(1) My Literature Review in full, including references: How can we make homework effective for all children?

Background Note: In January 2019 the INTO published a 1,200-word article by me on homework's effectiveness in their InTouch magazine which is posted to all primary school teachers in Ireland. The article was based on my April 2017 3,000-word Literature Review. 
The 1,200 word article should soon (sometime in March) be available by clicking on the 2019 January/February 2019 InTouch magazine and then going to pages 56-57. OR, for the moment, click here for the 'Current Issue' (this link doesn't seem to work in Chrome, but it does work in Firefox and maybe other browsers too) and again go to pages 56-57. 

Below is the full Literature Review...which, importantly, at the end lists all references if you want to get more detail...  

Title: How can we make homework effective for all children?

Author: Martin Stuart

24th April, 2017 

Part One: Introduction

With this assignment I hope to propose directions for improving homework practices in Ireland.

Definitions

‘Homework’ is taken to mean here tasks assigned by a teacher to students to be done outside of class time. ‘Effective’ is harder to define. I choose to define it at its best: effective means here that the student is learning for him/her the right content at the right time in the right way.

Topic of Professional and Personal Relevance

Homework just happens. It’s so much a part of normal school life that we don’t even think about it. Yet we should. It bothers me and I suspect it bothers many others. I doubt its effectiveness. It takes up so much of our, of children’s, and of families’ time and energy. Thinking it up, giving, writing, forcing children, forcing families, doing, checking, correcting, trying to give effective feedback, punishing children, writing notes, checking up on the notes… all this based on hope that homework is effective.

My school’s homework policy, similar to others I’ve seen, frustrates me. It focuses on punishment, not rewards, not differentiation, not interests, not enjoyment. It gives guidelines—but no limits—for the time spent at homework. It dictates homework must be given Monday through Thursday. It encourages everyone to see homework as a drag by enabling children to occasionally earn a “night off” homework.

Despite so much attention, in my primary school nearly every day of my eleven years there I’ve been faced with children who didn’t do their homework. It seems more than half have trouble with homework: failing to write it down correctly, a lack of support at home, forgetting to do it, forgetting to bring it in, or, quite frankly, just not motivated to do it, preferring to do something else with their time.

I feel that homework-as-is is overvalued by teachers as a learning tool. I feel that many in society are just waiting for someone to say “The Emperor’s wearing no clothes.” I feel that we impose it on children largely because “that’s the way it’s always been done”, and not due to a considered view of its merits. I feel that imposing it turns children off it. And yet ... I know from experience how wonderfully enriching it can be for children, especially when they have a significant degree of choice and control (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). They thrive on it, loving the opportunities it provides, such as to work with someone at home, to show off at home, and—often, when encouraged—go further than the homework assigned. In short, these children know and get a buzz off the joy of learning. How can we make homework effective for everyone?

Chosen Model of Reflection (2019 note: this paragraph is totally irrelevant to most readers... skip it!)

I often use the Borton (1970) ‘what?, so what?, now what?’ model for one-off incidents when reflecting at the end of a school day for example—for which it is effective—but reflecting on multi-dimensional issues is not its strength. Likewise for the Gibb’s Reflective Cycle model, although it is better suited to this assignment because it asks more questions. The Schön model (1983), reflecting in and on, is too simplistic for this assignment. The Brookfield four lenses model is very attractive for my title, requiring me to think from students’ and colleagues’ points of view, but to me it’s slightly better suited to reflecting on my actual teaching than on a literature review. And so, for this assignment, I used a model (Appendix A) credited to the Open University’s Health and Social Care faculty (Finlay, 2008, p.5). The key phrases in the three sections—Self-Awareness, Critical Thinking, and Reflection—cover the positives of the Brookfield model and more. I was repeatedly able to return to the detail in the model to guide me in this assignment.

Part Two: Literature Review

Very Little Research

The research into homework is insufficient. In comparison to other educational ‘inputs’ very little research has been carried out on homework’s effectiveness (Eren & Henderson, 2008). What’s more, research studies focus on high school children, with relatively little attention given to elementary-aged children (Canadian Council, 2009: p.47).

The Irish Official Context

This lack of attention by the research community is mirrored by Irish policy makers.

