. definition of emotions and teachers’ emotions.

Emotions are multidimensional constructs that consist of (1) affective, (2) physiological, (3) cognitive, (4) expressive, and (5) motivational components ( Kleinginna and Kleinginna, 1981 ; Scherer, 2005 ; Shuman and Scherer, 2014 ). Emotions have what Frenzel et al. (2015) call a “felt core”— the tangible experience of feeling (p. 202). When people experience emotions, the body often reacts as well. For example, the experience of fear can result in an increased heart rate or a change in breathing rate or pattern ( Frenzel et al., 2015 , p. 202). Emotional experiences also impact thoughts, such as when fear leads to thoughts about consequences. Emotions can be perceived by the outside world through the expressive component. For example, fear can be expressed verbally or non-verbally, such as through a worried face. Finally, the motivational component ensures that appropriate action is taken. Fear often leads to avoidance behavior.

According to Pekrun and Linnenbrink-Garcia (2012 , p. 261; see also Pekrun et al., 2023) , emotions can be described and differentiated according to their valence and activation. In terms of valence, a distinction can be made between positive (e.g., joy) and negative (e.g., anger). Valence in this context is related to the subjective experience of the teacher. Positive emotions are classified as those that are experienced as pleasant by the teacher, whereas negative emotions are defined as those experienced as unpleasant. Both negative and positive emotions can be functional or dysfunctional (for a critical discussion see An et al., 2017 ). In addition, there are physiologically activating or deactivating states. Excitement is activating, whereas relaxation is usually deactivating. These two aspects are crucial for understanding the actions that arise from emotions, as in the case of teachers who experience emotions in the classroom and act accordingly.

Teachers’ emotions have increasingly become objects of study in recent years. Frenzel (2014) proposed a reciprocal model of the causes and effects of teachers’ emotions when teaching in class. It illustrates how teachers’ emotions are triggered and influenced by and affect the teaching process. The basic assumptions of the model are based on an appraisal-theoretical understanding of emotions ( Ellsworth and Scherer, 2003 ). Appraisal theory explains why the same external experience may not lead to the same emotional responses in all individuals; it is not the experience itself that evokes the emotion, but the subjective appraisal made by the individual ( Sutton and Wheatley, 2003 ). For teachers, this appraisal is based on four aspects of teacher goals: (1) cognitive, (2) motivational, (3) social, and (4) relational ( Frenzel et al., 2009b ; Frenzel, 2014 ). Based on their perceptions of learners’ behavior on these four dimensions, teachers assess whether they have achieved or will achieve these goals. The outcome of this assessment process determines the teachers’ emotional response. For example, if a teacher perceives students’ engagement as high, it is likely that the teacher will experience positive emotions (e.g., enjoyment) as the students’ behavior is interpreted as goal conducive. These emotions then influence the teacher’s classroom behavior (i.e., cognitive activation, classroom management, social support). For example, teachers who experience positive emotions can build trusting relationships with their students. These instructional behavior factors affect students’ achievement, motivation, behavior in class, and relationship with the teacher. Thus, student and teacher behavior in the classroom is both the cause and effect of the teacher’s emotional experiences. This reciprocal relationship between teacher and student emotions has been empirically confirmed in a variety of studies ( Frenzel et al., 2009a , b ; Becker et al., 2014 ; Keller and Lazarides, 2021 ). It is expected that students’ homework behavior on the different dimensions is related to teachers’ homework-related emotions as well. It seems plausible, for example, that students who are committed to doing their homework trigger positive emotions in teachers because teachers then feel confirmed in their effectiveness and consider their goals to have been achieved. However, there are no specific empirical findings for homework practice so far.

2.2. Antecedents of teachers’ emotions—empirical findings

Teachers experience emotions for a variety of reasons related to achieving or not achieving their goals ( Sutton and Wheatley, 2003 ; Sutton, 2007 ; Frenzel, 2014 ). They experience joy in the classroom when students are motivated ( Becker et al., 2015 ; Burić and Frenzel, 2021 ), engaged ( Prawatt et al., 1983 ; Epstein and van Voorhis, 2012 ; Hagenauer et al., 2015 ; Chang, 2020 ), interested ( Frenzel et al., 2008 ), disciplined ( Hagenauer et al., 2015 ; Frenzel et al., 2020 ) or simply happy ( Chang, 2020 ; Keller and Lazarides, 2021 ). According to Frenzel et al. (2008) and Keller and Lazarides (2021) , joy is the emotion most commonly reported by teachers. When students are successful or interactive, teachers experience positive emotions ( Sutton, 2005 ; Wu and Chen, 2018 ; Chang, 2020 ) regardless of the students’ abilities ( Prawatt et al., 1983 ). In addition, they feel pride when a student with low abilities suddenly begins to try very hard ( Prawatt et al., 1983 ).

However, student engagement and discipline are also significant predictors of negative emotions such as anxiety, anger, and frustration ( Prawatt et al., 1983 ; Georgiou et al., 2002 ; Sutton and Wheatley, 2003 ; Sutton, 2005 ; Becker et al., 2014 ; Hagenauer et al., 2015 ; Frenzel et al., 2020 ). Anger is mainly evoked when students misbehave, do not participate, or are inattentive or unmotivated ( Sutton, 2007 ; Hagenauer et al., 2015 ). It also arises when teachers attribute students’ academic failures to inadequate effort ( Reyna and Weiner, 2001 ). The level of discipline has a significantly negative correlation with fear ( Frenzel et al., 2008 ). Surprise occurs when low-ability students who make little effort nevertheless succeed or high-ability students who exert a lot of effort fail ( Prawatt et al., 1983 ).

The relationships between students and teachers are also associated with emotions. When teachers feel connected to their students, they experience joy. If these relationships cannot be established, anger and anxiety are more likely to arise ( Hagenauer et al., 2015 ). In addition, social relations outside the classroom—such as those with colleagues or parents—can also lead to emotional responses ( Sutton and Wheatley, 2003 ; Sutton, 2005 ; Wu and Chen, 2018 ). Teachers feel pleasant emotions when they succeed in working with their colleagues, receive support from school leaders, or experience recognition from parents ( Chen, 2019 ). In contrast, unpleasant emotions can result if they experience competition with their colleagues, receive little support from the administration, or interact with uncooperative parents ( Sutton, 2005 ; Chen, 2019 ).

In conclusion, the main sources which trigger teachers’ emotions proposed in the model on teachers’ emotions ( Frenzel, 2014 ) have been confirmed empirically by various studies in different countries. However, it remains an open question whether these particular sources are also at the core of teachers’ emotions related to homework.

3. Homework

Homework has a long tradition worldwide and is a relevant practice in many schools. As already outlined in the introduction, it is defined as assignments given by a teacher for students to complete outside of school ( Cooper, 1989 ).

To date, much of the research on homework has focused on its didactic–methodological function (e.g., Fernández-Alonso et al., 2019 ). For example, researchers have investigated whether the additional learning time gained through homework impacts student performance (e.g., Rosário et al., 2018 ). In addition, research has analysed whether homework supports self-regulated learning by helping students acquire learning strategies ( Trautwein and Lüdtke, 2008 ). Another aspect that has been considered is whether homework functions as an equalizer or reinforces inequality because students have different degrees of support at home ( Dettmers et al., 2019 ). Additionally, researchers have investigated the influence of homework on the development of students’ interest ( Trautwein et al., 2001 ).

Although the aforementioned research has produced different findings, it is the consensus that doing homework alone does not necessarily provide benefits, but that the quality of homework is decisive in determining whether students benefit from it ( Trautwein et al., 2001 , 2002 ; Flunger et al., 2015 ; Rodríguez et al., 2019 ). Previous studies have shown that quality homework can positively influence the learner’s behavior and achievement ( Trautwein et al., 2002 , 2006 ; Trautwein and Lüdtke, 2007 , 2009 ; Dettmers et al., 2010 ; Rosário et al., 2018 ). Moreover, a student’s motivation to complete homework is positively related to its perceived quality ( Trautwein et al., 2006 ; Trautwein and Lüdtke, 2007 ; Rosário et al., 2018 ; Xu et al., 2021 ; Xu, 2022 ). For example, Rosário et al. (2018) found that when students perceive their homework to be high quality, they try harder, complete homework more often, perform better on assignments, and get higher grades in mathematics. However, the topic of homework is still controversial and opinions about the sense or even meaninglessness of homework are diverse ( Cooper et al., 2006 ; Fan et al., 2017 ). Due to these controversies, the topic can also be considered “emotional,” be it that homework often leads to conflicts between students and their parents ( Forsberg, 2007 ; Dumont et al., 2012 ) or that homework can also trigger emotions in the teacher–student interaction, for example, when students do not complete their homework (see Hagenauer et al., 2015 for teacher-student interaction).

Studies on students’ emotions during homework show that they are influenced by perceived homework quality and by parental homework support ( Trautwein et al., 2009a , b ; Dettmers et al., 2011 ). For example, negative emotions arise when perceived homework quality is low or parental homework help is perceived as controlling and can have a negative impact on homework effort and performance ( Else-Quest et al., 2008 ; Trautwein et al., 2009a , b ; Dettmers et al., 2011 ). Trautwein et al. (2009b) also found that negative emotions are negatively related to homework effort and French performance. However, they were also able to show that performance can predict subsequent negative emotions in homework. Regarding the parents, it was found that the emotions of the parents (e.g., about a subject) influence their homework support, but also have an influence on the emotions of the students ( Moè and Katz, 2018 ; DiStefano et al., 2020 ). Hence, while there are some studies on students’ emotions ( Knollmann and Wild, 2007 ; Trautwein et al., 2009a ; Dettmers et al., 2011 ) and parents’ emotions ( Moè and Katz, 2018 ; DiStefano et al., 2020 ), research on teachers’ emotions pertaining to homework practice is lacking.

4. The present study

Many studies have investigated the emotions teachers experience while teaching ( Sutton and Wheatley, 2003 ; Frenzel, 2014 ; Fried et al., 2015 ; Frenzel et al., 2021 ). However, there has been little research to date that focuses on specific activities of teaching. The present study focuses on the homework process. Based on Frenzel’s (2014) model, it can be assumed that the quality of homework is influenced by the teachers’ emotions. For example, positive emotions, such as joy triggered by students who are highly engaged in homework, may cause teachers to put in the effort to assign differentiated homework. This is likely to further enhance the students’ motivation and engagement. Thus, perceived student engagement and motivation may function as a significant cause of a teacher’s emotions related to homework. So far, however, there is no empirical evidence on the antecedents of teachers’ emotions and experienced teachers’ emotions themselves in the homework process.

To this end, in the present study we explored the following main research questions:

1. Which emotions do teachers experience related to German language homework (the language of instruction and the students’ native language), and (2) what are their antecedents?

This zooming in on a specific activity of teachers is timely, as the high context specificity of emotions and consequently the variations of emotions between contexts and situations are increasingly seen as being relevant for empirical research in the field. While there is already a great deal of empirical evidence on teachers’ emotions while teaching in general and their relations to students (e.g., Frenzel et al., 2021 ), our study extends previous research efforts by taking a closer look at a specific activity of teachers – homework practice and its emotional potential for teachers—and thereby also taking the context specificity of teachers’ emotions into account.

5.1. Participants

A total of 23 secondary school teachers from the canton of Bern in Switzerland participated in this study. The conditions for participation were that they had been in the teaching profession for at least 3 years and taught German (which is the language of instruction and a primary subject in the area). The subject German was chosen as it is one of the main subjects in Swiss secondary schools. Homework and its control can be very time-consuming for teachers, as essays have to be corrected in addition to other forms of assignments. In addition, it was important for us that the teachers already had sufficient professional experience so that they could report from their broad experience.

We first contacted all secondary schools in the canton of Bern to recruit teachers who were willing to participate in interviews. There are five different school models in Bern, which differ in terms of permeability (see Figure 1 ). In Model 1 , the students of the high-track secondary level (Sekundarschule) and the low-track secondary level (Realschule) are taught separately in different school buildings. In Model 2 , the two tracks are taught separately but in the same school building (i.e., there are separate high-track and low-track classes in the same building). In Model 3a , students in the low- and high-track levels are taught separately in most subjects; however, in the main subjects (mathematics, German, French), they are grouped according to their ability levels. In Model 3b, core classes are mixed, while the three main subjects are taught in ability-level groups. In Model 4 , all subjects are taught in mixed levels and classes are only differentiated internally.

Figure 1 . School models in the canton of Bern.

Of the teachers interviewed, two teachers were from Model 1, three teachers were from Model 2, 12 teachers were from Model 3a, four teachers were from Model 3b, and two teachers were from Model 4. This distribution accurately reflects the distribution of teachers among the different models in the canton of Bern. Model 3a is the most frequently implemented (see Table 1 ).

Table 1 . Demographics of the participants.

Of the 23 teachers interviewed, 12 were female (52.2%) and 11 were male (47.8%). One teacher was under 30 years old, 11 were between 30 and 40 years old, eight were between 41 and 50 years old and three were over 50 years old. The teachers also differed in terms of professional experience. Two had been in the teaching profession for less than 5 years, five for 5–10 years, seven for 11–15 years, six for 16–20 years and three for over 20 years (see Table 1 ).

5.2. Interviews and procedure

As teachers’ emotions related to homework practices are relatively unexplored, a qualitative–explorative approach was chosen to answer the proposed research questions. In addition, a short questionnaire was used to collect demographic information and the teachers’ positive and negative affect related to homework practice.

5.2.1. Interviews

We conducted semi-structured interviews based on an interview guide that lasted between 28 and 69 min. The interview guide had been previously piloted with two teachers. These interviews showed that the questions were easy to understand but that the interviewees found it difficult to identify emotions on their own.

