Requiring homework on a consistent basis is not an evidence-based practice and actually introduces worse outcomes for kids whose parents/guardians are less present, which disproportionately affects poor kids and kids of color.

Why do we do it? Because there are some parents (you know the ones) who will pester the school and lobby for dropping their funding if they don’t see consistent tangible output from their students. If the kids aren’t coming home with half a dozen papers each day and a bag of books, how can we verify that the teachers aren’t just sitting around on their phones all day not doing shit and collecting a paycheck WITH OUR TAX DOLLARSSSSS?!!!?!?!

So, homework largely serves as busy work to signal to parents that teachers are doing things. And the system is designed for parents to actively encourage and participate in the development of the skills required to regularly complete homework independently by high school. Kids whose parents have less free time are inherently disadvantaged, often labeled as bad kids or lazy early on, and can have a seat on the prison train before they’ve entered middle school. It also harms kids’ self esteem and sets an unhealthy precedent for expectations around work-life balance.

There isn’t a single thing that homework accomplishes by accident which couldn’t be accomplished better on purpose via other methods. Fuck homework.

    • EffortPostMcGee [any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well there are a couple reason why I don't need to provide that evidence

      1. I'm not advocating for any position about it. I'm granting that homework may be unhelpful for students who already don't get the material.
      2. I'm asking for studies that study the 2nd/3rd/4th order effects on this which is entirely different from trying to attack JuneFalls post.
      3. JuneFall hasn't provided any study, just a new article from Der Spiegel which is reporting on a study being conducted, with some preliminary results. But without any peer reviewed study published out of what TU Dresden is doing, Der Spiegel and the people they interviewed can basically say whatever they want and it still wouldn't have any scholarly weight nor should it. I don't know why I should be made to put in more effort just because of the content of my post I've said.
      4. " ... for kids who already don't get the material" is doing a lot of lifting, since I'm not sure if there are any studies which concern themselves with that issue in the affirmative or the negative, and definitely not over multiple cohorts spanning multiple generations.

      Offering up my thoughts however, I'd also like to just mention that I think that isolating one aspect of the education process and assessing its value solely by that aspect is both lacking in a dialectical analysis and also deeply idealist due to the manner in which the advocates are discussing the issue (as a sole atomic item of consideration, without regard for the manner in which this issue is connected to other issues), so even if I could find such studies which support or deconstruct the position you are asking me to find studies for I would still have my criticisms of the deeply liberal way that these studies are conducted and so I wouldn't include them in my response because I wouldn't link to studies for which I disagree with their methodology even if it supports that.

      • 420blazeit69 [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        isolating one aspect of the education process and assessing its value solely by that aspect

        Shouldn't we try to isolate variables like this?

        I agree that ultimately we need a comprehensive approach, but studying each variable in turn seems like an appropriate start.

        • EffortPostMcGee [any]
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah we definitely should isolate variables but you've nailed it one the head, once that is done we look at each one in concert with all the other social factors and figure it out comprehensively. Sorry to reply by basically just saying "yeah"