For a start, there is no policy on homework in Ireland. There are simply extremely rare snippets of advice found almost randomly amidst larger documents, such as in the post-primary guidelines for inclusion (Department of Education and Science, 2007, p.105) where the Department simply states some aims: to consolidate and extend, to promote independent learning, to monitor individual students’ and class progress, and to evaluate the effectiveness of the teaching and learning.

There is no research done by the Department’s own National Council for Special Education: a search of its database of over 3,000 Irish research or policy publications since the year 2000 for ‘homework’ in the title reveals not one publication (National Council for Special Education, n.d.). And the NCCA in its 92 pages of detailed guidelines for assessment in primary schools refers to homework just eight times, always as an object of a sentence, never the subject (National Council For Curriculum and Assessment, 2007).

In the 89 pages of the 1999 Introduction to the Primary School Curriculum homework is mentioned just once (NCCA and Dept of Ed 1999, p.18), simply listing it as an informal tool for assessment. There is no guidance on how much, or when, or whether to make it mandatory or not. In the post-primary sector the NCCA lists on a webpage four types of homework preceded by positive-only comments about homework and homework policies without giving any guidance on what should be in those policies (NCCA, n.d.). And so the official line in Ireland seems to be that homework is a good thing, so good that it doesn’t need looking into or indeed even departmental research, policies, or guidance.

The official situation has been recently muddied, however, by a quiet questioning of the effectiveness of homework, some like the Irish Primary Principals Network even advising the Houses of the Oireachtas that there was little evidence of any real benefit and listing many negatives of the practice (Irish Primary Principals Network, 2010; Donnelly, 2010).

Actual Practice in Ireland

Luckily there is authoritative and detailed data on the current practice in Ireland (ESRI, 2009). It’s from the Growing Up in Ireland series, and focuses on the education of 9-year-olds. Though it’s a little old there’s little reason to suspect things have changed: for example, no policy on homework has been issued since. It confirms that my school’s practice is common in many ways: e.g. children receive homework four nights a week (97%). Worryingly it shows too how out of touch, or in denial, teachers are with homework’s time consumption: e.g. only 1% of teachers expected homework to take more than an hour yet in fact 26% of 9-year-olds were taking that time, including 7% who were taking more than an hour-and-a-half.

Just last year a large survey was carried out about homework giving an important voice not alone to teachers but also to parents and children (National Parents Council, 2016; Lynch 2016). A majority of all parties found it “beneficial.” But—importantly—not all: 80% of teachers, 73% of parents, 62% of children. Why do 20% of teachers, 27% of parents, and 38% of children not find it beneficial?

Sixty-two percent of parents, a majority, found homework stressful: by definition, they find it hard to cope. What is being done to reduce this stress? As for whether or not they enjoy their homework, a pre-requisite for experiencing flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), the ultimate learning state, only a paltry 8% of 5^th and 6^th class children say ‘yes’: 43% say ‘sometimes,’ and 49% bluntly say ‘no’. The figures are higher for ‘yes’ at infants, suggesting that as a child ages homework assignments gradually connect less and less with the child’s own perceived learning needs. Certainly and sadly, few children in Ireland find homework intrinsically motivating.

Reasons Teachers Give Homework

Teachers give homework because it is school policy: they are directed to do so by their principal and in Irish law teachers are responsible to carry out duties assigned to them by the principal.

Teachers may feel under pressure to give homework that covers some of the curriculum that has not been covered in class time, particularly at post-primary level (Carr, 2013) in the hope that students will achieve more. This is surely tempting for teachers under time pressure.

Research Indicating Teachers Need To Rethink

This hope of teachers’ that more homework equals greater achievement has been tested—and dashed. Firstly, a major 40-country multi-level analysis has found that there is no clear-cut relationship between homework time and achievement (Dettmers, Trautwein & Lüdkte, 2009). And secondly, the OECD investigated this in 2011 and found in fact a ‘strong and negative’ relationship between time spent in individual study (and time in out-of-school lessons) and achievement in reading, maths, and science (OECD 2011). More does not equal more, in fact less equals more.

So, Homework Isn’t Effective?

As mentioned in the Introduction, it depends on how you define effective. Most research, however, focuses on a meaning limited to enhancing academic achievement. Even with just that there are doubts—especially for children up to 11 years old. Even those arguing for homework acknowledge that there is a dearth of evidence for homework for younger children (Marzano & Pickering, 2007, p.5; Carr, 2013, p.171).