Consent to use the data was obtained from the participants. In addition, they were informed of their right to withdraw from the study at any time and were assured that their personal information and data would be kept confidential. Interviews were conducted by the principal investigator in person or via Zoom (because of the COVID-19 pandemic). An informal conversational style was used to encourage respondents to speak openly about their experiences. They were also told that their experiences were important and that, therefore, there were no right or wrong answers; this was intended to ensure that they would proffer information as freely and openly as possible.

During the interviews, the teachers were asked to report on situations related to the homework process that had evoked emotions in them. They were asked to name the emotion and describe the situation that caused it (Main interview question: In which situations related to homework do you experience positive feelings? What kind of feeling? Can you tell me more about it? In which situations do you experience negative feelings? What kind of feeling? Can you tell me more about it? ). Based on the test interviews, during a second step, the teachers were presented with a list of specific emotions (which were also later addressed in the short questionnaire) and asked to read them. If they had experienced the emotion and had not yet mentioned it, they were asked to explain a situation that had triggered this emotion (Main interview question: You have now already reported on various emotions in the homework process. I will show you a selection of emotions now. Read through the emotions briefly. Perhaps you will notice that you have experienced one or two of them in connection with your homework practice. I would ask you to tell me a bit more about it ).

5.2.2. Teachers’ positive and negative affect

After the interviews, the teachers filled out a short questionnaire which consisted of demographic information and the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS, Breyer and Bluemke, 2016 ; German version). The PANAS scales were applied to provide a preliminary quantifying description of the teachers’ emotions related to their homework practice in addition to the thick and contextualized descriptions resulting from the interviews. The teachers had to answer the following question in terms of different emotions (e.g., active): “ When you think about your previous homework practice, how do you feel about it in general? ” The PANAS consists of ten positive and ten negative emotional states. Additional emotions that were considered relevant to homework were added: satisfied, disappointed, relaxed, frustrated, relieved, confident, hopeless, stressed, empathic, grateful, hopeful, bored, sad, pity, embarrassed, guilty conscience, disgusted, admiring, and envious (see Supplementary Table S1 ). The teachers assessed the intensity with which they felt each emotion using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely).

5.3. Data analysis

The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Fuss and Karbach (2019) and Kuckartz (2010) identified obligatory and pre-defined transcription rules. All transcripts conformed to these rules. Personal information provided by the participants was anonymised in the transcripts. The interviews were analysed utilizing the software MAXQDA based on the qualitative content analysis structure defined by Mayring (2017) . A coding frame was developed consisting of several main categories and subcategories that structured the material. First, the interview material was coded based on Frenzel’s (2014) teachers’ emotions model. They classified the students’ behavior on cognitive, motivational, and social levels as relevant antecedents of the teachers’ emotions. All other key categories and sub-categories pertaining to the triggers of the teachers’ emotions that were part of the coding frame emerged inductively from the material. In terms of specific emotions, the emotional states from the PANAS scales were used as deductive categories. Other emotions, such as feeling insecure, emerged from the interviews, so further inductive categories were formed during the coding process. These categories and the overall coding frame were discussed several times with a second researcher. The full coding frame is available from the researchers on request. Extensive extracts from the coding frame are depicted in the results section in Tables 2 – 4 .

Table 2 . Antecedents of teachers’ emotions related to context.

Table 3 . Antecedents of teachers’ emotions related to teachers’ behavior and (inner) demands.

Table 4 . Antecedents of teachers’ emotions related to student behavior.

For the final coding frame, each category was described and assigned a representative anchor example. In relation to the research questions, the coding scheme included 21 categories of positive emotions and 27 categories of negative emotions. A total of 116 codes in the positive emotion categories and 133 codes in the negative emotion categories were developed. The coding scheme also included 25 antecedents, 20 of which were divided into positive and negative. The exceptions were categories that were considered to be positive or negative per se (e.g., lies/excuses). There were 373 codes in the antecedent categories.

To ensure intercoder reliability, a second independent researcher who was not involved in the research project but who has expertise in the field coded a randomly selected interview using the final coding scheme. The codes were discussed with the second researcher. After a consensus was reached, the independent researcher coded four more randomly selected interviews. These were used to calculate intercoder reliability via the corrected Cohen’s Kappa coefficient, as suggested by Brennan and Prediger (1981) . The intercoder reliability as a measure of the coding consistency was good, suggesting consistency in the coding process (κ = 0.78; Landis and Koch, 1977 ).

In the following sections, the results of the study are reported. First, the emotions reported in the short questionnaire are presented, which is followed by the antecedents and associated emotions reported in the interviews. We will describe the dimensions/categories in detail and complement this description with frequencies (i.e., How many teachers mentioned each category). This procedure—the combination of detailed description and the indication of frequencies—is a common strategy for presenting results when using qualitative content analysis ( Schreier, 2012 ).

6.1. Which emotions do teachers experience in relation to their homework practice?

Findings from the PANAS scales revealed that the teachers experienced a variety of positive and negative emotions related to homework. Positive emotions dominated over negative emotions ( M positive emotions  = 2.69; M negative emotions  = 1.40) (see Figure 2 and Supplementary Table S1 ).

Figure 2 . Mean values of positive and negative teacher emotions in relation to the homework practice (1 = low occurrence; 5 = high occurrence).

To cross-validate these findings, the teachers were also asked in the interviews whether positive or negative emotions dominate from their perspective. In line with the quantitative findings, most of the teachers interviewed ( n  = 15) claimed that positive emotions were dominant. When prompted to elaborate, they clarified that they have a positive attitude toward homework and strive to implement high-quality homework practices. In addition, they reported that they do not receive negative feedback from students or parents on their homework practices, suggesting that they are satisfied. In contrast, negative emotions dominated among some teachers ( n  = 6). They argued that homework has the potential to cause negative outcomes such as conflicts with parents, stress, or students feeling overloaded. Finally, two teachers were unsure whether positive or negative emotions dominate, reflecting an ambivalent attitude toward homework.

Looking at the distinct emotions in detail, the teachers mentioned a high variation of positive and negative emotions that are triggered by their homework practice. Specifically, for the positive emotions, they reported feeling hopeful, excited, relieved, empathic, admiration, confident, determined, interested, enthusiastic, inspired, satisfied, proud, fulfilling, and relaxed. In terms of negative emotions, they reported feeling stressed, pity, sad, ineffective, overwhelmed, frustrated, guilty, including having a guilty conscience, ashamed, upset, insecure, disappointed, annoyed, scared, irritable, helpless, perplexed, hopeless, inadequate, and bored. In the following section, these distinct emotions are related to their antecedents.

6.2. What are the antecedents of teachers’ emotions related to their homework practice?

Based on the interview findings, triggers of teachers’ emotions were identified and grouped into three categories: context (Section 6.2.1), teacher behavior and (inner) demands (Section 6.2.2), and student behavior (Section 6.2.3).

6.2.1. Context

Various contextual factors that trigger emotional responses were mentioned (see Table 2 ). They related to the school environment, the students’ home environments, or the teacher’s own socialization experiences (i.e., their prior experiences with homework).

With regard to the school environment, the teachers reported that they feel relieved that they have access to digital tools . Emotions were also evoked in teachers because they have an/no obligation or the/no possibility of assigning homework . One teacher stated that she is relieved to have the opportunity to assign homework occasionally as this allows her to cover content for which there is too little time in class. Another teacher reported stress because he would like to assign more homework but does not have the opportunity because the students would be overwhelmed.

The teachers seldom mentioned factors related to the students’ home environments in the interviews. However, on some occasions, these conditions did evoke emotions. More concretely, some teachers reported that they feel empathy or pity when students do not have a suitable place at home to work and concentrate . In addition, conflicts between parents and students caused by homework evoked negative emotions in teachers. Regarding positive emotions, the teachers claimed to feel admiration when underachieving students or those who receive little support at home nevertheless work hard to complete their homework.

Finally, the teachers’ own socialization evoked emotions in them. One teacher said he felt sorry for the students because he did not like doing homework himself. In contrast, two teachers reported that they had enjoyed doing homework in their own school years , one particularly emphasizing the subject German because he was especially good at it.

6.2.2. Teacher behavior and (inner) demands

Different aspects of the teacher’s own behavior and (inner) demands triggered emotional responses (see Table 3 ). For one teacher, her demands and idealism led to a guilty conscience and a feeling of being ineffective and powerless. Several teachers reported feeling frustrated or stressed when the workload (e.g., correcting or preparation) is too high. Only one teacher experienced positive emotions, as she avoided giving homework to keep her workload low:

“I am really a bit wary of giving homework that gives me personally a lot of work.” (11, pos. 50)

The amount of homework assigned by the teachers evoked various emotions. First, the teachers reported feeling relieved when they do not have to assign a lot of homework to students—for example, when the students work productively in class, or when additional homework is unnecessary as the learning objectives have already been reached. Second, some of the teachers reported feeling guilty, ashamed, or pity when they assign homework to students who already have assignments from other teachers or have to study for tests.

The teachers reported experiencing positive emotions when the assigned work is completed well and thus, they can give positive feedback . However, negative emotions such as a guilty conscience can arise if they have to give negative feedback.

The teachers further reported that they are hopeful, excited, and enthusiastic when they assign homework that is perceived as high quality and which they have planned thoroughly. On the contrary, they mentioned experiencing a guilty conscience when they realize that they have put in little effort and/or time to prepare the homework. One teacher reported that she is often inspired by students to create new assignments .

Insecurities can arise during planning if the meaningfulness of homework is questioned. Teachers who doubt this frequently reported feelings of guilt. However, when they give homework that they believe is meaningful, they feel determined and interested. When teachers succeed in integrating homework into the lesson and it leads to discussions, they experience positive emotions such as interest, joy, enthusiasm, or inspiration. In contrast, they reported feeling guilty when they do not integrate homework into the lesson.

“It has also happened that you have done something […] and then you have not reacted at all, so that was – that was not sensible. Then you are really (.) guilty.” (06, pos. 75)

6.2.3. Student behavior

The students’ homework-related behavior triggered the broadest range of emotions in the teachers, defined in terms of the cognitive, motivational, and socio-emotional goals described in the Frenzel (2014) model (see Table 4 ). The teachers did not describe student behavior related to relational goals.

Cognitive goals were closely linked to learning progress and perceived success. Homework that does not lead to improved learning performance is likely to cause frustration, disappointment, and anger. One teacher reported experiencing a guilty conscience when particularly diligent students who complete their homework are still not successful. However, when learning goals are achieved, the teachers frequently reported feeling excited, enthusiastic, and satisfied. When students who have difficulties with the content succeed, teachers have indicated that they are enthusiastic, proud, and relieved.

In addition to the learning process and progress, the students’ learning outcomes (results/products) caused an array of emotions in the teachers. If the students do not meet the teachers’ expectations, disappointment or anger is likely to arise. The teachers reported being annoyed, frustrated, or upset when the students’ mistakes are repeated , or they have to repeat their instructions several times. However, more teachers reported positive emotions related to student outcomes, including joy, enthusiasm, admiration, pride, satisfaction, and interest.

As described in the model on teachers’ emotions ( Frenzel, 2014 ), teachers also pursue motivational goals during instruction, which becomes salient in relation to homework practice. The teachers frequently mentioned that the students’ initiative, interest, and ambition trigger positive emotions in them. For example, the teachers reported that they feel satisfaction, fulfillment, or joy when students voluntarily engage in school-related tasks at home or show interest in the content that has been discussed at school. However, if the students lack motivation, frustration can occur.

The teachers also reported feeling disappointed and upset as a result of a lack of student engagement . Conversely, high student engagement goes hand in hand with joy, enthusiasm, satisfaction, fulfillment, admiration, and pride. One teacher reported that he feels hopeful and confident when he notices that a formerly disinterested student suddenly develops motivation and engagement.

In addition, the teachers revealed that their emotions are strongly related to those of their students , suggesting emotion transmission effects. Teachers indicated they feel guilty when students’ emotions about homework are negative. One teacher reported that he sometimes gets upset with himself when he overloads his students with homework. Positive emotions among students corresponded with emotions such as joy or enthusiasm in teachers.

Finally, teachers reported that they experience emotions related to the students’ achievement of social goals. Students are responsible for fulfilling their role as learners by behaving in a socially appropriate manner and in accordance with the norms and standards of their respective learning environment.

Most of the teachers’ negative emotions were triggered by homework that is not handed in by students. Teachers reported feeling anger and stress because they cannot progress in class. They feel frustrated, disappointed, upset, irritable, perplexed, helpless, and even hopeless when the same students repeatedly fail to complete homework. In addition, some teachers confessed to feeling insecure and incompetent because, from their perspective, they have failed to establish a positive homework culture.

“Yes, being hopeless is sometimes a bit difficult, but when there are really students who don't succeed in this subject or in that subject and maybe not even in German, then maybe sometimes the question is: How could we tackle this now?” (03, pos. 58)

One teacher reported that he feels empathic when a student does not do homework due to a difficult situation at home; he then works with the pupil to seek a solution. Another teacher reported that she feels bored when the same situation occurs repeatedly. Unfinished homework can lead to conflicts at school between teachers and students, which cause negative feelings.

Two closely related phenomena are cheating on or copying homework , which is interpreted as a failure to meet social goals. The same is true of students who lie or make excuses , which also evoke negative emotions among teachers. The particular emotion that is triggered depends on who is considered responsible for the behavior. When teachers are blamed, they are likely to feel insecure; however, when teachers do not attribute the behavior to themselves but regard the students as responsible, they experience anger (directed toward the students).

