It's important to add here that homework has never been shown to improve grades or educational outcomes generally, and it's a very well-studied topic.
If there is one thing I regret about my college years it is not doing math assignments.
I dont have the sources to hand, but i recall an economist talking about large studies in this area.
Just because that's the case it doesn't follow that "homework doesn't improve grades."
I find that hard to believe.
Writing, to take one example, requires practice. The amount of practice you can get in a single academic year maxes out at 180 hours without homework and you would have no time to actually teach.
I can imagine that 5 hours a week of writing homework in English rapidly exceeds the amount of time you could ever spend in class.
Imagine a manager saying "you need to brush up on your C++. But we're too busy to arrange training. An hour a day after work should help instead"
Children need time to develop in ways other than rote education. Homework steals that time from them. I am quite happy to write "did not have time to complete due to Scouts / swimming / x " on assignment sheets.
The discrete goals that schools are expected to fulfill are excessive, poorly defined, and politically vulnerable. It's a odd game.
That's fine, but don't complain about the education of the children not being very good afterward.
100 hours barely moves you out of the novice category for any subject.
> Imagine a manager saying "you need to brush up on your C++. But we're too busy to arrange training. An hour a day after work should help instead"
Funny, that's exactly what about 1/3 of the students in the CS classes that I taught were doing. Almost all of whom paid for the class themselves.
They disagree with your assessment to the tune of several thousand dollars of hard earned money.
That said, OPs comment is overly broad and devoid of specifics, so okay, you refuted his "never".
No, it’s not his job. I’m guessing programming is probably his job.
He’s not a researcher and this is not a peer reviewed journal. This is a place where amateurs of conversation come to discuss things that are of interest, but most of us know nothing about, in our spare time. It started out differently but that’s basically what it has evolved into.
Providing citations is nice, it helps, it’s useful and constructive. But it’s not a job, it’s not a duty. You are a capable person with a working, sceptic brain who can do your own research if you so please. Anyone is free to make baseless claims, just downvote them or kindly ask for more info if you don’t like it.
But I’m tired of this “provide 3 different citations from peer reviewed journals to get a passing grade” attitude. It’s getting so bad I’m seeing it in daily life now, and it’s killing all sense of colloquial conversation. You do some work if you don’t like what people are saying. Everyone will thank you for it.
Or just ignore them. Or downvote them. Or be amicable, at least. But nobody has to do anything. I disagree.
Sorry, I guess :/ pet peeve.
But the discussion went:
* original poster (HN1) made a general claim
* someone (HN2) answered with a sourced counter-argument for a specific case
* another commenter (HN3) said something like "good on you, but your source doesn't prove much cause it doesn't disprove all the other cases"
Conceptually, for me at least, I'd rank their statements, from good to bad: HN2 > HN1 >>>>> H3.
The one thing I dislike the most is the IANAL - "Don't take this as legal advice" disclaimer that I see abused. I mean, really, who is naive enough to take random legal advice from strangers?
Having recently read some stories over at darwinawards.com, I can think of quite a few people who would seem a lot less naïve, if all they had done was taking legal advice from strangers...
Even in the study mentioned in a previous comment [1], the authors disagree as, "we find additional homework to be most effective for high and low achievers".
[0]https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/06/20/why-handwriting-is...
[1]https://www.binghamton.edu/economics/research/old-working-pa...
I also think the "poorer countries" is a red herring (e.g. Singapore scores quite highly on the list), I think it's more about cultural differences and competition about a much more limited number of places for higher education.
My own (very limited) experience with the education systems in several Asian countries is that the focus is more on feeding students facts. Whereas the education in the Nordic countries generally focus more on learning how to solve problems, either by yourself or in groups.
I'm not sure if there is any work directly comparing the two, but it's true that emotional stability and encouragement are very important.
"The most determinative factor in parental involvement appears to be what could be called: good parenthood in the home situation (Desforges & Abouchaar, 2003; Fantuzzo et al., 2004; McWayne et al., 2004). This factor is characterised by the establishing of a safe and stable home setting, stimulation of intellectual development e.g. by discussions between parent and child, modeling, disseminating the importance of education and fostering high expectations about children’s school success." [0]
[0] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265632472_Parental_...