The stark truth is that in elementary schools homework had zero effect on achievement in a review of the literature in the USA (Cooper, 1994, p.4; Kohn, 2006). Why is this? Part of the explanation seems to be simply young children’s limited cognitive ability—being less able to concentrate, less able to avoid distractions, and having less effective study habits (Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2001). In the Cooper review (1994), however, in-class supervised study, as opposed to homework, had some effect on achievement: This seems to speak to Vygotsky’s idea of the natural need of young children for social interactions with ‘more knowledgeable others’ to scaffold their learning.

This is not to say that homework always has no effect on achievement. Quite the opposite: The same review shows, that older children, 11 to 13, benefit achievement-wise from homework, and older children again, in high school, benefit twice as much (Cooper, 1994). Moreover it shows that homework was more beneficial for children aged 11-and-over than in-class supervised study. This important finding has been confirmed by Marzano & Pickering (2007). By that age, children have developed sufficient independent learning skills to benefit from homework. Eren and Henderson (2008) found that the benefits were highest for the lowest achievers—a finding of high relevance to Learning Support teachers; similarly, McMullen (2007) found that children at schools that were performing poorly did best from increasing the assignment of homework: these findings indicate schools would do best to focus on lower achievers. However, caution is necessary here: Examining the net impact of homework on achievement, the Canadian Council on Learning (2009) in a systematic review of homework found there were only correlations between homework and achievement, not causations.

So, there are benefits to homework for certain groups, but even here more caution is needed: Even those researchers most in favour of homework express doubts as to consistent good use by teachers (Carr, 2013; p.169). And there is always a danger with homework of students learning the wrong thing, of them “habituating errors or misconceptions” (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001), especially when students don’t understand or mis-understand the work being undertaken.

Naturally, with parents being the prime educators, parents’ attitudes are key in whether homework policies are viewed positively or negatively by children (Epstein & Van Voorhis, 2001). If parents aren’t happy with any or all aspects of homework the child will likely catch and imitate that attitude. It follows that there is a need for parents to get a real voice, not a token voice, in formulating homework policy for their children if they are to look positively on homework and help motivate the child.

There are some who claim non-academic benefits to homework, often focused on assumed needs of businesses. For example papers extol the virtues of training children for the workplace and becoming accustomed to working for external reward (Corno & Xu, 2004), and preparing children for the ‘increasingly competitive world of work’ (Bempechat, 2004). But even these supposed benefits are disputed, with researchers summarising from reviewing the literature that there is no evidence for any non‑academic benefit from homework for any age level (Kohn, 2006). In angst at the ongoing meting out of homework, Kohn clarifies this in 2007: “no study has ever substantiated the belief that homework builds character or teaches good study habits… or that it teaches children self-discipline and responsibility” (Kohn, 2007).

Some like the idea of homework for the learning opportunities it provides: some, for example, declaring that it provides students with autism learning opportunities for self-management and organisational skills (Hampshire, Butera, & Dustin, 2014). Certainly, homework provides opportunities for all sorts of learning and this idea will be explored more fully in the Critical Reflection below.

What Price Homework?

There is a price to pay for imposing homework. Negative and serious effects of homework have been recognised internationally for a long time (Cooper, 1994), including an increased gap between high and low achievers, a possible increase in social inequalities if not all children have equal access to equal resources, denial of access to leisure time, physical and emotional fatigue, and loss of interest in academic material. Similarly, many negatives, both anecdotal (Donnelly, 2010), and quantitative-research based (National Parents Council, 2016) have been found in Ireland, including: stress for the parents, homework not benefiting everyone, a lack of enjoyment, erosion of quality time within families, homework often set at too high a level, teaching time being given to correcting homework, and homework being something that gives low-achieving children the dispiriting message that they are incapable.