Homework completion evokes positive emotions in teachers because it demonstrates that students are meeting social goals. Teachers reported being happy when homework is done, although experiences differed. One teacher reported that she feels confident that when students do not do their homework, it is usually for a good reason and not due to a general rejection of homework.

Similarly, when students take responsibility and succeed in organizing themselves, teachers mentioned feeling relaxed, satisfied, and excited. In contrast, the teachers reported that they feel pity and frustration when the students do not take responsibility and organize themselves to complete their homework.

Finally, feedback from students triggered emotions in teachers, with positive feedback leading to positive emotions and negative feedback leading to negative emotions, such as frustration in one teacher. One teacher reported that she can also be irritable when she receives negative feedback that is not justified.

To conclude and summarize the results related to our main research question, the teachers reported various positive and negative emotions and the factors that trigger them. These features are illustrated in a conceptual model of teachers’ emotions related to homework practices (see Figure 3 ).

Figure 3 . Model of the antecedents of teachers’ emotions related to homework.

7. Discussion

The overall aim of this study was to investigate the emotions triggered in teachers by homework-related issues. It was found that for the majority of teachers, positive emotions dominated negative emotions. A positive emotional pattern in teachers when teaching was also found in the majority of previous studies ( Keller et al., 2014 ; Anttila et al., 2016 ). Nevertheless, when prompted to identify specific situations which triggered an emotional response, the teachers mentioned just as many negative situations as positive ones. Many different triggers of teachers’ emotions were mentioned and described, which were categorized according to contextual conditions, teachers’ behavior and (inner) demands, and students’ behavior.

In line with previous research and the theoretical model of teachers’ emotions ( Frenzel, 2014 ), the present study underlines the importance of the students’ cognitive, motivational, and socio-emotional behavior. More concretely, teachers reported that they experience joy when they perceive or experience students as motivated, engaged, interested, and disciplined e.g., (see also Chang, 2020 ). In contrast, they explained that they feel frustration or anger when students are not engaged or disciplined e.g., (see also Becker et al., 2015 ). It was also confirmed that teachers experience positive emotions when they observe students making progress e.g., (see also Wu and Chen, 2018 ). In line with Prawatt et al. (1983) , this study found that teachers experience joy as a result of their students’ achievements and outcomes. Additionally, previous studies ( Becker et al., 2014 ; Frenzel et al., 2021 ; Keller and Lazarides, 2021 ) have shown that the teachers’ emotions are related to those of the students—identified as the emotion transfer effect, which was also reflected in the present study. Consistent with Chen (2019 , 2020) , this study further showed that negative emotions arise in teachers when students do not take responsibility for their learning; a central goal of self-regulated learning environments, which gained additional attention during the COVID-19 pandemic when students had to cope with distance learning ( Berger et al., 2021 ).

In addition to the many findings that align with prior research on teachers’ emotions and the factors that trigger them, the study also produced some unexpected results. First, the teachers did not report the emotions of anxiety. This may be due to the fact that inexperienced teachers were excluded from the study; previous studies have found that inexperienced teachers and student teachers experience more anxiety than experienced teachers ( Sutton and Wheatley, 2003 ; Chang, 2009 ). The results so far also indicate that anxiety is mainly experienced with regard to classroom management (for example, Oral, 2012 for student teachers). This is less relevant in the context of homework practice. However, it could have been assumed that teachers may be anxious about correcting homework and giving feedback to students, because, for example, correcting essays is a rather complex task. However, this assumption was not confirmed in the present data. In this case, teaching experience could have played a moderating role.

Second, the students’ relational behavior was not stressed as an important factor influencing the teachers’ emotions. In this regard, the data collection method may have played a role. Previous studies have revealed that relational behavior is an important antecedent of teachers’ emotions when measured by a questionnaire, but it is stressed less often when teachers are asked directly about concrete, emotion-laden situations (e.g., Hagenauer and Hascher, 2018 ). Therefore, relational aspects may be less explicit than, for example, socio-emotional behaviors and thus, harder to explicitly describe and reflect on. However, recent research has shown the importance of teacher–student relationships in behavior and well-being ( Roorda et al., 2011 ; Spilt et al., 2011 ). Consequently, the perception that high-quality, goal-oriented homework is likely to affect the quality of teacher–student relationships ( Wentzel, 2012 ; Wettstein and Raufelder, 2021 ) should not be ignored. Future research may use additional methods (e.g., intensive longitudinal methods such as diaries or experience sampling) to explore this link in depth ( Goetz et al., 2016 ).

Third, concerning the factors that trigger emotions, the results show, in accordance with Frenzel’s model on teachers’ emotions ( Frenzel, 2014 ) that the emotions related to homework practice are also triggered primarily by the behavior of the students. This implies that the model can also be applied well to the specific area of a teachers’ responsibility, namely homework practice. Yet, the results also show that teacher-determined and contextual factors are responsible for teachers’ emotions as well. These findings underscore that teachers set high standards for their professional practices. Depending on their evaluation of whether they meet the standards (e.g., by assigning differentiated homework) or not (e.g., by assigning too much homework), they experience either positive or negative emotions. Thus, teachers evaluate their students’ behavior and critically evaluate their own professional behavior simultaneously. This finding supports the idea that the teaching profession demands high moral standards—both in general ( De Ruyter and Kole, 2010 ) and in terms of homework practices—which leads to guilt among teachers who feel they do not meet them.

Furthermore, the findings also show that the wider context needs to be considered when discussing the emotional value of homework practices. This is reasonable, as contextual factors (e.g., the [lack of] support at home) influence whether teachers can achieve their goals. Previous research has repeatedly shown that how parents support their children is significantly related to homework behavior and student achievement ( Pomerantz and Eaton, 2001 ; Moroni et al., 2015 ). However, school-level (e.g., a place to do homework at school) and system-level contextual factors (e.g., the number of lessons per week) also influence homework practices and ultimately affect teachers’ emotions.

7.1. Strengths, limitations, and future research

Based on an explorative approach, the present study has shown that teachers’ emotions can also be examined context-specifically for the teacher’s area of responsibility “homework practice.” Following the results, the model of teachers’ emotions ( Frenzel, 2014 ), which specifies the antecedents of teachers’ emotions, can be transferred to teachers’ emotions related to homework practice, but additionally, it should be extended to include further antecedents at the teachers’ level and at the context level. Through the exploratory approach the diversity of teachers’ emotions in the homework process could be illustrated and the diverse antecedents of these emotions could be identified in depth.

Still, from an exploratory perspective, the study has some limitations as well. First, the findings represent the experiences of secondary teachers from the canton of Bern. By purposively selecting these cases, we have tried to obtain a selection that is as comprehensive as possible in terms of the school models existing in the canton of Bern. Nevertheless, further quantitative studies need to follow. These studies could test possible differences in the emotional experiences of teachers working in different school models. In our small-scale study, these group differences could not be reliably explored. In addition, further studies based on different samples in different contexts are needed, which would allow a generalization of the results beyond the Swiss (Bernese) context. If such quantitative studies are conducted, when developing measurement instruments, consideration should be given to mapping the diversity of the emotional experiences of teachers. Classical instruments, such as the Teacher Emotions Scales (TES; Frenzel et al., 2016 ) which were developed for teaching in general, may fall short when it comes to the specific context of homework practice. Even if anxiety, anger, and enjoyment (i.e., the core emotions of the TES) are relevant teachers’ emotions related to homework practice, other emotions, such as satisfaction, disappointment, stress, or guilt (including having a guilty conscience) should also be considered in such measurement instruments. Furthermore, the link between teachers’ emotions and homework quality needs further exploration. As a reciprocal relationship can be assumed, a complex longitudinal design needs to be applied. Second, the teachers’ emotions were measured retrospectively. It can be assumed that the teachers mainly described situations that were either very close in time or in which the emotions were experienced intensely ( Heuer and Reisberg, 1992 ). Future studies should therefore also use situational measurements (e.g., experience sampling methods). Another limitation is that the results were based on self-reporting. This can lead to bias; for example, the teachers may have answered in a socially desirable way. We countered this effect by ensuring full anonymity and by creating a trusting environment during the interviews. It must also be mentioned that the subjective assessment of emotions is still a valid way to capture the affective core of emotions, i.e., the subjective feeling that cannot be observed. Nevertheless, if a multicomponent approach to emotions is pursued, future studies can, for example, use further data collection methods, such as physiological measures accounting for the physical arousal of emotions. Finally, it should be noted that the teachers were explicitly asked about their emotions in connection with homework. This has the advantage that teachers have purposefully reflected on their emotions and their antecedents. However, such an approach presupposes a conscious reflection on emotions by the teachers. Another pre-assumption of this study was that emotions occur in the homework process, which is why we opted for the explicit approach to explore teachers’ emotions. For future research, it would be interesting to complement these explicit approaches to capturing emotions with implicit approaches by attempting to reconstruct teachers’ emotional experiences through, for example, narrative interviews.

7.2. Conclusion and practical implications

This study has provided a first insight into the emotional experiences of Swiss secondary teachers teaching German during the homework process and has also identified the multiple influencing conditions of these emotions. On a theoretical level, the results of this study extend the research findings on teachers’ emotions by focusing on homework practices as a specific area of action in the classroom. They enable Frenzel’s (2014) model of teachers’ emotions in the classroom to be differentiated by focusing on this specific aspect of teaching. Overall, the results clearly showed that the homework process is definitely experienced emotionally by teachers. Even though homework is done by students at home, it is still the students and their behavior that are the most emotionally relevant source for teachers’ emotions. This result is due to the fact that the homework process also includes significant teacher–student interactions in class (e.g., homework return and discussion), as well as the fact that student behavior is also visible in the quality of homework completion. Teachers, for example, are happy about the students’ learning progress that they diagnose from the homework, or they are annoyed when the students do not put in enough effort or cheat on homework. However, the demands that teachers place on themselves are also often sources of their emotions (e.g., “inner demands”), and contextual factors also influence their emotional experience (e.g., experiencing pity due to unfavorable conditions at home).

From a practical point of view, the results provide some implications for teacher education and training in Switzerland. First and foremost, pre-service teachers should acquire basic knowledge about the development of emotions and their influence on teaching and learning. In-service teachers should also be sensitized to this through professional development programs. For example, a training program developed by Carstensen et al. (2019) focusses specifically on fostering teachers’ socio-emotional competencies. If teachers develop socio-emotional competencies, they are more likely to recognize automatic patterns of action that occur due to their own emotions and thus will be better able to interrupt negative spirals that can arise from them. This could have a positive impact on the quality of the homework they assign and subsequently the behavior of the students. Teachers who can regulate their emotions appropriately (e.g., by applying cognitive reappraisal when students do not hand in their homework) are less likely to let their emotional reactions interfere with their professional teaching behavior.

These skills also have an impact on building and maintaining meaningful teacher–student relationships ( Carstensen et al., 2019 ), which positively influence the students’ engagement and achievement ( Roorda et al., 2011 ). Previous research has shown that cheating amongst university students is lower when the instructor is evaluated positively ( Stearns, 2001 ) in terms of teacher–student relationships and enthusiasm ( Orosz et al., 2015 ). Building on these findings, meaningful teacher–student relationships might decrease the triggers of negative teachers’ emotions, as students who are satisfied with their teachers are less likely to cheat on, copy, or lie about their homework and complete it more reliably.

Finally, pre-service and in-service teachers should be specifically trained in assigning high-quality homework. The results of this study demonstrate that positive emotions in teachers can be evoked by their students’ learning progress, learning outcomes, and engagement. Previous studies have shown that homework quality can promote student achievement ( Rosário et al., 2018 ) and engagement ( Trautwein et al., 2006 ). Assigning high-quality homework can have positive effects on both the students’ learning and the teacher’s own emotional experiences. During the training, teachers could also learn how to follow up on completed homework during class, as it was found that being unable to use homework in class leads to negative emotions.

Data availability statement

The dataset presented in this article is not readily availabel because it currently forms an essential part of the first author’s qualification phase. Requests to access the dataset should be directed to CF, [email protected] .

Ethics statement

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

CF conceived, planned, and conducted the study. In addition, CF wrote the first draft of the manuscript. GH and SM were closely involved in the process and contributed to the revision of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2023.1239443/full#supplementary-material

An, S., Ji, L.-J., Marks, M., and Zhang, Z. (2017). Two sides of emotion: exploring positivity and negativity in six basic emotions across cultures. Front. Psychol. 8, 1–14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00610

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Anttila, H., Pyhältö, K., Soini, T., and Pietarinen, J. (2016). How does it feel to become a teacher? Emotions in teacher education. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 19, 451–473. doi: 10.1007/s11218-016-9335-0

Baş, G., Şentürk, C., and Ciğerci, F. M. (2017). Homework and academic achievement: a meta-analytic review of research. Issues Educ. Res. 27, 31–50.

