Luận án Tiến sĩ: Lắng nghe tiếng nói sinh viên về bài tập về nhà

LMU/LLS Theses and Dissertations Spring April 2013 Listening to Student Voices: A Critical Study of Homework Michael Bates Loyola Marymount University, mbates@louisvillehs.org Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.edu/etd Part of the Education Commons Recommended Citation Bates, Michael, "Listening to Student Voices: A Critical Study of Homework" (2013). LMU/LLS Theses and Dissertations.edu/etd/233 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in LMU/LLS Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@lmu.

LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY Listening to Student Voices: A Critical Study of Homework by Michael Bates A dissertation presented to the Faculty of the School of Education, Loyola Marymount University, in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Education 2013 Listening to Student Voices: A Critical Study of Homework Copyright © 2013 by Michael Bates Loyola Marymount University School of Education Los Angeles, CA 90045 This dissertation written by Michael Bates, under the direction of the Dissertation Committee, is approved and accepted by all committee members, in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Nightly across America, students take the work of school home. As a student, teacher, and now as a parent, I have lived the costs of the stresses of homework–and, I am not alone. I have been a successful student, not because of grades or homework, but because of my parents, teachers, moments, literature, and films which have caused me to look beyond traditional models of school.

Because of a nagging cognitive dissonance, I have tried to understand what might be my homework for critical consciousness. To do so, I needed to venture past the isolation of homework in dialogue with wisdom of family and fellow learners. I gratefully acknowledge the support, help, and care that have shaped my thoughts and the culmination of this study: To each student in this study, your voice matters. Know that I hear you, and I hope many take you seriously in the effort to address the role and purpose of homework in schools.

To Professor Antonia Darder, by your dedication to students and by your example of justice, gentleness, and wisdom, you have challenged me to pursue excellence and to craft a work honoring student voice. Ani Shabazian, for your insight about intrinsic motivation, locus of control, and social reproduction, you have helped me keep my focus on the importance of school as a process for the development of wonder. Elizabeth Brewer, for your humor, your consistent challenge, and genuine encouragement, perspective to this pursuit you have helped me bring. Karie Huchting, for your boundless energy and joy, you helped me develop a true appreciation for quantitative methods and for excellent teaching.

To Cohort 7 and to my LMU professors, thank you for challenging me to lead for Social Justice. Particularly, to Drs. Jill Bickett, Beth Stoddard, and Shane Martin, your support and care of me from day one in this program have helped me to persevere and to seek my best self. To the school and its staff at which this study took place, you gave me the chance to grow professionally and academically; know that I am most grateful for this opportunity.

To Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Oscar Romero, Sr., Daniel Smith-Christopher, Howard Zinn, Pedro Arrupe, S., Elie Wiesel, Upton Sinclair, Mark Twain, Charles Dickens, John Steinbeck, Dalton Trumbo, Alfie Kohn, John Buell, Denise Pope, Sir Ken Robinson, Mihalyi Csíkszentmihályi, Daniel Pink, Charles Kernaghan, and Michael Moore, you have inspired me to think critically, to question traditional practices of schooling, and to seek justice and peace despite the perpetual drumbeats of war and consumption. I dedicate this dissertation to: My parents, John and Maureen, who have sacrificed their lives for their children. My partner, Nancy, for her love and unyielding support to me throughout our relationship, and especially these past three years of research. To our children, Brian and Peter, who give me a daily serendipity of inspiration, joy, laughter, and humility.

This research is for you, and for all students…may your time be spent living your joy and seeking justice, not doing worksheets, or stressing over book reports, or memorizing facts you will not need. May you be critical thinkers in love and en paz with the good of life and community. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. iii LIST OF TABLES .x CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .3 Statement of the Problem .8 Purpose of the Study .9 Significance of the Study .14 Intrinsic Motivation, Social Reproduction, and Critical Pedagogy .15 Research Design and Methodology .18 Definitions of Terms .19 Organization of the Study .20 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ON HOMEWORK .22 Definition of Homework .22 History of Homework in the United States .23 Early History of Homework.