And then there’s the question of its impact on the family. Is homework a force for good here? Do teachers consider it sufficiently, and regularly, and individually, when assigning homework? Qualitative research using interviews with parents (Dudley-Marling, 2003) showed how homework disrupts family life, reduces time for family activities, and diminishes the quality of family interactions. In essence, homework was found to transform school troubles into family troubles. The stress of homework is a significant additional burden on children with learning problems in middle-school aged children (Wenz-Gross & Siperstein, 1998) and in high school age children (Galloway & Pope, 2013). And this is something to be carefully considered: A data-analysis of Google search trends in Korea (where death by suicide is 3 times the OECD average) revealed a link between stress and suicide (Song, Song, An, Hayman, & Woo, 2014). And in Ireland a recent study found that one in three young people by the age of 13 is likely to have experienced some type of mental disorder; two of the identified risk factors are work stress and family stress (Cannon, Coughlan, Clarke, Harley & Kelleher, 2013, p.7). Is the price of homework worth it?

How Can Homework Be Improved?

To improve the assignment of homework, the Canadian Council (2009) give some general recommendations from its review of 18 research studies. These include focusing on homework type rather than homework quantity; incorporating a meta-cognitive aspect to it; assigning homework judiciously, taking into account many factors including the impact on families; understand that homework will affect students differently, with low-achieving students and older students (aged 14 plus) having the most to gain; to maximize effect, aim to increase intrinsic motivation.

Similarly Carr (2013, p.175) reviews the literature on recommendations and says, “Ultimately, effective homework should be purposeful, efficient, personalized, doable, and inviting.”

Protheroe (2009), in her summation of the literature, emphasises the need for the teacher to consider the specific abilities and needs of each child. The need to differentiate individually for homework so that children don’t experience discouragement from an inability to do the work on their own is echoed by others (Vatterott, 2010, p.13 & Carr, 2013, p.175). But it is difficult for a teacher to know and give homework to suit each child’s unique learning needs. It’s hard enough for a child to know their own preferences, which may well regularly change, let alone expect a teacher to accurately diagnose them and then give homework that motivates everyone.

This idea of motivation also arises in Hong, Milgram, and Rowell’s (2004) learner-centred homework model where teacher, parent, and child co-create the content. And it’s reflected in the idea of Universal Design for Learning (UDL)(Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014), which is aimed at ensuring that the potential of all children is enabled through teaching and learning practices. With this, content doesn’t have to be specified in advance. By offering choice of content, tools, levels of challenge, and learning context it frees, motivates and empowers the child to do their best at their level.

Part Three: Critical Reflection

The Open University model of reflection proved especially useful in conducting the above Literature Review in directing me to evaluate ideas, challenge assumptions, and explore alternatives, all of which I hope to keep doing in this critical reflection.

I believe the thoughts in my Introduction were largely supported by the literature. But the findings are more nuanced than I had expected. Homework as-is does work for some, as explained above. And in fact the benefits are potentially big for low achieving children (Eren & Henderson, 2008), which surprised me.

There was no justification found, however, for some current practices in homework-as-is: punishing children, rote work, homework just about every day. Homework in Ireland is institutionalised. Homework in Ireland is problematic.

To solve a problem, however, you need to acknowledge and then define it. The educational community in Ireland is guilty of not yet really listening to the student voice (Fleming, 2015). We’ve got to listen, at the minimum so as to reengage the many disengaged and to stop disengaging many more. The Emperor is wearing close to no clothes and the educational community must come to see that and state that. The typical one-size-fits-all approach to homework does not work for all. Forcing children to do homework that does not suit them is wrong. Rather than provide for multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement (Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014), including none, we typically impose one task to be done in one way. We are a long long way from optimising non‑school learning opportunities.

It is mind-boggling to think of the neglect shown by the Department of Education and Skills (DES) in having so little in the form of policy or recommendations on homework. It takes up so much of students’ time, causes so much stress, is so full of potential, and yet the DES gives it so little attention. The vacuum of policy in Ireland needs to be filled—with evidence-based policy.

Parents need to step up, teachers to step down. Meet in the middle, with the child. We teachers are in loco parentis yet too often we act in matters of homework as if we have the right to force their child to carry the burdens of school home so as to burden the family and the family relationships. Based on what, I ask. We do not have that right, I argue.

We need to support parents, the primary educators. And before giving homework each day, ask the question “Is it necessary?” As Kohn (2007) says, “Let families decide how they will spend most of their evenings.”

We need to support children. We expect too much from young children. Before expecting them to learn much from homework-as-is, we teachers must first of all work on the child’s study habits, self-regulation, ability to focus and ability to avoid distractions.