Google Scholar

Becker, E. S., Goetz, T., Morger, V., and Ranellucci, J. (2014). The importance of teachers' emotions and instructional behavior for their students' emotions – An experience sampling analysis. Teach. Teach. Educ. 43, 15–26. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2014.05.002

Becker, E. S., Keller, M. M., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., and Taxer, J. L. (2015). Antecedents of teachers' emotions in the classroom: An intraindividual approach. Front. Psychol. 6:635. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00635

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Berger, F., Schreiner, C., Hagleitner, W., Jesacher-Rößler, L., Roßnagl, S., and Kraler, C. (2021). Predicting coping with self-regulated distance learning in times of COVID-19: evidence from a longitudinal study. Front. Psychol. 12:701255. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.701255

Brennan, R. L., and Prediger, D. J. (1981). Coefficient kappa: some uses, misuses, and alternatives. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 41, 687–699. doi: 10.1177/001316448104100307

Breyer, B., and Bluemke, M. (2016). Deutsche version der positive and negative affect schedule PANAS (GESIS panel). Zusammenstellung Sozialwissenschaftlicher Items Skalen . doi: 10.6102/zis242

Burić, I., and Frenzel, A. C. (2021). Teacher emotional labour, instructional strategies, and students' academic engagement: a multilevel analysis. Teach. Teach. 27, 335–352. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2020.1740194

Carstensen, B., Köller, M., and Klusmann, U. (2019). Förderung sozial-emotionaler Kompetenz von angehenden Lehrkräften. Zeitschrift Für Entwicklungspsychologie Pädagogische Psychologie 51, 1–15. doi: 10.1026/0049-8637/a000205

Chang, M.-L. (2009). An appraisal perspective of teacher burnout: examining the emotional work of teachers. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 21, 193–218. doi: 10.1007/s10648-009-9106-y

Chang, M.-L. (2020). Emotion display rules, emotion regulation, and teacher burnout. Front. Educ. 5:90. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2020.00090

Chen, J. (2019). Exploring the impact of teacher emotions on their approaches to teaching: a structural equation modelling approach. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 89, 57–74. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12220

Chen, J. (2020). Teacher emotions in their professional lives: implications for teacher development. Asia Pac. J. Teach. Educ. 48, 491–507. doi: 10.1080/1359866X.2019.1669139

Cooper, H. (1989). Homework . New York: Longman.

Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., and Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Rev. Educ. Res. 76, 1–62. doi: 10.3102/00346543076001001

De Ruyter, D. J., and Kole, J. J. (2010). Our teachers want to be the best: on the necessity of intra-professional reflection about moral ideals of teaching. Teach. Teach. , 16, 207–218. doi: 10.1080/13540600903478474

Dettmers, S., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., and Pekrun, R. (2011). Students’ emotions during homework in mathematics: testing a theoretical model of antecedents and achievement outcomes. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 36, 25–35. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.10.001

Dettmers, S., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Kunter, M., and Baumert, J. (2010). Homework works if homework quality is high: using multilevel modeling to predict the development of achievement in mathematics. J. Educ. Psychol. 102, 467–482. doi: 10.1037/a0018453

Dettmers, S., Yotyodying, S., and Jonkmann, K. (2019). Antecedents and outcomes of parental homework involvement: how do family-school partnerships affect parental homework involvement and student outcomes? Front. Psychol. 10:1048. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01048

DiStefano, M., O’Brien, B., Storozuk, A., Ramirez, G., and Maloney, E. A. (2020). Exploring math anxious parents’ emotional experience surrounding math homework-help. Int. J. Educ. Res. 99:101526. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2019.101526

Dreer, B. (2021). Teachers’ well-being and job satisfaction: the important role of positive emotions in the workplace. Educ. Stud. 1–17, 1–17. doi: 10.1080/03055698.2021.1940872

Dumont, H., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Neumann, M., Niggli, A., and Schnyder, I. (2012). Does parental homework involvement mediate the relationship between family background and educational outcomes? Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 37, 55–69. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.09.004

Ellsworth, P. C., and Scherer, K. R. (2003). “Appraisal processes in emotion” in Series in affective science. Handbook of affective sciences . eds. R. J. Davidson, H. H. Goldsmith, and K. R. Scherer (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 572–595.

Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., and Hejmadi, A. (2008). Mother and child emotions during mathematics homework. Math. Think. Learn. 10, 5–35. doi: 10.1080/10986060701818644

Epstein, J. L., and van Voorhis, F. L. (2012). “The changing debate: from assigning homework to designing homework” in Contemporary debates in childhood education and development . ed. S. Suggate (London: Routledge), 263–273.

Fan, H., Xu, J., Cai, Z., He, J., and Fan, X. (2017). Homework and students' achievement in math and science: a 30-year meta-analysis, 1986–2015. Educ. Res. Rev. 20, 35–54. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.003

Fernández-Alonso, R., Woitschach, P., Álvarez-Díaz, M., González-López, A. M., Cuesta, M., and Muñiz, J. (2019). Homework and academic achievement in Latin America: a multilevel approach. Front. Psychol. 10:95. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00095

Flunger, B., Trautwein, U., Nagengast, B., Lüdtke, O., Niggli, A., and Schnyder, I. (2015). The Janus-faced nature of time spent on homework: using latent profile analyses to predict academic achievement over a school year. Learn. Instr. 39, 97–106. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.05.008

Forsberg, L. (2007). Homework as serious family business: power and subjectivity in negotiations about school assignments in Swedish families. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 28, 209–222. doi: 10.1080/01425690701192695

Frenzel, A. C. (2014). “Teacher emotions” in Educational psychology handbook series. International handbook of emotions in education . eds. R. Pekrun and L. Linnenbrink-Garcia (New York: Routledge), 494–519.

Frenzel, A. C., Daniels, L., and Burić, I. (2021). Teacher emotions in the classroom and their implications for students. Educ. Psychol. 56, 250–264. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2021.1985501

Frenzel, A. C., Fiedler, D., Marx, A. K. G., Reck, C., and Pekrun, R. (2020). Who enjoys teaching, and when? Between- and within-person evidence on teachers' appraisal-emotion links. Front. Psychol. 11:1092. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01092

Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., and Sutton, R. E. (2009a). Emotional transmission in the classroom: exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. J. Educ. Psychol. 101, 705–716. doi: 10.1037/a0014695

Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Stephens, E. J., and Jacob, B. (2009b). “Antecedents and effects of teachers' emotional experiences: An integrated perspective and empirical test” in Advances in teacher emotion research: The impact on teachers' lives . eds. P. A. Schutz and M. Zembylas (New York: Springer), 129–151.

Frenzel, A. C., Götz, T., and Pekrun, R. (2008). “Ursachen und Wirkungen von Lehreremotionen: Ein Modell zur reziproken Beeinflussung von Lehrkräften und Klassenmerkmalen” in Lehrerexpertise: Analyse und Bedeutung unterrichtlichen Handelns . ed. M. Gläser-Zikuda (Münster: Waxmann), 187–209.

Frenzel, A. C., Götz, T., and Pekrun, R. (2015). “Emotionen” in Pädagogische Psychologie . eds. E. Wild and J. Möller. 2. Auflage ed (Berlin Heidelberg: Springer), 201–224.

Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Daniels, L. M., Durksen, T. L., Becker-Kurz, B., et al. (2016). Measuring teachers' enjoyment, anger, and anxiety: the teacher emotions scales (TES). Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 46, 148–163. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.05.003

Fried, L., Mansfield, C., and Dobozy, E. (2015). Teacher emotion research: introducing a conceptual model to guide future research. Issues Educ. Res. 25, 415–441.

Fuss, S., and Karbach, U. (2019). Grundlagen der Transkription: Eine praktische Einführung . 2nd Edn. Opladen Toronto: Barbara Budrich.

Georgiou, S. N., Christou, C., Stavrinides, P., and Panaoura, G. (2002). Teacher attributions of student failure and teacher behavior toward the failing student. Psychol. Sch. 39, 583–595. doi: 10.1002/pits.10049

Goetz, T., Bieg, M., and Hall, N. C. (2016). “Assessing academic emotions via the experience sampling method” in Methodological advances in research on emotion and education . eds. M. Zembylas and P. A. Schutz (Stuttgart: Springer), 245–258.

Goetz, T., Cronjaeger, H., Frenzel, A. C., Lüdtke, O., and Hall, N. C. (2010). Academic self-concept and emotion relations: domain specificity and age effects. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 35, 44–58. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.10.001

Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., and Hall, N. C. (2006). The domain specificity of academic emotional experiences. J. Exp. Educ. 75, 5–29. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.75.1.5-29

Goetz, T., Nett, U. E., Martiny, S. E., Hall, N. C., Pekrun, R., Dettmers, S., et al. (2012). Students' emotions during homework: structures, self-concept antecedents, and achievement outcomes. Learn. Individ. Differ. 22, 225–234. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2011.04.006

Hagenauer, G., and Hascher, T. (2018). Bedingungsfaktoren und Funktionen von Emotionen von Lehrpersonen im Unterricht. Unterrichtswissenschaft 46, 141–164. doi: 10.1007/s42010-017-0010-8

Hagenauer, G., Hascher, T., and Volet, S. E. (2015). Teacher emotions in the classroom: associations with students' engagement, classroom discipline and the interpersonal teacher-student relationship. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 30, 385–403. doi: 10.1007/s10212-015-0250-0

Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotional practice of teaching. Teach. Teach. Educ. 14, 835–854. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00025-0

Hascher, T., and Waber, J. (2021). Teacher well-being: a systematic review of the research literature from the year 2000–2019. Educ. Res. Rev. 34:100411. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100411

Heuer, F., and Reisberg, D. (1992). “Emotion, arousal, and memory for detail” in The handbook of emotion and memory: Research and theory . ed. S.-Å. Christianson (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum), 151–180.

Keller, M. M., Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Pekrun, R., and Hensley, L. (2014). “Exploring teacher emotions: a literature review and an experience sampling study” in Teacher motivation: Theory and practice . eds. P. W. Richardson, H. M. G. Watt, and S. A. Karabenick (New York: Routledge), 69–82.

Keller, M. M., and Lazarides, R. (2021). “Effekte von Lehreremotionen auf Unterrichtsgestaltung und Schüleremotionen: Eine Tagebuchstudie im Fach Mathematik” in Emotionen in Schule und Unterricht: Bedingungen und Auswirkungen von Emotionen bei Lehrkräften und Lernenden . eds. C. Rubach and R. Lazarides (Opladen Berlin Toronto: Barbara Budrich), 108–127.

Kleinginna, P. R., and Kleinginna, A. M. (1981). A categorized list of emotion definitions, with suggestions for a consensual definition. Motiv. Emot. 5, 345–379. doi: 10.1007/BF00992553

Knollmann, M., and Wild, E. (2007). Quality of parental support and students' emotions during homework: moderating effects of students' motivational orientations. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 22, 63–76. doi: 10.1007/BF03173689

Kuckartz, U. (2010). Einführung in die computergestützte Analyse qualitativer Daten . 3rd Edn. Wiesbaden: VS.

Landis, J. R., and Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33, 159–174. doi: 10.2307/2529310

Mayring, P. (2017). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution . Klagenfurt: Beltz.

Mevarech, Z. R., and Maskit, D. (2015). The teaching experience and the emotions it evokes. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 18, 241–253. doi: 10.1007/s11218-014-9286-2

Moè, A., and Katz, I. (2018). Brief research report: parents’ homework emotions favor students’ homework emotions through self-efficacy. J. Exp. Educ. 86, 597–609. doi: 10.1080/00220973.2017.1409180

Moroni, S., Dumont, H., Trautwein, U., Niggli, A., and Baeriswyl, F. (2015). The need to distinguish between quantity and quality in research on parental involvement: the example of parental help with homework. J. Educ. Res. 108, 417–431. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2014.901283

Oral, B. (2012). Student Teachers' classroom management anxiety: a study on behavior management and teaching management. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 42, 2901–2916. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00966.x

Orosz, G., Tóth-Király, I., Bőthe, B., Kusztor, A., Kovács, Z. Ü., and Jánvári, M. (2015). Teacher enthusiasm: a potential cure of academic cheating. Front. Psychol. 6:318. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00318

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., and Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in Students' self-regulated learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educ. Psychol. 37, 91–105. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4

Pekrun, R., and Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2012). “Academic emotions and student engagement” in Handbook of research on student engagement . eds. S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie (New York: Springer), 259–282.

Pekrun, R., and Marsh, H. W. (2022). Research on situated motivation and emotion: Progress and open problems. Learn. Instr. 81:101664. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101664

Pekrun, R., Marsh, H. W., Elliot, A. J., Stockinger, K., Perry, R. P., Vogl, E., et al. (2023). A three-dimensional taxonomy of achievement emotions. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 124, 145–178. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000448

Pelikan, E. R., Lüftenegger, M., Holzer, J., Korlat, S., Spiel, C., and Schober, B. (2021). Learning during COVID-19: the role of self-regulated learning, motivation, and procrastination for perceived competence. Z. Erzieh. 24, 393–418. doi: 10.1007/s11618-021-01002-x

Pomerantz, E. M., and Eaton, M. M. (2001). Maternal intrusive support in the academic context: transactional socialization processes. Dev. Psychol. 37, 174–186. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.37.2.174

Prawatt, R. S., Byers, J. L., and Anderson, A. H. (1983). An attributional analysis of teachers' affective reactions to student success and failure. Am. Educ. Res. J. 20, 137–152. doi: 10.3102/00028312020001137

Reyna, C., and Weiner, B. (2001). Justice and utility in the classroom: An attributional analysis of the goals of teachers' punishment and intervention strategies. J. Educ. Psychol. 93, 309–319. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.93.2.309

Rodríguez, S., Núñez, J. C., Valle, A., Freire, C., Ferradás, M. D. M., and Rodríguez-Llorente, C. (2019). Relationship between students' prior academic achievement and homework behavioral engagement: the mediating/moderating role of learning motivation. Front. Psychol. 10:1047. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01047

Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., and Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher–student relationships on students' school engagement and achievement. Rev. Educ. Res. 81, 493–529. doi: 10.3102/0034654311421793

Rosário, P., Carlos Núñez, J., Vallejo, G., Nunes, T., Cunha, J., Fuentes, S., et al. (2018). Homework purposes, homework behaviors, and academic achievement. Examining the mediating role of students' perceived homework quality. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 53, 168–180. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.04.001

Scherer, K. R. (2005). What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Soc. Sci. Inf. 44, 695–729. doi: 10.1177/0539018405058216

Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis . London: SAGE.