Board of Education (1977) .25 The Progressive Era .26 California Ban on Homework .28 Fair Labor Standards Act (1938) .29 The Cold War to Present .30 Modern Legal Trends in Homework.31 Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) .31 Privacy, Divorce, Termination, and Prison .38 Current Legal Trends in Homework .40 Pro-Homework Research .40 The Ten Minute Rule .41 Types of Homework .43 Homework and Achievement .45 Gender and Catholic Schools .45 Homework as Work .47 Costs of Homework .48 Motivation and Homework .50 Gap in the Homework Literature .51 Pro-Homework Books .52 Research Challenging Homework Practice .54 The Case Against Homework .55 Punished by Rewards .60 Catching Up or Leading the Way .62 CHAPTER THREE: THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK .68 Self-Determination Theory .68 Locus of Control .71 Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose.73 Passion and Aptitude.81 Role of Education in Capitalist Society .82 Education for Future Citizenry .85 Banking Concept of Education .88 Isolation and Disengagement .92 Student Voice in the Research of Homework .94 v Significance of Student Voice .95 Student Perspectives, If Ignored .97 Student Voice and School Reform.99 Quantitative Student Voice .100 Advocate for Students .102 CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGY .103 Rationale for the Methodology .105 Duration of Study.107 Role of Researcher .121 CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS .123 Findings of Research Questions.125 Quantitative Survey Results.125 Qualitative Survey Results.128 Focus Group Findings .136 Conditioned to Do Homework .137 Cost of Homework .148 Piece of Paper .150 Purpose of School .151 Quality of Homework .152 Quantity of Homework .157 Unthinking, Auto Pilot Zombies .159 Weekends Minus Homework is Our Life .162 Final Summary of Data .165 CHAPTER SIX: ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS.167 Isolation and Disengagement .169 Punished by Rewards, Doing School, and the Job of Childhood .172 Cost of Homework .173 Irony of Autonomy .175 Ten Minute Rule .175 Motivation and Homework .176 Gender and Catholic School .177 Thousands of Hours .178 Hope for Educators? .180 Agency or Auto Pilot? .180 Catching Up or Leading the Way .182 Essentialized Practice of Homework .182 Homework for Critical Consciousness .186 CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSION .187 Context of Homework.189 Recommendations for Homework Practice .190 Echoes of Scholars .191 vii Purpose and Motivation .192 Stress and Wonder .198 APPENDIX A: Student Survey .220 APPENDIX B: Focus Group Guiding Questions.223 APPENDIX C: Survey Script for Teacher/Proctor .226 APPENDIX E: Focus Group Signup Sheet .227 APPENDIX F: Parent Letter .228 APPENDIX G: Informed Consent and Assent Form .229 APPENDIX H: 1901 California Ban on Homework.233 viii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Grade Level of Survey Respondents .114 Table 2: Grade Point Average (GPA) .115 Table 3: Reported Hours of Homework.115 Table 4: Reported Hours of Sleep per Night .116 Table 5: Reported Percentage of Semester Grade Based on Homework.116 Table 6: Reported Minutes of Exercise per Day .116 Table 7: GPA of Focus Group Participants .117 Table 8: Characteristics of Each Focus Group .117 Table 9: Student Responses to Questions About Homework .125 Table 10: Pearson’s Correlations of Composites, Stress, and Fun .126 Table 11: Response to Questions by GPA Group.127 ix ABSTRACT Listening to Student Voices: A Critical Study of Homework by Michael Bates In a culture of meritocracy and an increasing emphasis on global competition, student learning has become more fully aligned with a belief in the value and effectiveness of homework. Amidst the incessant drive toward competition and an unrelenting push toward an increasing use of homework as commonplace educational practice, there also exist clarion calls to question, reform, and abolish this practice. From student stress to overarching challenges to the nature of education, there exist unexamined discourses that critically challenge current beliefs in the significance of homework practice in the United States. Through employing discussions of student voice and theoretical lenses of intrinsic motivation, social reproduction, and critical pedagogy, this study examined how homework practices impact high school students, by engaging directly with their perceptions.

The purpose of this mixed methods study is to better understand how homework affects high school students, beyond measures of student achievement within the current context of education in the United States. The study was x conducted in an all-female, Catholic, college preparatory high school, utilizing student survey and focus groups. Findings of the study are explored and discussed with respect to public policy implications related to the future development, assignment, and role of homework practices in the academic formation of high school students in this setting and beyond. Keywords: homework, high school, student voice, education, stress, intrinsic motivation, social reproduction theory, critical pedagogy, critical consciousness xi CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION In 1887, in DeWitt County, Texas, a 13-year-old pupil challenged the authority of his public school teacher to assign him homework (Bolding v.

On two consecutive days, the boy refused to do his homework assignments, despite his teacher’s warning that he would be whipped if he continued to disobey. After the second refusal, the teacher decided to carry out the threatened punishment. But after ‘one blow with a switch’, the unrepentant pupil ‘drew a butcher knife, and stabbed the teacher under the shoulder blade, and in the thigh.’ While considering the validity of the pupil’s conviction for aggravated assault, the Texas appellate court discussed the teacher’s authority to require homework. The court concluded that the teacher’s authority extends…to the prescribing and enforcement of reasonable rules and requirements, even while the pupils are at their homes.

(as cited in Gill & Schlossman, 2003b, p. 849) This case is a disturbing reminder of the ways in which the practice of homework historically silences student voice and confirms the power of teachers and schools over student lives. In a very graphic way, the story above describes the reality of a frustrated student who was silenced in his protest to homework. When his voice was ignored, he resorted to physical violence, not unlike the physical violence of his reprimanding teacher.

Though the violence exhibited could have many causes, what can be gleaned from this story for the purpose of this study is the importance of valuing the perspective of student voices. It is a concrete, albeit graphic, reminder of why it is important that we, as teachers, listen to students and take seriously their concerns about school, and specifically about homework. 1 Today, students continue to have little voice to challenge the practice of homework (Buell, 2004; Kohn, 2006a; Kralovec & Buell, 2000; Warton, 2001; Xu, 2004). Where the story above emphasizes the physical power of the teacher and force of law behind the promotion of homework, today it is by consensual practice that parents and students allow schools and teachers to prescribe work to be completed at home (McLaren, 2009).

Where the story above is about brute violence, today the reality of homework is about a more subtle, complex violence. This violence is manifested in the ways students cheat, copy assignments, stress out, lose sleep, procrastinate, scream at their parents, and succeed or fail with grades by how they complete their homework. As Antonia Darder (1991) posits, “there is an ever-present consciousness of resistance that engages, consciously or unconsciously, in an ongoing struggle with the external social forces of domination and the internal human forces that seek humanization” (p.