I believe we’d be wise to re-frame and re-name “homework” as “opportunities,” or “non-school opportunities” (NSOs) which are really what it is. Doing this is likely to lead teachers to look for a wider and more appropriate range of possible tasks, is likely to lead to greater collaboration between parents-child-teacher, and is likely to lead the child to benefit from increased intrinsic motivation, increased effort, and increased joy.

In sum, it is time for the uncritical acceptance of assumptions about the benefits of homework to end. It is time for the education community in Ireland to gather—including the NCSE, the Inspectorate, ILSA, IATSE,  the IPPN, the INTO, the NPC, and the DES—and consider in greater depth than this paper allows the issue of homework. We must ask questions that challenge every assumption and look for evidence-based answers. It is time for teachers to re-imagine the potential for homework, to ask lots of questions: What would an ideal homework system look like? Would it even be called ‘work’? What exactly is ‘effective’ homework? Would it be good to specifically also aim at enjoyment? It is time to create a new vision for homework, based on a re-evaluation of the purpose of education for the 21^st century.

Reference List

Bempechat, J. (2004). The motivational benefits of homework: A social-cognitive perspective. Theory into Practice, 43(3), 189-196. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.dcu.idm.oclc.org/stable/3701520

Borton, T. (1970). Reach, Touch and Teach.  London: Hutchinson

Canadian Council on Learning. (2009). A systematic review of literature examining the impact of homework on academic achievement. Canadian Council on Learning.

Cannon M, Coughlan H, Clarke M, Harley M & Kelleher I (2013) The Mental Health of Young People in Ireland: a report of the Psychiatric Epidemiology Research across the Lifespan (PERL) Group Dublin: Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland

Carr, N. S. (2013). Increasing the effectiveness of homework for all learners in the inclusive classroom. School Community Journal, 23(1), 169-182. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1406196556?accountid=15753

Cooper, H. (1989). Homework. New York: Longman. IN Muhlenbruck, L. C. (1999). Homework and achievement: Explaining the different strengths of relation at the elementary and secondary school levels. Social Psychology of Education , 3: 295.

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.

Cooper, H. (1994). Homework research and policy: A review of the literature. Research/Practice, 2(2).

Corno, L., & Xu, J. (2004). Homework as the job of childhood. Theory into Practice, 43(3), 227-233. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4303_9

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row.

DES (2007). Inclusion of students with special educational needs: Post primary guidelines. Dublin: Government Publications. 

Dettmers, S., Trautwein, U., & Lüdtke, O. (2009). The relationship between homework time and achievement is not universal: Evidence from multilevel analyses in 40 countries. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20(4), 375-405. doi:10.1080/09243450902904601

Donnnelly, K. (2010, October 8). Primary school homework of no real benefit, say principals. Retrieved April 14, 2017, from independent.ie: http://www.independent.ie/life/family/learning/primary-school-homework-of-no-real-benefit-say-principals-26688001.html

Dudley-Marling, C. (2003). How school troubles come home: The impact of homework on families of struggling learners. Current Issues in Education, 6

Economic and Social Research Institute. (2009, November). Growing Up in Ireland: Key Findings: 9-year-olds. Retrieved April 12, 2017, from https://www.dcya.gov.ie: https://www.dcya.gov.ie/documents/growingupinireland/keyfindingsquantatives/No3TheEducationof9YearOlds.pdf

Epstein, J.L., & Van Voorhis, F.L. (2001). More than minutes: Teachers' roles in designing homework. Educational Psychologist, 36(3), 181-193. IN Bempechat, J. (2004). The Motivational Benefits of Homework: A Social-Cognitive Perspective. Theory Into Practice, 43(3), 189-196. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.dcu.idm.oclc.org/stable/3701520

Eren, O., & Henderson, D. J. (2008). The impact of homework on student achievement. The Econometrics Journal, 11(2), 326-348.

Finlay, L. (2008). Reflecting on ‘Reflective practice’. PBLB paper, 52.