Schutz, P. A., and Lanehart, S. L. (2002). Introduction: emotions in education. Educ. Psychol. 37, 67–68. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3702_1

Shuman, V., and Scherer, K. R. (2014). “Concepts and structures of emotions” in Educational psychology handbook series. International handbook of emotions in education . eds. R. Pekrun and L. Linnenbrink-Garcia (New York: Routledge), 13–35.

Spilt, J. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., and Thijs, J. T. (2011). Teacher wellbeing: the importance of teacher–student relationships. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 23, 457–477. doi: 10.1007/s10648-011-9170-y

Stearns, S. A. (2001). The student-instructor relationship's effect on academic integrity. Ethics Behav. 11, 275–285. doi: 10.1207/S15327019EB1103_6

Sutton, R. E. (2005). Teachers' emotions and classroom effectiveness: implications from recent research. Clear. House 78, 229–234. doi: 10.2307/30189914

Sutton, R. E. (2007). “Teachers' anger, frustration, and self-regulation” in Emotion in education . eds. P. A. Schutz and R. Pekrun (Amsterdam: Academic Press), 259–274.

Sutton, R. E., and Wheatley, K. F. (2003). Teachers' emotions and teaching: a review of the literature and directions for future research. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 4, 327–358. doi: 10.1023/A:1026131715856

Trautwein, U., Köller, O., and Baumert, J. (2001). Lieber oft als viel: Hausaufgaben und die Entwicklung von Leistung und Interesse im Mathematik-Unterricht der 7. Jahrgangsstufe. Zeitschrift Pädagogik 47, 703–724. doi: 10.25656/01:4310

Trautwein, U., Köller, O., Schmitz, B., and Baumert, J. (2002). Do homework assignments enhance achievement? A multilevel analysis in 7th-grade mathematics. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 27, 26–50. doi: 10.1006/ceps.2001.1084

Trautwein, U., and Lüdtke, O. (2007). Students' self-reported effort and time on homework in six school subjects: between-students differences and within-student variation. J. Educ. Psychol. 99, 432–444. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.432

Trautwein, U., and Lüdtke, O. (2008). “Die Förderung der Selbstregulation durch Hausaufgaben: Herausforderungen und Chancen” in Kompetenz-Bildung: Soziale, emotionale und kommunikative Kompetenzen von Kindern und Jugendlichen . eds. C. Rohlfs, M. Harring, and C. Palentien (Wiesbaden: VS), 239–251.

Trautwein, U., and Lüdtke, O. (2009). Predicting homework motivation and homework effort in six school subjects: the role of person and family characteristics, classroom factors, and school track. Learn. Instr. 19, 243–258. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.001

Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Schnyder, I., and Niggli, A. (2006). Predicting homework effort: support for a domain-specific, multilevel homework model. J. Educ. Psychol. 98, 438–456. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.438

Trautwein, U., Niggli, A., Schnyder, I., and Lüdtke, O. (2009a). Between-teacher differences in homework assignments and the development of students’ homework effort, homework emotions, and achievement. J. Educ. Psychol. 101, 176–189. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.101.1.176

Trautwein, U., Schnyder, I., Niggli, A., Neumann, M., and Lüdtke, O. (2009b). Chameleon effects in homework research: the homework–achievement association depends on the measures used and the level of analysis chosen. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 34, 77–88. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.09.001

Wentzel, K. R. (2012). Teacher-student relationships and adolescent competence at school. In T. Wubbels, P. Brokden, J. Tartwijkvan, and J. Levy (Eds.), Advances in learning environments research: Vol. 3. Interpersonal relationships in education: An overview of contemporary research . Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. (pp. 19–35).

Wettstein, A., and Raufelder, D. (2021). “Beziehungs- und Interaktionsqualität im Unterricht” in Soziale Eingebundenheit. Sozialbeziehungen im Fokus von Schule und Lehrer*innenbildung . eds. G. Hagenauer and D. Raufelder (Münster: Waxmann), 17–31.

Wu, Z., and Chen, J. (2018). Teachers' emotional experience: insights from Hong Kong primary schools. Asia Pac. Educ. Rev. 19, 531–541. doi: 10.1007/s12564-018-9553-6

Xu, J. (2022). Individual and class-level factors for students' management of homework environment: the self-regulation perspective. Curr. Psychol. 1–15, 1–15. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-02596-5

Xu, J., Du, J., Cunha, J., and Rosário, P. (2021). Student perceptions of homework quality, autonomy support, effort, and math achievement: testing models of reciprocal effects. Teach. Teach. Educ. 108:103508. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2021.103508

Keywords: teachers’ emotions, homework, secondary school, qualitative content analysis, interviews, emotional antecedents

Citation: Feiss C, Hagenauer G and Moroni S (2023) “I feel enthusiastic, when the homework is done well”: teachers’ emotions related to homework and their antecedents. Front. Educ . 8:1239443. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1239443

Received: 13 June 2023; Accepted: 18 July 2023; Published: 03 August 2023.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2023 Feiss, Hagenauer and Moroni. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Christine Feiss, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

share this!

August 16, 2021

Is it time to get rid of homework? Mental health experts weigh in

by Sara M Moniuszko

It's no secret that kids hate homework. And as students grapple with an ongoing pandemic that has had a wide-range of mental health impacts, is it time schools start listening to their pleas over workloads?

Some teachers are turning to social media to take a stand against homework .

Tiktok user @misguided.teacher says he doesn't assign it because the "whole premise of homework is flawed."

For starters, he says he can't grade work on "even playing fields" when students' home environments can be vastly different.

"Even students who go home to a peaceful house, do they really want to spend their time on busy work? Because typically that's what a lot of homework is, it's busy work," he says in the video that has garnered 1.6 million likes. "You only get one year to be 7, you only got one year to be 10, you only get one year to be 16, 18."

Mental health experts agree heavy work loads have the potential do more harm than good for students, especially when taking into account the impacts of the pandemic. But they also say the answer may not be to eliminate homework altogether.

Emmy Kang, mental health counselor at Humantold, says studies have shown heavy workloads can be "detrimental" for students and cause a "big impact on their mental, physical and emotional health."

"More than half of students say that homework is their primary source of stress, and we know what stress can do on our bodies," she says, adding that staying up late to finish assignments also leads to disrupted sleep and exhaustion.

Cynthia Catchings, a licensed clinical social worker and therapist at Talkspace, says heavy workloads can also cause serious mental health problems in the long run, like anxiety and depression.

And for all the distress homework causes, it's not as useful as many may think, says Dr. Nicholas Kardaras, a psychologist and CEO of Omega Recovery treatment center.

"The research shows that there's really limited benefit of homework for elementary age students, that really the school work should be contained in the classroom," he says.

For older students, Kang says homework benefits plateau at about two hours per night.

"Most students, especially at these high-achieving schools, they're doing a minimum of three hours, and it's taking away time from their friends from their families, their extracurricular activities. And these are all very important things for a person's mental and emotional health."

Catchings, who also taught third to 12th graders for 12 years, says she's seen the positive effects of a no homework policy while working with students abroad.

"Not having homework was something that I always admired from the French students (and) the French schools, because that was helping the students to really have the time off and really disconnect from school ," she says.

The answer may not be to eliminate homework completely, but to be more mindful of the type of work students go home with, suggests Kang, who was a high-school teacher for 10 years.

"I don't think (we) should scrap homework, I think we should scrap meaningless, purposeless busy work-type homework. That's something that needs to be scrapped entirely," she says, encouraging teachers to be thoughtful and consider the amount of time it would take for students to complete assignments.

The pandemic made the conversation around homework more crucial

Mindfulness surrounding homework is especially important in the context of the last two years. Many students will be struggling with mental health issues that were brought on or worsened by the pandemic, making heavy workloads even harder to balance.

"COVID was just a disaster in terms of the lack of structure. Everything just deteriorated," Kardaras says, pointing to an increase in cognitive issues and decrease in attention spans among students. "School acts as an anchor for a lot of children, as a stabilizing force, and that disappeared."

But even if students transition back to the structure of in-person classes, Kardaras suspects students may still struggle after two school years of shifted schedules and disrupted sleeping habits.

"We've seen adults struggling to go back to in-person work environments from remote work environments. That effect is amplified with children because children have less resources to be able to cope with those transitions than adults do," he explains.

'Get organized' ahead of back-to-school

In order to make the transition back to in-person school easier, Kang encourages students to "get good sleep, exercise regularly (and) eat a healthy diet."

To help manage workloads, she suggests students "get organized."

"There's so much mental clutter up there when you're disorganized... sitting down and planning out their study schedules can really help manage their time," she says.

Breaking assignments up can also make things easier to tackle.

"I know that heavy workloads can be stressful, but if you sit down and you break down that studying into smaller chunks, they're much more manageable."

If workloads are still too much, Kang encourages students to advocate for themselves.

"They should tell their teachers when a homework assignment just took too much time or if it was too difficult for them to do on their own," she says. "It's good to speak up and ask those questions. Respectfully, of course, because these are your teachers. But still, I think sometimes teachers themselves need this feedback from their students."

©2021 USA Today Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Report outlines a path to prosperity for planet and people if Earth's critical resources are better shared

8 hours ago

Smartphone-based microscope rapidly reconstructs 3D holograms

10 hours ago

Observational study supports century-old theory that challenges the Big Bang

Clovis people used Great Lakes camp annually about 13,000 years ago, researchers confirm

Human 'molecular map' contributes to the understanding of disease mechanisms

JunoCam spots new volcano on active Io

11 hours ago

Spiny mice point the way to new path in social neuroscience

Team develops new tool to map fossil fuel emissions from space

NASA scientists recreate Mars's spider-shaped geologic formations in lab for the first time

Newly discovered antimicrobial could prevent or treat cholera

12 hours ago

Relevant PhysicsForums posts

Are excuses for academic parties getting thinner or is it just me.

Sep 7, 2024

AAPT 2024 Summer Meeting Boston, MA (July 2024) - are you going?

Sep 2, 2024

RIP Edward "Joe" Redish (1942 - 2024), Physics Education

Incandescent bulbs in teaching.

Aug 21, 2024

How to explain Bell's theorem to non-scientists

Aug 18, 2024

Free Abstract Algebra curriculum in Urdu and Hindi

Aug 17, 2024

More from STEM Educators and Teaching

Related Stories

Smartphones are lowering student's grades, study finds

Aug 18, 2020

Doing homework is associated with change in students' personality

Oct 6, 2017

Scholar suggests ways to craft more effective homework assignments

Oct 1, 2015

Should parents help their kids with homework?

Aug 29, 2019

How much math, science homework is too much?

Mar 23, 2015

Anxiety, depression, burnout rising as college students prepare to return to campus

Jul 26, 2021

Recommended for you

Virtual learning linked to rise in chronic absenteeism, study finds

Sep 5, 2024

AI tools like ChatGPT popular among students who struggle with concentration and attention

Aug 28, 2024

Researchers find academic equivalent of a Great Gatsby Curve in science mentorships

Aug 27, 2024

More academic freedom leads to more innovation, reports study

Statistical analysis can detect when ChatGPT is used to cheat on multiple-choice chemistry exams

Aug 14, 2024

Larger teams in academic research worsen career prospects, study finds

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

The effects of teachers' homework follow-up practices on students' EFL performance: a randomized-group design

Affiliations.

• 1 Departamento de Psicologia Aplicada, Escola de Psicologia, Universidade do Minho Braga, Portugal.
• 2 Departamento de Psicologia, Universidad de Oviedo Oviedo, Spain.
• 3 Vicerrectoría Académica, Universidad Central de Chile Santiago de Chile, Chile ; Facultad de Educación, Universidad Autónoma de Chile Santiago de Chile, Chile.
• PMID: 26528204
• PMCID: PMC4603246
• DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01528

This study analyzed the effects of five types of homework follow-up practices (i.e., checking homework completion; answering questions about homework; checking homework orally; checking homework on the board; and collecting and grading homework) used in class by 26 teachers of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) using a randomized-group design. Once a week, for 6 weeks, the EFL teachers used a particular type of homework follow-up practice they had previously been assigned to. At the end of the 6 weeks students completed an EFL exam as an outcome measure. The results showed that three types of homework follow-up practices (i.e., checking homework orally; checking homework on the board; and collecting and grading homework) had a positive impact on students' performance, thus highlighting the role of EFL teachers in the homework process. The effect of EFL teachers' homework follow-up practices on students' performance was affected by students' prior knowledge, but not by the number of homework follow-up sessions.

