The relationship between homework time and achievement is not universal: Evidence from multilevel analyses in 40 countries

School Effectiveness and School Improvement

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 375-405

  Dettmers, Swantje ^a   Trautwein, Ulrich ^a,b   Ludtke, Oliver ^a,b  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Homework; Mathematics achievement; Multilevel modeling

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449602033     PISSN: 09243453     EISSN: 17445124     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09243450902904601     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Carroll, J.B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers' College Record, 64, 723-733.
2. Chang, M., Singh, K., & Mo, Y. (2007). Science engagement and science achievement: Longitudinal models using NELS data. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13, 349-371.
3. Chen, C., & Stevenson, H.W. (1989). Homework: A cross-cultural examination. Child Development, 60, 551-561.
4. Cool, V., & Keith, T.Z. (1991). Testing a model of school learning: Direct and indirect effects on academic achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 28-44.
5. Cooper, H. (1989). Homework. White Plains, NY: Longman.
6. Cooper, H., Lindsey, 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, 70-83.
7. 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, 1-62.
8. Cooper, H., & Valentine, J.C. (2001). Using research to answer practical questions about homework. Educational Psychologist, 36, 143-153. (Pubitemid 33583731)
9. De Jong, R., Westerhof, K.J., & Creemers, B.P.M. (2000). Homework and student math achievement in junior high schools. Educational Research and Evaluation, 6, 130-157.
10. Dö bert, H., Hörner, W., von Kopp, B., & Mitter, W. (Eds.). (2002). Die Schulsysteme Europas [The school systems of Europe]. Hohengehren, Germany: Schneider Verlag.
11. Duckworth, A.L., & Seligman, M.E.P. (2006). Self-discipline gives girls the edge: Gender in self-discipline, grades, and achievement test scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 198-208.
12. Esping-Andersen, G., & Przeworski, A. (2001). Quantitative cross-national research methods. In N.J. Smelser & P.B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences Amsterdam: Elsevier.
13. Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. London: Edward Arnold.
14. Heller, K.A., & Perleth, Ch. (2000). Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest für 4. -12. Klassen, Revision (KFT 4-12 + R) [Cognitive Abilities Test for Grades 4-12, Revision]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
15. Hong, E., & Milgram, R.M. (1999). Preferred and actual homework style: A cross-cultural examination. Educational Research, 41, 251-265.
16. Hox, J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Hufton, N.R., Elliott, J.G., & Illushin, L. (2002). Educational motivation and engagement: Qualitative accounts from three countries. British Educational Research Journal, 28, 265-289.
18. Keith, T.Z. (1986). Homework. West Lafayette, IN: Kappa Delta Pi.
19. Keith, T.Z., & Cool, V.A. (1992). Testing models of school learning: Effects of quality of instruction, motivation, academic coursework, and homework on achievement. School Psychology Quarterly, 3, 207-226.
20. Kreft, I., & De Leeuw, J. (1998). Introducing multilevel modeling. London: Sage.
21. LeTendre, G., Hofer, B., & Shimizu, H. (2003). What is tracking? Cultural expectations in the U.S., Germany, and Japan. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 43-89.
22. Lucas, S.R. (1999). Tracking inequality. Stratification and mobility in American high schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
23. Maaz, K., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., & Baumert, J. (2008). Educational transitions and differential learning environments: How explicit between-school tracking contributes to social inequality in educational outcomes. Child Development Perspectives, 2(2), 99-106.
24. Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25. Opdenakker, M.C., & Van Damme, J. (2005). Differences between secondary schools: A study about school context, group composition, school practice, and school effects with special attention to public and catholic schools and types of schools. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17, 87-117.
26. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2004a). Learning for tomorrow's world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris: Author.
27. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2004b). PISA 2003 data analysis manual. Paris: Author.
28. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2004c). PISA 2003 technical report. Paris: Author.
29. Paschal, R.A., Weinstein, T., & Walberg, H.J. (1984). The effects of homework on learning: A quantitative synthesis. Journal of Educational Research, 78, 97-104.
30. Peugh, J.L., & Enders, C.K. (2005). Using the SPSS mixed procedure to fit cross-sectional and longitudinalmultilevelmodels.Educational and PsychologicalMeasurement, 65, 717-741.
31. Queensland Government. (2004). Homework literature review: A summary of key research findings. The State of Queensland (Department of Education and the Arts). Retrieved September 18, 2008, from http://education.qld.gov.au/review/ pdfs/homework-text-forweb. pdf
32. Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models (2nd ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
33. Raudenbush, S.W., Bryk, A.S., Cheong, Y.F., & Congdon, R.T. (2004). HLM 6 [Computer program]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
34. Rubin, D.B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. Wiley: New York.
35. Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R.J. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
36. Schmitz, B., & Skinner, E. (1993). Perceived control, effort, and academic performance: Interindividual, intraindividual, and multivariate time-series analyses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 1010-1028.
37. Shen, C. (2005). How American middle schools differ from schools of five Asian countries: Based on cross-national data from TIMSS 1999. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11, 179-199.
38. Stanat, P., & Lüdtke, O. (2008). Multilevel issues in international large-scale assessment studies on student performance. In F.J.R. van de Vijver, D.A. van Hemert, & Y.H. Poortinga (Eds.), Individuals and cultures in multilevel analysis (pp. 315-344). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Thorndike, R.L., & Hagen, E. (1993). The Cognitive Abilities Test: Form 5. Itasca, IL: The Riverside Publishing Company.
40. Trautwein, U. (2007). The homework-achievement relation reconsidered: Differentiating homework time, homework frequency, and homework effort. Learning and Instruction, 17, 372-388.
41. Trautwein, U., & Köller, O. (2003). The relationship between homework and achievement: Still much of a mystery. Educational Psychology Review, 15, 115-145.
42. Trautwein, U., Köller, O., Schmitz, B., & Baumert, J. (2002). Do homework assignments enhance achievement? A multilevel analysis in 7th grade mathematics. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 26-50.
43. Trautwein, U., & Lüdtke, O. (2007). Students' self-reported effort and time on homework in six school subjects: Between-students differences and within-student variation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 432-444.
44. Trautwein, U., & 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. Learning and Instruction, 19, 243-258.
45. Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Kastens, C., & Köller, O. (2006). Effort on homework in grades 5-9: Development, motivational antecedents, and the association with effort on classwork. Child Development, 77, 1094-1111.
46. Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Marsh, H.W., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2006). Tracking, grading, and student motivation: Using group composition and status to predict self-concept and interest in ninth-grade mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 788-806.
47. Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Schnyder, I., & Niggli, A. (2006). Predicting homework effort: Support for a domain-specific, multilevel homework model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 438-456.
48. Van den Noortgate, W., Opdenakker, M.-C., & Onghena, P. (2005). The effects of ignoring a level in multilevel analysis. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16, 281-303.
49. Walberg, H.J. (1991). Does homework help? The Second Community Journal, 1, 13-15.
50. Walberg, H.J., & Paschal, R.A. (1995). Homework. In L.W. Anderson (Ed.), International encyclopaedia of teaching and teacher education (pp. 268-271). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
51. West, B.T., Welch, K.B., & Galecki, A.T. (2007). Linear mixed models. A practical guide using statistical software. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group.
52. Xu, J. (2005). Purposes for doing homework reported by middle and high school students. The Journal of Educational Research, 99, 46-55.