Fleming, D. (2015). Student voice: An emerging discourse in irish education policy. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8(2), 223-242. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dcu.idm.oclc.org/docview/1753205039?accountid=15753

Galloway, M., Conner, 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

Hampshire, P. K., Butera, G. D., & Dustin, T. J. (2014). Promoting homework independence for students with autism spectrum disorders. Intervention in School and Clinic, 49(5), 290-297. doi:10.1177/1053451213513955

Hong, E., Milgram, R., & Rowell, L. (2004). Homework Motivation and Preference: A Learner-Centered Homework Approach. Theory Into Practice, 43(3), 197-204. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.dcu.idm.oclc.org/stable/3701521

Hoover-Dempsey, K., Battiato, A. C., Walker, J. M. T., Reed, R. P., DeJong, J. M., & Jones, K. P. (2001). Parental involvement in homework. Educational Psychologist, 36(3), 195-209. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3603_5

Irish Primary Principals Network. (2010, October 8). www.ippn.ie. Retrieved April 13, 2017, from ippn.ie: https://www.ippn.ie/index.php/99-news-and-views/education-news/2866-primary-school-homework-of-no-real-benefit-say-principals-independentie

Kohn, A. (1998). What to look for in a classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass IN Heward, W. L. (2003). Ten faulty notions about teaching and learning that hinder the effectiveness of special education. The journal of special education, 36(4), 186-205.

Kohn, A. (2006). The truth about homework. Education Week, 26(2), 52.

Kohn, A. (2007). Rethinking homework. PRINCIPAL-ARLINGTON-, 86(3), 35.

Lynch, A. (2016, September 2). NPC Conference 2016 - Homework Survey [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCB8zdW3JvA

Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. J. (2007). Special topic: The case for and against homework. Educational leadership, 64(6), 74-79.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. IN Protheroe, N. (2009). Good Homework Policy = Good Teaching. Principal, 89(1), 42-45.

McMullen, S. (2007). The impact of homework time on academic achievement. TheUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill [Online]: http://www. learndoearn. org/For-Educators adresinden, 13.

Meyer, A., Rose, D.H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and Practice. Wakefield, MA: CAST Professional Publishing.

National Council For Curriculum and Assessment. (2007). Assessment in the Primary School Curriculum: Guidelines for Schools. Dublin: NCCA.

National Council for Special Education. (n.d.). Database of SEN Research & Policy in Ireland. Retrieved April 14, 2017, from http://ncse.ie/: http://ncse.ie/database-of-sen-research-policy-in-ireland

National Parents Council. (2016, June 20). www.npc.ie. Retrieved April 13, 2017, from National Parents Council Primary: http://www.npc.ie/news-post.aspx?contentid=8643

NCCA. (n.d.). AfL - Homework. Retrieved April 12, 2017, from www.ncca.ie: http://www.ncca.ie/en/Curriculum_and_Assessment/Post-Primary_Education/Junior_Cycle/Assessment_for_Learning_AfL_/Homework/AfL_Homework.html

NCCA and Dept of Education and Science. (1999). Primary School Curriculum: Introduction. Dublin: The Stationery Office

OECD (2011), "Relationships between Students' Learning Time and Performance", in Quality Time for Students: Learning In and Out of School, OECD Publishing, Paris.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264087057-6-en

Protheroe, N. (2009). Good homework policy. Principal, 89(1), 42-45.

Sallee, B., & Rigler, N. (2008). Doing our homework on homework: How does homework help? English Journal, 98(2), 46-51. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dcu.idm.oclc.org/docview/237301838?accountid=15753

Schön, D. A. 1983. The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action, New York: Basic Books. 

Song, T. M., Song, J., An, J.-Y., Hayman, L. L., & Woo, J.-M. (2014). Psychological and Social Factors Affecting Internet Searches on Suicide in Korea: A Big Data Analysis of Google Search Trends. Yonsei Medical Journal, 55(1), 254–263. http://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2014.55.1.254

The NCCA. (n.d.). Curriculum. Retrieved April 12, 2017, from Curriculum Online: http://www.curriculumonline.ie/Primary/Curriculum

Van Voorhis, F.L. 2011, "Costs and Benefits of Family Involvement in Homework", Journal of Advanced Academics, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 220-249,354.

Wenz-Gross, M., & Siperstein, G. N. (1998). Students with learning problems at risk in middle school: Stress, social support, and adjustment. Exceptional Children, 65(1), 91-100. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/201189344?accountid=15753