Keywords: English as a Foreign Language (EFL); academic performance; homework; teachers' practices; types of homework follow-up.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• "Homework Feedback Is…": Elementary and Middle School Teachers' Conceptions of Homework Feedback. Cunha J, Rosário P, Núñez JC, Nunes AR, Moreira T, Nunes T. Cunha J, et al. Front Psychol. 2018 Feb 6;9:32. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00032. eCollection 2018. Front Psychol. 2018. PMID: 29467687 Free PMC article.
• The predicting role of EFL teachers' immediacy behaviors in students' willingness to communicate and academic engagement. Hu L, Wang Y. Hu L, et al. BMC Psychol. 2023 Oct 7;11(1):318. doi: 10.1186/s40359-023-01378-x. BMC Psychol. 2023. PMID: 37805631 Free PMC article.
• Unpacking Chinese EFL Students' Academic Engagement and Psychological Well-Being: The Roles of Language Teachers' Affective Scaffolding. Pan Z, Wang Y, Derakhshan A. Pan Z, et al. J Psycholinguist Res. 2023 Oct;52(5):1799-1819. doi: 10.1007/s10936-023-09974-z. Epub 2023 May 30. J Psycholinguist Res. 2023. PMID: 37249799
• On the Role of EFL/ESL Teachers' Emotion Regulation in Students' Academic Engagement. Wang F, Ye Z. Wang F, et al. Front Psychol. 2021 Oct 6;12:758860. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.758860. eCollection 2021. Front Psychol. 2021. PMID: 34690902 Free PMC article. Review.
• EFL Students' L2 Achievement: The Role of Teachers' Organizational Commitment and Loving Pedagogy. Ye D, Sun S, Zhao D. Ye D, et al. Front Psychol. 2022 Jul 6;13:937624. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.937624. eCollection 2022. Front Psychol. 2022. PMID: 35874384 Free PMC article. Review.
• The impact of three types of writing intervention on students' writing quality. Rosário P, Högemann J, Núñez JC, Vallejo G, Cunha J, Rodríguez C, Fuentes S. Rosário P, et al. PLoS One. 2019 Jul 18;14(7):e0218099. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218099. eCollection 2019. PLoS One. 2019. PMID: 31318868 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
• Students' Achievement and Homework Assignment Strategies. Fernández-Alonso R, Álvarez-Díaz M, Suárez-Álvarez J, Muñiz J. Fernández-Alonso R, et al. Front Psychol. 2017 Mar 7;8:286. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00286. eCollection 2017. Front Psychol. 2017. PMID: 28326046 Free PMC article.
• Homework Involvement and Academic Achievement of Native and Immigrant Students. Suárez N, Regueiro B, Epstein JL, Piñeiro I, Díaz SM, Valle A. Suárez N, et al. Front Psychol. 2016 Oct 4;7:1517. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01517. eCollection 2016. Front Psychol. 2016. PMID: 27757097 Free PMC article.
• Academic Goals, Student Homework Engagement, and Academic Achievement in Elementary School. Valle A, Regueiro B, Núñez JC, Rodríguez S, Piñeiro I, Rosário P. Valle A, et al. Front Psychol. 2016 Mar 31;7:463. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00463. eCollection 2016. Front Psychol. 2016. PMID: 27065928 Free PMC article.
• Bang H. (2011). What makes it easy or hard for you to do your homework? An account of newcomer immigrant youths' afterschool academic lives. Curr. Issues Educ. 14, 1–26.
• Benjamini Y., Hochberg Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B 57, 289–300.
• Buijs M., Admiraal W. (2013). Homework assignments to enhance student engagement in secondary education. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 28, 767–779. 10.1007/s10212-012-0139-0 - DOI
• Cardelle M., Corno L. (1981). Effects on second language learning of variations in written feedback on homework assignments. TESOL Q. 15, 251–261. 10.2307/3586751 - DOI
• Cooper H. (1989). Synthesis of research on homework. Educ. Leadersh. 47, 85–91.

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Europe PubMed Central
• Frontiers Media SA
• PubMed Central

Other Literature Sources

• scite Smart Citations

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

• < Previous

Home > Dissertations > 164

Dissertations

Teachers' perceptions of homework's effects on english learners.

Peggy Smith , Brandman University Follow

Date of Award

Spring 4-4-2018

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Education (EdD)

Organizational Leadership

First Advisor

Dr. Guadalupe Solis

Second Advisor

Dr. Keith Larick

Third Advisor

Dr. Alan Enomoto

Purpose: Homework is an educational practice that has been implemented for many years. Research has shown that homework can have stringent effects on the well-being of students. To date, much of the research discusses the students’ and parents’ point of view on homework’s effects. Although teachers are the practitioners that develop and implement this practice, there is a dearth of research on teacher’s perspectives of homework’s effects on the well-being of students. Even less research has been carried out on teachers’ perspectives of homework’s effects on the well-being of English Learner Students. Since the goal of education is to provide all students with a quality education, it is imperative that teachers reflect on and utilize educational practices that promote positive outcomes for English Learners as well as mainstream students. Thus, the purpose of this qualitative phenomenological study was to describe and explain elementary school teachers’ perceptions of homework’s effects on the emotional and physical well-being of English Learners.

Methodology: This phenomenological qualitative study utilized in-depth interviews and artifacts to discover teachers’ perceptions of homework’s effects on English Learners. Thirteen elementary school teachers in the South San Joaquin Valley of California were selected to participate in the study via purposeful sampling. An interview script derived from the research questions was used to draw out the teachers’ perceptions. The participants were digitally recorded and given transcripts to review for accuracy. Triangulation was achieved through analyzing data from interview transcripts and artifacts.

Findings : Major findings include emotional effects such as frustration, inadequacy, and tension between family members. Some positive effects attributed to EL students with high academic language and parental support are feelings of accomplishment and a higher confidence level.

Conclusions: Many conclusions were drawn based on the major findings. From these findings a list of implications for action were created. One implication for action is to provide teacher development classes on homework including the history of homework and how this educational practice affects all students.

Recommendations: Recommendations for further research are described in Chapter V, including studies that search out the effects of homework from the students’ and parents’ perspective.

Recommended Citation

Smith, Peggy, "Teachers' Perceptions of Homework's Effects on English Learners" (2018). Dissertations . 164. https://digitalcommons.umassglobal.edu/edd_dissertations/164

Since April 19, 2018

Included in

Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Commons

• Collections
• Disciplines

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS

Author Corner

• Submit Research

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

• Student information
• Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

Education scholar Denise Pope has found that too much homework has negative effects on student well-being and behavioral engagement. (Image credit: L.A. Cicero)

A Stanford researcher found that too much homework can negatively affect kids, especially their lives away from school, where family, friends and activities matter.

“Our findings on the effects of homework challenge the traditional assumption that homework is inherently good,” wrote Denise Pope , a senior lecturer at the Stanford Graduate School of Education and a co-author of a study published in the Journal of Experimental Education .

The researchers used survey data to examine perceptions about homework, student well-being and behavioral engagement in a sample of 4,317 students from 10 high-performing high schools in upper-middle-class California communities. Along with the survey data, Pope and her colleagues used open-ended answers to explore the students’ views on homework.

Median household income exceeded $90,000 in these communities, and 93 percent of the students went on to college, either two-year or four-year.

Students in these schools average about 3.1 hours of homework each night.

“The findings address how current homework practices in privileged, high-performing schools sustain students’ advantage in competitive climates yet hinder learning, full engagement and well-being,” Pope wrote.

Pope and her colleagues found that too much homework can diminish its effectiveness and even be counterproductive. They cite prior research indicating that homework benefits plateau at about two hours per night, and that 90 minutes to two and a half hours is optimal for high school.

Their study found that too much homework is associated with:

* Greater stress: 56 percent of the students considered homework a primary source of stress, according to the survey data. Forty-three percent viewed tests as a primary stressor, while 33 percent put the pressure to get good grades in that category. Less than 1 percent of the students said homework was not a stressor.

* Reductions in health: In their open-ended answers, many students said their homework load led to sleep deprivation and other health problems. The researchers asked students whether they experienced health issues such as headaches, exhaustion, sleep deprivation, weight loss and stomach problems.

* Less time for friends, family and extracurricular pursuits: Both the survey data and student responses indicate that spending too much time on homework meant that students were “not meeting their developmental needs or cultivating other critical life skills,” according to the researchers. Students were more likely to drop activities, not see friends or family, and not pursue hobbies they enjoy.

A balancing act

The results offer empirical evidence that many students struggle to find balance between homework, extracurricular activities and social time, the researchers said. Many students felt forced or obligated to choose homework over developing other talents or skills.

Also, there was no relationship between the time spent on homework and how much the student enjoyed it. The research quoted students as saying they often do homework they see as “pointless” or “mindless” in order to keep their grades up.

“This kind of busy work, by its very nature, discourages learning and instead promotes doing homework simply to get points,” Pope said.

She said the research calls into question the value of assigning large amounts of homework in high-performing schools. Homework should not be simply assigned as a routine practice, she said.

“Rather, any homework assigned should have a purpose and benefit, and it should be designed to cultivate learning and development,” wrote Pope.

High-performing paradox

In places where students attend high-performing schools, too much homework can reduce their time to foster skills in the area of personal responsibility, the researchers concluded. “Young people are spending more time alone,” they wrote, “which means less time for family and fewer opportunities to engage in their communities.”

Student perspectives

The researchers say that while their open-ended or “self-reporting” methodology to gauge student concerns about homework may have limitations – some might regard it as an opportunity for “typical adolescent complaining” – it was important to learn firsthand what the students believe.

The paper was co-authored by Mollie Galloway from Lewis and Clark College and Jerusha Conner from Villanova University.

Media Contacts

Denise Pope, Stanford Graduate School of Education: (650) 725-7412, [email protected] Clifton B. Parker, Stanford News Service: (650) 725-0224, [email protected]

School Homework Debate: Exploring Whether Homework is Helpful or Harmful

Lomit Patel

Navigating early decision college applications: a guide, online education trends shaping the future of learning.

The alarm clock screams, signaling the start of another hectic school day. You’re running late, as usual, trying to get everyone dressed, fed, and out the door. As your teen begrudgingly gathers their books, a familiar tension fills the air: the school homework debate rears its head yet again. We all know this scene—the back and forth over unfinished assignments, the last-minute scramble to complete homework assignments, and the frustration simmering on both sides. It begs the question: Is the school homework debate truly beneficial or another free time stressor in an overloaded day?

Table Of Contents:

Understanding the arguments: a two-sided story, time management, not time filling: homework done right, opening the lines of communication: parents, teachers, and students, should schools have homework, the importance of quality over quantity in homework, homework and student well-being, the role of technology in the homework debate, involving parents in the homework equation, navigating the homework battlefield: is it worth the struggle.

The school homework debate is far from new. It has been argued in classrooms, faculty meetings, and living rooms for generations. Educators tout its ability to reinforce learning, while some parents and students view it as an unnecessary burden. The answer, like most things in life, isn’t black and white.

Proponents of the great homework debate highlight its role in cementing classroom concepts. Practice, as they say, makes perfect. By revisiting what they’ve learned independently, students solidify their understanding and develop critical thinking skills from elementary school, middle school, and high school.

Homework can also cultivate good working hard study habits and time management, which are valuable assets as children progress through their academic careers and into college prep. Imagine a student struggling with algebra; that extra practice at home, guided by carefully designed problems, can make the difference between confusion and that “aha” moment of clarity.

On the flip side, critics of the great homework debate argue that it eats into precious family time. After hours spent at school, children need time to decompress, pursue hobbies, and just be kids. Homework can be a major source of stress, leading to arguments, sleep deprivation, and even resentment toward learning.

There’s a reason the image of a frustrated student slumped over a mountain of books resonates with so many. They are burnt out. Excessive homework can lead to students falling behind rather than getting ahead with better grades .

Here’s where the nuance of the school homework debate really comes in: It’s not about the quantity of homework but the quality. We’ve all seen worksheets seemingly designed as busy work, offering little educational value. Effective completing homework should be engaging and purposeful.

Imagine, instead of endless grammar exercises, students embark on a mini research project tied to their history lessons, fueling their curiosity. Or maybe math problems are integrated into a real-life scenario—calculating the cost of a family vacation, for instance, making learning relevant and fun.

It’s about finding the right balance—assigning work that challenges and inspires without overwhelming students. Parents can play a role here, too, by creating a supportive learning environment at home and getting involved in their child’s education.

No, I don’t mean hovering over them with a red pen. Providing a dedicated workspace free of distractions and encouraging breaks when needed will make a huge difference in their productivity and attitude towards learning.

The school homework debate goes beyond worksheets and textbooks. Time management , responsibility, critical thinking—these are life skills honed through structured activities like homework. This learning approach can be particularly helpful for students with learning difficulties, providing additional support and practice.

The key to a successful approach to the school homework debate is communication—open and honest dialogue between teachers, parents, and students. Are assignments consistently taking longer than expected? Let the teacher know. This parents involved feedback allows for adjustments to ensure homework is challenging but manageable.

Openly communicate with your child about their workload, challenges, and achievements, offering encouragement and guidance. Let’s move past the nightly battles and work together, nurturing a love of learning, both inside and outside the classroom.

After all, isn’t that what matters most? Encouraging students to take ownership of their education and develop good study skills will benefit them far beyond their school years.

The debate on whether schools should assign homework is not new. Often discussed at school board meetings, it’s a multifaceted issue with valid points on both sides. To gain a clearer understanding, let’s examine the pros and cons:

When discussing the role of homework, it’s crucial to shift the focus from quantity to quality. Instead of overwhelming students with endless worksheets and rote exercises, the emphasis should be on assignments that are meaningful, engaging, and relevant to their learning.

For instance, a well-designed homework assignment might involve a hands-on project, encouraging creativity and practical application of knowledge. Such assignments foster deeper learning, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills more effectively than traditional, repetitive tasks.

Additionally, incorporating elements of choice and personalization in homework can significantly impact student engagement. Allowing students to select topics within a subject area that genuinely interests them can ignite their curiosity and make learning more enjoyable.

The potential impact of homework on student well-being is a significant aspect of the homework debate. While some argue that homework teaches discipline and time management, others express concern about the potential for stress, anxiety, and sleep deprivation, particularly when homework loads are excessive.

Research on the relationship between homework and student well-being presents mixed findings. Some studies suggest a correlation between moderate amounts of homework and academic achievement, while others indicate that excessive homework can negatively affect students’ physical and mental health. It’s essential to recognize that each student is different; what might be manageable for one student could be overwhelming for another.

Factors such as age, learning styles, and individual circumstances play a role in how students experience homework. Younger children, for example, may require shorter, more engaging assignments, while older students may benefit from more independent, project-based tasks.

The increasing prevalence of technology in education has inevitably influenced the homework debate. Online learning platforms, educational apps, and digital resources have expanded homework possibilities, offering students access to a wealth of information and interactive learning experiences beyond traditional textbooks.

Technology can personalize homework assignments, tailoring them to individual student needs and learning styles. Adaptive learning platforms, for example, adjust the difficulty of exercises based on a student’s performance, providing targeted support and challenges.

However, it’s essential to use technology thoughtfully and avoid simply replicating traditional homework assignments in a digital format. The goal should be to leverage technology to create more engaging, interactive, and personalized learning experiences that enhance, not replace, effective teaching practices.

Parents play a crucial role in supporting their children’s education and navigating the homework landscape. Open communication between parents, teachers, and students is vital to ensure homework is a positive and productive experience.

Parents can foster a supportive learning environment at home by providing a dedicated study space, encouraging regular breaks, and promoting a positive attitude toward learning. However, it’s essential to find a balance between offering support and allowing children to develop their own study habits and problem-solving skills.

Regularly communicating with teachers about their child’s homework progress and any challenges they might be facing can help address issues promptly and make necessary adjustments to the workload or teaching strategies.

The school homework debate is a complex issue with no easy answers. It’s about finding that sweet spot—making sure school work reinforces classroom learning, hones important skills, but doesn’t overshadow the joy of childhood. The conversation is ongoing, and by approaching it with open minds and a collaborative spirit, we can find solutions that work for everyone.  

About Lomit Patel

Related articles.

Back to School Tips for a Smooth, Happy Year

Minecraft Console Commands: The Guide to Level Up Your Game

My coding path.

Take your child from novice to expert. Just follow the path.

Block Coding Courses

Apply your coding skills! Find your passion!

Other Advanced Tynker Courses

Graduate to Python and other text coding languages with Tynker’s advanced elective courses.

• For Authors
• Collaboration
• Privacy Policy

• Conferences & Symposiums

Tools & Methods

How does homework affect students.

Posted by Kenny Gill

Homework is essential in the learning process of all students. It benefits them in managing time, being organized, and thinking beyond the classroom work. When students develop good habits towards homework, they enjoy good grades. The amount of homework given to students has risen by 51 percent. In most cases, this pushes them to order for custom essays online. A lot of homework can be overwhelming, affecting students in negative ways.

How homework affects the psyche of students Homework plays a crucial role in ensuring students succeeds both inside and outside the classroom. The numerous hours they spend in class, on school work, and away from family and friends lead to them experiencing exhaustion. Too much homework leads to students becoming disheartened by the school, and it chips away at their motivation for succeeding.

As a result, homework becomes an uphill battle, which they feel they will never win despite putting an effort. When they continue to find homework difficult, they consider other ways of working on it, such as cheating.

Getting enough time to relax, engage with friends and family members helps the students to have fun, thus, raising their spirit and their psyche on school work.  However, when homework exceeds, it affects their emotional well-being making them sad and unproductive students who would rather cheat their way through school.

As a result, they have to struggle with a lack of enough sleep, loss of weight, stomach problems, headaches, and fatigue. Poor eating habits where students rely on fast foods also occasions as they struggle to complete all their assignments. When combined with lack of physical activity, the students suffer from obesity and other health-related conditions. Also, they experience depression and anxiety. The pressure to attend all classes, finish the much homework, as well as have time to make social connections cripples them.

How can parents help with homework? Being an active parent in the life of your child goes a long way towards promoting the health and well-being of children. Participating in their process of doing homework helps you identify if your child is facing challenges, and provide the much-needed support.

The first step is identifying the problem your child has by establishing whether their homework is too much. In elementary school, students should not spend over twenty minutes on homework while in high school they should spend an average of two hours. If it exceeds these guidelines, then you know that the homework is too much and you need to talk with the teachers.

The other step is ensuring your child focuses on their work by eliminating distractions. Texting with friends, watching videos, and playing video games can distract your child. Next, help them create a homework routine by having a designated area for studying and organizing their time for each activity.

Why it is better to do homework with friends Extracurricular activities such as sports and volunteer work that students engage in are vital. The events allow them to refresh their minds, catch up, and share with friends, and sharpen their communication skills. Homework is better done with friends as it helps them get these benefits. Through working together, interacting, and sharing with friends, their stress reduces.

Working on assignments with friends relaxes the students. It ensures they have the help they need when tackling the work, making even too much homework bearable. Also, it develops their communication skills. Deterioration of communication skills is a prominent reason as to why homework is bad. Too much of it keeps one away from classmates and friends, making it difficult for one to communicate with other people.

Working on homework with friends, however, ensures one learns how to express themselves and solve issues, making one an excellent communicator.

How does a lot of homework affect students’ performance? Burnout is a negative effect of homework. After spending the entire day learning, having to spend more hours doing too much homework lead to burnout. When it occurs, students begin dragging their feet when it comes to working on assignments and in some cases, fail to complete them. Therefore, they end up getting poor grades, which affects their overall performance.

Excessive homework also overshadows active learning, which is essential in the learning process. It encourages active participation of students in analyzing and applying what they learn in class in the real world. As a result, this limits the involvement of parents in the process of learning and children collaboration with friends. Instead, it causes boredom, difficulties for the students to work alongside others, and lack of skills in solving problems.

Should students have homework? Well, this is the question many parents and students ask when they consider these adverse effects of homework. Homework is vital in the learning process of any student. However, in most cases, it has crossed the line from being a tool for learning and becomes a source of suffering for students. With such effects, a balance is necessary to help students learn, remain healthy, and be all rounded individuals in society.

Related Articles:

One Response to How does homework affect students?

Great info and really valuable for teachers and tutors. This is a really very wonderful post. I really appreciate it; this post is very helpful for education.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Top Keywords

Diabetes | Alzheimer’s disease Cancer | Breast cancer | Tumor Blood pressure | Heart Brain | Kidney | Liver | Lung Stress | Pain | Therapy Infection | Inflammation | Injury DNA | RNA | Receptor | Nanoparticles Bacteria | Virus | Plant

See more …

Proofread or Perish: Editing your scientific writing for successful publication

Lab Leader makes software applications for experiment design in life science

Cyagen Biosciences – Helping you choose the right animal model for your research

Labcollector lims and eln for improving productivity in the lab.

Image Cytometer – NucleoCounter® NC-3000™

Recent posts.

• Unlocking new treatments for bone diseases: using PEPITEM to strengthen bones and prevent loss
• The Manikin Challenge: manikin-based simulation in the psychiatry clerkship
• Does UV-B radiation modify gene expression?
• Ferrate technology: an innovative solution for sustainable sewer and wastewater management
• Sleep abnormalities in different clinical stages of psychosis

Teachers Ask Putin to Make Homework Voluntary for Older Students

A group of teachers has asked the Kremlin to free up time for older schoolchildren to set aside homework and receive an education from Moscow's museums and theaters.

President Vladimir Putin and acting Mayor Sergei Sobyanin met with the teachers on Wednesday and agreed to seriously consider their suggestions to make homework voluntary, Interfax reported.

Schoolchildren aged 15 to 16 study six days a week in public schools. Their 37 hours of classwork are supplemented by 20 hours of assigned homework.

By expecting schoolchildren to do so much homework, "we are depriving them of the possibility to take advantage of what Moscow has to offer," said Vita Kirichenko, winner of the 2012 teacher of the year competition.

Learning should be a pleasure for children, considering the educational ambience given to the city by its museums and theaters, educators said during the meeting.

"We suggest letting students choose for themselves the form of self-education that will be most effective in the latter stages of their school life," Kirichenko said.

Sobyanin appeared to embrace the teachers' appeal. "The paradox is that the better the teacher, the less homework they dish out because better teachers have time during lessons to cement schoolchildrens' knowledge," he said. "Weaker teachers have to assign more homework to achieve the same results."

Putin said that although it was a thorny issue, he agreed that overloading children causes them to lose attention and become tired.

"It is extremely important that schoolchildren have free time. Of course, we would like that time to be used to maximum effect, sensibly," Putin said.

The president said that Sobyanin would draft a proposal and send it to the relevant departments to "give them some homework to do."

Sign up for our free weekly newsletter

A Message from The Moscow Times:

Dear readers,

We are facing unprecedented challenges. Russia's Prosecutor General's Office has designated The Moscow Times as an "undesirable" organization, criminalizing our work and putting our staff at risk of prosecution. This follows our earlier unjust labeling as a "foreign agent."

These actions are direct attempts to silence independent journalism in Russia. The authorities claim our work "discredits the decisions of the Russian leadership." We see things differently: we strive to provide accurate, unbiased reporting on Russia.

We, the journalists of The Moscow Times, refuse to be silenced. But to continue our work, we need your help .

Your support, no matter how small, makes a world of difference. If you can, please support us monthly starting from just $ 2. It's quick to set up, and every contribution makes a significant impact.

By supporting The Moscow Times, you're defending open, independent journalism in the face of repression. Thank you for standing with us.

Remind me next month

Russia Jails Exiled Ex-Lawmaker Ponomaryov 10 Years in Absentia

Kursk Region Governor Says Over 150K Civilians Evacuated From Border Areas

U.K. Slaps Fresh Sanctions on Russian 'Shadow Fleet'

Kremlin Believes U.S. Has Authorized Long-Range Ukrainian Strikes on Russia

Advertisement

For premium support please call:

• Subscriptions
• Entertainment
• Home & Garden
• Lighter Side
• Science & Tech

Mom Emails Son's Teacher to Opt Him Out of Homework After He Comes Home with Packet: 'We Are Done'

On TikTok, one mom describes how her son received a 15- to 20-page, double-sided August homework packet on the first day of school

TikToker cayleyxo and her son faced a difficult moment after he came home with homework following his first days of kindergarten

Cayley emailed his teacher, sharing that "we are done" with assignments

Following comments from other parents and educators, the mom shared that she and her son's teacher were able to meet in the middle

For one mom, kindergarten homework was just not working.

In a now-viral TikTok , Arizona-based mom of three, Cayley (known as cayleyxo on social media), explains why she emailed her son's kindergarten teacher at his charter school to opt out of homework assignments. In the video, she describes how her son received a 15- to 20-page, double-sided August homework packet on the first day of school, which stressed him out.

"I sent my son's kindergarten teacher a cutesy little email saying, 'I'm sorry. Based on the stress, mental, physical anxiety it's causing my kid, we are done,' " the mom explains in the TikTok.

She adds that the email came after she and her son tried to work on the homework packet together. On Aug. 26, she had him sit down quietly during breakfast and work on finishing at least one or two pages of the packet because he was behind.

During that moment, Cayley says they both started crying.

"It was an emotional mess. I felt so guilty dropping him off at school," she says. "He didn’t want to be there. For the last two weeks, he told me he doesn’t even like school and doesn’t want to be there anymore, which hurts my mama heart because you’re 5. The only thing you should be worrying about is learning and what time snack time is."

"Work to live, we don’t live to work," she adds, explaining how she wants her kids to love school.

Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE's free daily newsletter to stay up to date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from juicy celebrity news to compelling human interest stories.

d3sign / Getty Images

Related: Teacher's Kind Gesture to Nervous New Kindergarten Parents Brings Tears to Mom's Eyes (Exclusive)

Since posting, Cayley’s video has garnered almost 250,000 views and 1,600 comments from people sharing their reactions to the situation, including teachers offering their thoughts on homework.

"Kindergarten teacher here—it's normal for kids to not like school the first couple of weeks or even months!" one person wrote in the comments. "It’s a big adjustment, especially for kids who have never been to preschool or away from their parents. Hang in there, Mama. He’ll love it once he starts to make friends. As for homework, I agree with you. I never sent home homework unless parents specifically asked me, and I always let them know it was optional. I did, however, tell parents to read a book to their child every day, so that was their only 'homework.' "

"I’m a substitute teacher, and homework is SO outdated and unnecessary! Most teachers at the district I work for have made it a thing of the past, but some are still hanging on. Good for you, though!" another teacher replied.

Other parents also chimed into the conversation, one adding: "My kids get SO much homework. They’re GRADED on it too, starting in 1st grade public school! The pressure on these kids is insane."

"We had kinder orientation tonight and my son’s teacher said “homework! It’s kindergarten, I’m not giving homework. Just read with them.” And I thought “good because we ain’t gonna do it” 😂," another parent said.

On Sept. 7, Cayley posted a follow-up video to the TikTok , revealing that after emailing, the teacher reduced the homework to one page. She also included more interactive assignments like keeping a reading log and practicing sight words.

"I told her I would be up for meeting in the middle and working as a team because that is what we’re here for — the benefit of our children," Cayley says in the video. "This is your sign to maybe say something to your teacher, nicely and politely, if something doesn’t sit right with you at their school."

For more People news, make sure to sign up for our newsletter!

Read the original article on People .

Elections  20 24

Rfk jr. suggests independent support for trump will drop in wake of debate, election certification to take place with tighter security after 2021 attack.

NBC Universal

More than 337,000 people visit Taylor Swift's link to register to vote

In other news, the best and worst moments of the 2024 mtv vmas, katy perry’s defiant vmas speech calls for detractors to log off: ‘there are no decad…, asian shares up on wall st tech boost, dollar extends gains on yen, norfolk southern ceo fired for ‘consensual relationship’ with railroad’s chief legal …, how to fix burnt tomato sauce, according to a chef, pop-tarts has a collab we didn’t see coming, 4 sisters share the same birthday ... but they're not quadruplets, northern lights may be visible in 17 states: where to see forecasted auroras in the u…, shohei ohtani reaches 47-47: dodgers star clobbers hr to continue campaign for 50-50, sources: pac-12 rebuilding conference, targeting boise state, san diego state, fresno…, flash flood emergency for new orleans as francine pounds louisiana: updates, hurricane francis rips across louisiana with powerful winds, flooding rains leaving 4…, related articles.

• Search Please fill out this field.
• Newsletters
• Sweepstakes

New Survey Reveals Teachers Are Unhappy at Work—Here’s How To Support Educators

Experts say there are ways for parents to help.

Perhaps the saddest thing about a new teacher satisfaction survey conducted by ProCare Therapy , a school therapy and teacher staffing agency, is that no one will be surprised to learn just how unhappy today’s educators are .

Of course, we all have anecdotes about how schools are understaffed and teacher turnover seems higher than ever. But the data from this survey underscores the startling facts behind what parents see happening every day in classrooms. Consider that, according to the findings, 47.2% of educators feel that teaching has negatively impacted their mental health.

The reasons teachers cited for dissatisfaction with their jobs include the quality of their school system, student-teacher ratios, and the rates of turnover. As far as the factors that contribute to whether teachers are happy in their roles, autonomy and the cost of living are incredibly important, per the Teacher Haven Index, commissioned in the survey.

GettyImages/Leren Lu

The Best and Worst States for Teachers

The Index ranked all 50 states by where teachers are the happiest. Here are the top 10 in order:

• North Dakota
• West Virginia
• South Dakota

The bottom 10 states for teacher happiness are:

• Massachusetts
• Rhode Island

Per survey, 15.5% of teachers said they would be happier if they had a more manageable workload, 12.6% said a better work-life balance would improve their job satisfaction, and 10.9% reported wanting mental health support.

How Parents Can Better Support Teachers

Teachers are dealing with so much more than many people realize, such as budgets cuts, an ever-changing curriculum, and even the politicization of their role in society, says Lightning Jay, PhD, assistant professor, Department of Teaching Learning and Educational Leadership at Binghamton University.

In light of these findings, and how challenging it is to be an educator in America today, it’s imperative for parents to help teachers to be happier in their jobs. That can only add up to a better learning environment for kids.

Indeed, as ProCare Therapy Senior Vice President Stephanie Morris tells Parents , “Parents can be a powerful source of support for teachers, and there are a few key ways they can make a real difference.” 

Communication is key

For starters, Morris says that open communication between parents and teachers is essential. “Keeping a respectful and consistent dialogue with teachers helps parents stay informed and involved, and it makes it easier to address any challenges together," shares Morris.

Suzanne Barchers, EdD, Education Advisory Board Chair at Lingokids , a play and learning app for kids, offers the advice that being patient, and avoiding heated confrontations is key. “Present yourself as a collaborator,” Dr. Barchers recommends, adding that parents should not expect teachers to solve all of their student’s issues.

Show your appreciation

Simple gestures of appreciation also go a long way toward supporting teachers, according to Morris. “A heartfelt thank you or a small token of gratitude can really remind them that their efforts are valued,” she says. That can include classroom donations of school supplies , books, and our time, which according to Morris, helps alleviate the financial burden on teachers, and improve their work-life balance.

“What teachers really need is daily appreciation,” adds Dr. Barchers. She echoes Morris in suggesting that volunteering your time can truly go a long way in supporting teachers, such as organizing a snack donation rotation among the class parents.

And don’t forget the rest of the school staff, including the principal, paraprofessionals, librarian, secretaries, janitors, and cafeteria workers. “All these people are dedicated to education," Dr. Barchers says. "Many receive extremely low wages."

Parents who show appreciation to teachers can help make the job feel worth it, Dr. Jay says. And it doesn’t have to be anything elaborate. “A quick note telling the principal about how wonderful a teacher is; even a text saying ‘thank you’ goes a long way,” he says. “If a teacher has ever made your day by calling home with good news about your child, you know how meaningful a little praise is and you know how easy it would be to reciprocate.”

Support educators on a larger scale

Finally, Rachel Cederbaum , founder and lead academic coach behind Gold Signature Writers LLC , an academic and enrichment service for students in grades K-12, as well as a former high school English teacher, says that parents can support teachers on a larger scale as well. “Joining local committees and writing to their local congressperson to advocate for teachers is also key,” she urges.

Dr. Jay adds that showing up at school board meetings is key—and not just to express discontent. “Teachers need to hear from happy parents to balance out the angry voices,” he says. 

The Teacher Haven Index: Best States for Educators . Pro Care Therapy . 2024.

Related Articles

Visit the new and improved Hamilton Education Program website

• AP US History Study Guide
• History U: Courses for High School Students
• History School: Summer Enrichment
• Lesson Plans
• Classroom Resources
• Spotlights on Primary Sources
• Professional Development (Academic Year)
• Professional Development (Summer)
• Book Breaks
• Inside the Vault
• Self-Paced Courses
• Browse All Resources
• Search by Issue
• Search by Essay
• Become a Member (Free)
• Monthly Offer (Free for Members)
• Program Information
• Scholarships and Financial Aid
• Applying and Enrolling
• Eligibility (In-Person)
• EduHam Online
• Hamilton Cast Read Alongs
• Official Website
• Press Coverage
• Veterans Legacy Program
• The Declaration at 250
• Black Lives in the Founding Era
• Celebrating American Historical Holidays
• Browse All Programs
• Donate Items to the Collection
• Search Our Catalog
• Research Guides
• Rights and Reproductions
• See Our Documents on Display
• Bring an Exhibition to Your Organization
• Interactive Exhibitions Online
• About the Transcription Program
• Civil War Letters
• Founding Era Newspapers
• College Fellowships in American History
• Scholarly Fellowship Program
• Richard Gilder History Prize
• David McCullough Essay Prize
• Affiliate School Scholarships
• Nominate a Teacher
• State Winners
• National Winners
• Gilder Lehrman Lincoln Prize
• Gilder Lehrman Military History Prize
• George Washington Prize
• Frederick Douglass Book Prize
• Our Mission and History
• Annual Report
• Contact Information
• Student Advisory Council
• Teacher Advisory Council
• Board of Trustees
• Remembering Richard Gilder
• President's Council
• Scholarly Advisory Board
• Internships
• Our Partners
• Press Releases

History Resources

Bruised Egos, Battles, and Boycott: The 1980 Moscow Olympics

By elise stevens wilson.

Politics and sports have intermingled since the inception of the Olympic Games in Greece, but not until the 1980 Olympics did people fear that politics might destroy the Olympic movement and spirit. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America battled each other ideologically, economically, militarily, culturally, and politically in a very long Cold War that spanned more than forty years (1948–1991). In the midst of the Cold War, the two countries often met in sporting arenas around the world to compete for medals. In 1980, Moscow hosted the Summer Olympics, the first Olympics held in a communist country. Because the United States and the USSR were deep in conflict, especially over the recent movement of Soviet troops into Afghanistan in 1979, the Olympics became an extension of the political arena. The United States did not show up for the games. The 1980 Olympics were not unusual because they were political, but because the extreme degree to which they were politicized had never before been seen. Many Americans and Soviets alike feared that the Olympics would be destroyed if politics infiltrated the games.

In 1980, some Americans believed it their duty to boycott the Olympic Games. Others felt that the Olympics were meant be a de-politicized time when countries could put aside their differences and celebrate something they had in common: sports. These opinions were discussed and debated in the media. Journalists, politicians, athletes, and average citizens expressed their feelings about, and their justifications for or against, the boycott. The 1980 Summer Olympics are significant both in sports history and Cold War history.

In this two-day lesson, students will investigate the various reasons for the boycott and the ways Americans analyzed the 1980 Moscow Olympics at the time. Students will use periodicals as their tools for examining this period in history, and teachers should take the opportunity to discuss media bias. Students will gather information from articles and participate in a debate over whether the US should have boycotted. Additionally, a PowerPoint accompanies this lesson to aid in background information.

• Students will be able to identify various points of view.
• Students will be able to describe why the boycott is significant to both sports history and Cold War history.
• Students will be able to effectively debate using arguments gathered from American periodicals.
• Students will formulate opinions on whether politics should be mix with sporting events.
• 1980 Moscow Olympics: A World Divided  (PowerPoint)
• US periodicals—arguments for and against the boycott (PDF) (Some articles have been shortened to achieve equity in length.)
• US periodicals—coverage of the Moscow Olympics and the boycott (PDF)

Additional Resources

• Opening Ceremony, 1980 Moscow Olympics , YouTube 
• Closing Ceremony, 1980 Moscow Olympics , YouTube

Day One (45–60 minutes)

Use the Think, Pair, Share method or a journal prompt, and ask students the following: Do you think political disagreements between countries should affect their participation in the Olympics? Or: If you were the leader of a country, and the Olympic Games were being held in another country that you believed committed crimes against its people, would you send your athletes to that country? (5 minutes)

Use the 1980 Moscow Olympics Background PowerPoint to introduce the Cold War and the back story to the Moscow Games. (7–10 minutes)

Take some time to discuss media bias with students. Tell students that they will be working with periodicals and that they should take bias into account when reading these sources. (5 minutes)

Divide students into groups of 3–4, and give each group a different article from US periodicals—arguments for and against the boycott found under Materials. Instruct students to read the articles in groups and underline sections that express an opinion about the boycott. (10–15 minutes)

Give each group a large piece of paper and colored markers. Ask each group to discuss their article and write down key ideas. At the top, they should indicate whether are pro-boycott, anti-boycott, or split. (5–10 minutes)

In groups, students should prepare for a debate on whether America should have boycotted the Olympics in Moscow. You can set up the debate in one of two ways.

• Students can take on the personalities mentioned in the articles, such as athletes, politicians, the President, the International Olympic Committee, or even the US Olympic Committee, and debate each other on a television show that is similar to The McLaughlin Group or Meet the Press .
• Students can be members of a presidential advisory committee on the Olympics. Their job is to convince the President which position to take on the boycott.

Some articles will have opposing viewpoints, so you should divide groups into two. Students should create a slogan that best represents their opinions. This slogan can be displayed during the debate. (15 minutes)

Students should prepare for the debate. To make the debate more interesting, students can dress appropriately for their roles.

Day Two (45–60 minutes)

Most of this class period will be spent on the debate for which students have prepared the previous day. Lay down the ground rules for the debate. There are a number of different ways to hold a class debate. (5 minutes)

Here is one suggestion for a class debate:

1) Assign a student to be a moderator or the teacher can be the moderator. If you chose option (a) for the debate, the moderator can act as the television host. If you chose option (b) for the debate, the moderator can be the President of the United States. 2) Only one person may speak at a time. 3) While a person is speaking others should take notes to use to further support their position or to attack the other side. 4) Provide a time limit for each person to speak (1–2 minutes). 5) Make sure each side has an equal amount of time to speak. 6) At the end of the debate, one student from each side gets one minute to provide closing arguments. 7) Remind them that they are not students, but either the personalities from the articles or members of a presidential committee, and they can feel free to take on these roles fully.

Allow students to meet with their sides for a few minutes. They should pick who will give the closing argument and perhaps who should speak first, second, third, etc. (5 minutes)

Proceed with the debate. (15–25 minutes)

Debrief the debate. Ask students how they would feel about the boycott using the barometer method. For this method, students line up on an imaginary line in the classroom with one end of the line representing the choice to boycott, and the other the choice to attend the Olympics. Students can stand anywhere along this spectrum and justify their position. (5 minutes)

Choose one or more of the articles from US periodicals — coverage of the Moscow Olympics and the boycott found under Materials. Read the article(s) as a class, and make sure to point out the media bias. This will give students some closure to the issue of the boycott as well as allow them to see more of the language and rhetoric used during the Cold War. (10–20 minutes)

Ask students to write a response to the following prompts. (5 minutes)

• In this debate, who had the most persuasive argument and why?
• Evaluate whether the Moscow Olympic Games were an appropriate battleground for the Cold War.

Assessments

In addition to the debate and written responses, students can be assessed in the following manner:

• Students can write a letter to President Carter either in support of or in opposition to the boycott of the Moscow Olympics. Make sure they identify the reasons for their opinions.
• Students can research other Olympics that have been politicized and write a comparison paper focusing on whether sports activities should be political.
• Students can research articles from major American newspapers on whether the United States should have supported the Beijing Games in 2008. Many people felt that China, a communist country, had violated human rights and therefore should not be supported. It is an excellent, modern analogy to the Moscow Olympics.

As an extension to this lesson plan, the students can explore how Soviet periodicals covered the boycott and the Moscow Olympics. A good source with an English translation is The Current Digest of the Post-Soviet Press .

Stay up to date, and subscribe to our quarterly newsletter.

Learn how the Institute impacts history education through our work guiding teachers, energizing students, and supporting research.

Advertisement

Supported by

In a Kyiv Classroom, Cries for Help From Children Scarred by War

“They are like a bleeding wound, and no one sees it,” a schoolteacher said of her pupils, many of whom have fled frontline areas or lost family members in the fighting.

• Share full article

By Oleksandr Chubko and Carlotta Gall

Oleksandr Chubko, a reporter, and Oksana Parafeniuk, a photographer, were invited to spend time with the children of Class 6H in a school in Kyiv, Ukraine.

When the Russian invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022 and some of her students fled abroad, Iryna Kovaliova, a literature teacher, decided it was time to retire.

“I wrote my resignation letter and took my things from school,” she said. But the children in her sixth-grade class, 6H, in a Kyiv school, begged her to stay, “at least for the duration of the war,” she recounted in a recent interview.

Two years later, she is still teaching at 63, three years past the retirement age for teachers, torn by the heartbreak of watching her students grapple with the trauma of air raids, bombings and the loss of loved ones. She worries for those who have been displaced, forced to study online, as well as for former students who have already enlisted in the army and are fighting on the front lines.

She begins every morning by checking the social media accounts of two former students who are in the army, relieved when she sees they have been online, knowing that at least they are alive.

Maria Lysenko, the principal of the school, said she was worried for a whole generation of children, but also for her teachers.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .