Homework in the Home: How Student, Family, and Parenting-Style Differences Relate to the Homework Process

Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 464–487 (2000) doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1036, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

Homework in the Home: How Student, Family, and Parenting-Style Differences Relate to the Homework Process Harris Cooper and James J. Lindsay University of Missouri

and Barbara Nye Tennessee State University Parents (n ⫽ 709) were surveyed about involvement in their child’s homework. A factor analysis revealed three dimensions of homework involvement similar to those found in more general studies of parenting style. These dimensions are autonomy support, direct involvement, and elimination of distractions. A fourth dimension, parental interference, differentiated itself from autonomy support for students in higher grades. Two-thirds of parents reported some negative or inappropriate form of involvement. Parenting style for homework was then related to student and family characteristics and student schooling outcomes. Results indicated parents with students in higher grade levels reported giving students more homework autonomy and less involvement of all other types. Parents in poorer families reported less support for autonomy and more interference. Parents reported less elimination of distractions when an adult was not at home after school and, for elementary school students, when there were more than one child living in the home. Elementary school parents of males reported more direct involvement in homework, while high school parents of females reported more direct involvement. More parental support for autonomy was associated with higher standardized test scores, higher class grades, and more homework completed. More positive parent involvement was associated with lower test scores and lower class grades, especially for elementary school students. Student attitudes toward homework were unrelated to parenting style for homework. Stage–environment fit theory and conceptions of families as This research was supported by a Grant R117E40309 from the Office of Educational Research and Improvement. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily of the granting agency. Thanks are extended to the staff of the Center for Research and Policy in Basic Skills, Tennessee State University, for help with data collection and to the participating school districts and parents. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Harris Cooper, Department of Psychology, McAlester Hall, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211. E-mail: cooperh@ missouri.edu. 464 0361-476X/00 $35.00 Copyright  2000 by Academic Press All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

465

varying in resources to support children are used to explain the findings and draw implications for parent behavior and educational practice.  2000 Academic Press Parent supervision of the activities of the child is an instinct. It is therefore general and unavoidable. But for this instinct parents would not make the sacrifice to send the children to school. These questions, then, are pertinent: Can a public school be so conducted that the assistance of parents may be entirely eliminated? If such a school is possible, is it desirable? —E. C. Brooks

These premises and questions provided the impetus for the first known study of the effects of parent involvement on academic achievement (Brooks, 1916, pp. 187–188). Brooks visited the homes of 268 fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-grade students and classified each according to whether students did or did not receive supervision from a parent while doing homework. Without the benefit of a statistical test, Brooks concluded, ‘‘Where parents are capable of guiding the child and are inclined to supervise the home study, their children succeed in school. But where the parents are illiterate or for other reasons are unable or unwilling to supervise the home study, their children as a rule either make slow progress or are failures . . .’’ (p. 193). While Brooks’s language is insensitive by today’s standards, his unequivocal conclusion is not without appeal. Still, Brooks’s claim about the relationship between parent supervision and home study did not put the issue to rest. In fact, research conducted over the past generation suggests Brooks’s assertion was deceptively simple. This article presents the results of a survey of parents regarding their behavior in helping their children with homework and how student, family, and parenting-style differences relate to student achievement. Before presenting the study, we first examine how the applied literature suggests parent involvement might be linked to homework’s effectiveness and discuss several theoretical models that might help explain these relationships. We then summarize previous research relating parent involvement and achievement. Applied Perspectives on Parent Involvement in Homework Cooper (1989) reviewed the applied literature examining the impact of parent involvement on the effectiveness of homework. Cooper found that for each potentially positive impact suggested by educators, there was a corresponding potentially negative effect (see also Corno, 1996). First, educators said that while parent involvement in home study could be used to accelerate children’s learning, involvement might also interfere with learning if parents were ill-equipped to take on the role of teacher or if parents used instructional techniques different from those being used at school. Second, educators suggested that parent involvement might facilitate communication of expectations between the school and family. Conversely, direct involvement of parents in homework could also lead to excessive pressure on chil-

466

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

dren to complete assignments and do well, creating expectations inconsistent with the students’ capabilities. Finally, educators pointed out that while monitoring and assisting with homework by parents should be beneficial to students, overly involved parents might give assistance beyond tutoring, perhaps by simply giving correct answers or completing assignments themselves. Complicating the picture further, families differ in the resources of time, space, and materials available to them. Scott-Jones (1984), Kronholz (1997), and Odum (1994) all suggested that requests for involvement might be more difficult for families of limited economic means and/or in which there is a single parent. For example, well-to-do families could find it easier to provide students with quiet, well-lit spaces in which to do homework and be more able to provide the materials needed for successful completion of assignments. Grolnick, Benjet, Kurowski, and Apostoleris (1997) empirically demonstrated these relationships (see also McDermott, Goldman, & Varenne, 1984). Given this multiplicity of influences, we would expect theoretical models would have emerged that integrated student, parent, and family factors as influences on student achievement via parent involvement in homework. While no model specific to homework has emerged, there do exist at least two general theoretical approaches to parent involvement in schooling that pertain to home study. Theoretical Approaches to Parent Involvement in Schooling Grolnick and Ryan (1989) asserted that ‘‘both self-regulation and competence-relevant outcomes [in children] could be linked to parents’ styles of motivating and supporting the child’s school-related behavior’’ (p. 143). They proposed three dimensions of parenting style that should predict children’s self-regulation and competence. Autonomy support was defined as ‘‘the degree to which parents value and use techniques which encourage independent problem solving, choice, and participation in decision making . . .’’ (p. 144). Direct parent involvement concerned ‘‘the extent to which the parent is interested in, knowledgeable about, and takes an active part in the child’s life’’ (p. 144). Finally, provision of structure referred to the degree to which parents provide clear and consistent guidelines and follow-through on contingencies for the child’s behavior, independent of the content of these expectations. Greater structure makes it easier for children to discern who and what controls outcomes. Grolnick and Ryan (1989) studied 48 intact families using measures of parents’ autonomy support, structure, and involvement that focused primarily on general educational issues but also included other life skills. The study found general support for the hypotheses that greater autonomy support, structure, and involvement on the part of parents were related to greater

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

467

self-regulation and higher achievement in their children. However, several interacting variables, including family socioeconomic status, were identified. Autonomy support was the dimension that proved most consistent with the theoretical expectations. The second general model was offered by Eccles and colleagues (1991). These researchers borrowed person–environment fit theory (Lewin, 1935) to propose that ‘‘people will have optimal motivation and satisfaction in settings that afford them as much autonomy as they desire’’ (p. 54). Then, following Hunt (1975), Eccles et al. added a developmental component by proposing that ‘‘optimal levels of adult control over children’s behavior should respond to, and foster, increasing independence and autonomy as children mature’’ (p. 55). Eccles et al. (1991) tested their notions using a large sample of adolescents who completed multiple waves of questionnaires. Students expressed an increasing desire for control over their educational experiences as they matured and, consistent with Grolnick and Ryan’s notion of structure and involvement, adolescents seemed ‘‘to develop best when these increasing opportunities occur in environments that are emotionally supportive’’ (p. 66). The Relationship between Parent Involvement in Homework and Student Achievement Research correlating parent involvement and student achievement suggests no categorical relationship. Cooper (1989) found that five studies relating the amount of parent involvement to student achievement produced correlations ranging from ⫹.40 to ⫺.22. We found two additional largesample studies. Epstein (1988) surveyed first-, third-, and fifth-grade teachers (n ⫽ 82) and parents (n ⫽ 1269) in 16 Maryland school districts. She found negative relationships between the number of minutes parents reported helping with homework and the child’s achievement in reading and math. Keith, Keith, Troutman, Bickley, Tirvette, and Singh (1993) analyzed the nationally representative sample of 21,814 eighth-grade students and parents taken from the 1988 National Education Longitudinal Study. Keith et al. used a composite measure of parent involvement that included how often parents checked homework as well as measures not related to homework. They found positive relationships in all subject areas. Part of this effect appeared to result from an increase in the amount of homework completed by students with involved parents. At least two explanations come to mind for the contradictory findings. First, because these studies are correlational, they may be gauging a relationship that is bidirectional in nature. That is, it may be the case that both (a) increasing parent involvement causes improved student achievement and (b) poor achievement causes greater parent involvement. The latter possibility was supported by Epstein (1988), who found a negative correlation between

468

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

parent involvement and achievement but also found that parents of lowachieving students said they received from teachers more frequent requests to help, more messages that they should help, and more communications about how to help with homework. Second, parent involvement may cause improved student learning under some conditions but interfere with learning under other conditions. Some types of parent help with homework might be beneficial while other types might be detrimental to student progress. Regrettably, the two large-sample studies simply asked how often the parent was involved in homework without examining different circumstances for involvement (e.g., because the teacher required it or because the child requested it) or goals of involvement (e.g., to increase understanding or to make homework go faster). In order to accomplish this more refined analysis, we must turn to studies with smaller samples but more in-depth treatment of parent homework involvement. Applying Parenting-Style Theories to Homework Research We found four studies that used in-depth surveys to identify the salient issues associated with parent involvement in homework. All four studies acknowledged the positive potential of parent involvement but each also highlighted the tensions caused by homework involvement, especially those related to parents playing an active teaching role and to variations in parent resources across families. Reetz (1990) surveyed 570 elementary and middle school parents and asked them about the problems they faced in helping their child with homework. The most frequently mentioned problem was ‘‘helping child develop consistent study times’’ (p. 17). This problem was followed by ‘‘finding time to supervise homework because of parental work commitments’’ and ‘‘helping the child develop independent study habits’’ (p. 17). Clearly then, parents were expressing an implicit understanding of the importance of Grolnick and Ryan’s (1989) dimensions of autonomy support, direct involvement, and structure. Kay, Fitzgerald, Paradee, and Mellencamp (1994) used interviews, focus groups, and logs to identify the major homework issues confronting 41 families of fourth- or eighth-graders eligible for special education services. The first theme to emerge was the feeling among parents that they were inadequately equipped to help their child with homework. They cited three reasons for their feeling of inadequacy: changes in pedagogy due to school reform, lack of information about curriculum, and need for specific training to help children with special needs. The Kay et al. (1994) study as well as Cooper’s (1989) review point to a fourth parenting-style dimension that may be important in homework. This dimension might be labeled mentoring skills. Parents may differ in their ability to serve as teachers because they possess differing levels of teaching

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

469

ability or familiarity with the curriculum. This dimension might be independent of the parents’ level of autonomy support, structure, and direct involvement. Hoover-Dempsey, Bassler, and Burow (1995) interviewed 69 parents of first- through fifth-graders. A recurring theme in the interviews concerned expectations for independent work. Several parents reported tension between the child’s need for help and what the child should accomplish independently. Virtually all parents described themselves as responsible for structuring aspects of homework. About three-quarters said they monitored homework, about half said they provided motivation for doing homework, and about half said they taught their child as part of homework. Two reports by Epstein and Becker (Becker & Epstein 1982; Epstein & Becker, 1982) described the results of a survey of 3700 teachers regarding parent involvement. They found that teachers were ‘‘divided concerning whether teachers can actually influence parents to help their children at home, whether most parents have sufficient skills to teach their children to read and solve math problems, [and] whether it is fair to ask parents to spend an hour each evening working with their children on school-related activities . . .’’ (pp. 88–89). In the minds of teachers then, the mentoring skill and direct involvement issues seemed to be most salient. Variations in Parent Involvement across Families Variation in how homework is carried out in different homes has been the focus of three qualitative studies. McDermott, Goldman, and Vareene (1984) examined videotapes of homework in two working-class families from the same neighborhood, each with two children attending the same school. In one family homework moved fluidly in and out of daily life, while in the other family homework was ‘‘much like a mountain to be climbed’’ (p. 403), with multiple interruptions and diversions before an assignment was completed. McDermott and colleagues concluded that ‘‘the two families offer quite different environments for work sent home from school. The parents have different problems to solve in their daily round with school tasks and different resources with which to solve them’’ (p. 406). Chandler, Argyris, Barnes, Goodman, and Snow (1986) interviewed and observed mothers, teachers, and students from 31 urban, low-income families. They found little discontinuity between the implicit theories of learning held by teachers and parents and that most family interactions over homework were positive, cooperative, and productive. The researchers concluded that ‘‘some parents can provide their children with skilled teaching and management’’ (p. 23; also see Snow, Barnes, Chandler, Goodman, & Hemphill, 1991). Finally, Xu and Corno (1998) reported six case studies, based on observations and interviews, of third-graders doing homework in homes where par-

470

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

ents held professional positions. They concluded that (a) teachers and parents held similar views about the complex purposes of homework, (b) all parents used multiple strategies to help their child complete homework, (c) students ‘‘used a variety of strategies to help themselves follow through on homework’’ (p. 37), and (d) in most cases ‘‘homework became a commitment that limited family participation in other social or leisure activities. It was also at times an emotionally draining event’’ (p. 36). In sum, the qualitative studies indicate that parents and teachers are aware that some kinds of involvement can be counterproductive to their children’s learning. Also, parents and teachers apparently understand that supporting autonomous behavior and providing structure, motivation, and competent mentoring can make positive contributions to their child’s learning. Further, some families are more prone than others to have more positive or negative consequences from parent involvement. The Present Study Previous large-sample homework research has measured family variations and achievement outcomes but has lacked distinction in the measurement of the circumstances, goals, and quality of parent involvement. Past small-scale research has analyzed parent involvement in-depth but has lacked (a) systematic classification of family and child differences and/or (b) measures of achievement. Using a relatively large sample of 709 families, the present study provides the most detailed and integrated picture of parent influence on homework outcomes. Also, this study tested the applicability of Grolnick and Ryan’s (1989) parenting-style dimensions and Eccles and colleagues (1991) stage–environment fit model to the homework process. Thus, we predicted that (a) distinctions in parents’ homework involvement taken from the applied literature (e.g., differences in involvement goals and circumstances) will reveal a factor structure suggesting Grolnick and Ryan’s three dimensions of parenting style, with a possible fourth dimension relating to mentoring ability; (b) parenting styles will be related to family variables, specifically, families with greater resources of adult time and competency will also show more autonomy support, structure, direct involvement, and good mentoring skill; and (c) more autonomy support, structure, direct involvement, and better mentoring skills on the part of parents will be associated with better school performance on the part of children. Finally, the Eccles et al. model was used to predict that as students grow older parents will be less involved in homework along all dimensions. METHOD

Sample Size and Composition Because this data set was used for multiple studies (see Cooper, Lindsay, Nye, & Greathouse, 1998), we had to obtain complete data from a teacher, at least one student in that

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

471

teacher’s class, and that student’s parent. We referred to this unit of data as a ‘‘triad.’’ We defined ‘‘parent’’ to include biological or adoptive parents or guardians. Within any class, there could be as many usable triads as there were students. When the data were analyzed, a total of 709 pairs of parent and student responses were available. For any given analysis, the sample size could be smaller due to a missing response on the questionnaire, missing class grades, or missing standardized test scores. Response rate. A total of 103 teachers in Grades 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12 were contacted and initially agreed to take part in the study. Of these, 80% (n ⫽ 82) returned at least one usable triad. Within these classes, the response rate by parents and students was 35%. While we would have liked to pursue nonresponding parents beyond the second mailing procedure described below, doing so was beyond the resources of our study. The 35% response rate is somewhat lower than that obtained in other homework studies that required parents to complete and return questionnaires (cf. Epstein, 1988; Reetz, 1990) but comparable to studies involving the educational implications of parenting styles (cf. Eccles et al., 1991; Grolnick & Ryan, 1989. A comparison of the percentage of students in the sample versus the school districts according to their sex, racial or ethnic group, type of residence, and whether they were eligible for free lunch indicated that respondents were not a random sample drawn from the districts (see Cooper et al., 1998, for details). Therefore, care must be taken in generalizing our results to populations containing percentages of whites and disadvantaged families that differ markedly from our sample statistics. School districts. Three school districts agreed to take part in the research: a large metropolitan public school district in the state of Tennessee, a suburban school district adjacent to the urban district, and a rural school district adjacent to the suburban district (see Cooper et al., 1998, for details). All participating classes were regular education classes and the three districts did not use tracking systems based on ability. Students and parents. In 85% of the cases, the student’s mother completed the parent questionnaire. Students and parents were sampled primarily from 2nd- (n ⫽ 95), 4th- (n ⫽ 190), 6th- (n ⫽ 124), 8th- (n ⫽ 112), 10th- (n ⫽ 117), and 12th- (n ⫽ 55) grade classrooms, with a few students in 7th and 11th grade (n ⫽ 16). A total of 285 parents constituted the elementary school sample (Grades 2 through 5), 243 parents constituted the middle school sample (Grades 6 through 8), and 181 parents constituted the high school sample (Grades 9 through 12).

Instruments The homework questionnaire. The homework survey, which we titled the Homework Process Inventory (HPI), was developed explicitly for this study. Items were generated to measure the factors Cooper (1989) proposed as influences on the utility of homework. Six different versions of the HPI were constructed. There were separate versions for teachers, students, and parents and within each group of respondents there were separate versions for elementary and secondary school. The data described below come only from the parent questionnaires. There were 25 questions on the elementary school version of the parent HPI and 27 questions on the secondary school version of the HPI. Parents were asked whether their child was a male or female. Fifty-five percent of the students were female. Then parents were asked several questions about their family’s characteristics. The specific wording of these questions can be found in Table 1. First, parents were asked whether their child received lunch at school for free. Seventy-one parents (10%) said their child received free lunch. Families receiving free lunch were considered low SES (versus middle SES) in the analyses. Second, parents were asked how many adults lived in the child’s home. Sixty-seven parents (9.4%) reported that only one adult lived in the home, 521 (73.5%) reported two adults lived in the home, and 121 parents (17.1%) reported more than two adults lived in the home. Third, parents were asked how many other children lived in the home. Responses ranged from 0 to 10, with a mean of 1.5. Finally, parents were asked whether an

472

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

TABLE 1 Factors Affecting the Influence of Parent Involvement in Homework on Student Outcomes Student characteristics Grade level or age Gender Family characteristics Economic resources Question: How does your child get lunch? Responses: brings it from home/buys it at school/gets it free at school. Number of adults in the home Question: What other people live in your home? Responses: my husband or wife/number of other grown-ups Number of siblings Question: What other people live in your home? Responses: number of sons/number of daughters/number of other children Time spent in the home by adults Question: Is an adult at home when your child returns from school? Responses: yes/no Parenting style Autonomy support Question: How often do you or someone else help with homework that your child should really be doing alone? Responses: every night/more than once a week/about once a week/less than once a week/never Question: How often do you or someone else help so your child can finish faster? Responses: all the time/most of the time/about half the time/some of the time/never Structure Question: How often do you make your child set aside quiet time for doing homework? Responses: all the time/most of the time/about half the time/some of the time/never Question: Most of the time, is the television on or off when your child does homework? Response: the television is always on/usually, the television is on/usually, the television is off/the television is always off Direct involvement Question: How often does your child’s homework require you or other people (another adult or brother or sister) to be involved? Responses: every night/more than once a week/about once a week/less than once a week/never Question: How often do you help your child with homework because your child needs help? Responses: all the time/most of the time/about half the time/some of the time/never Question: When your child asks you or someone else for help, how often is it because your child doesn’t understand the homework? Responses: all the time/most of the time/about half the time/some of the time/never Interference Question: How often do you think that helping your child actually makes it harder to do homework? Responses: all the time/most of the time/about half the time/some of the time/never

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

473

TABLE 1—Continued Student outcomes Homework completed Question: On average, how much homework does your child actually finish? Responses: all of it/most of it/half of it/some of it/none of it. Achievement Standardized test scores Class grades Attitudes Question: How do you feel about homework? Responses: like it very much/like it some/neither like nor don’t like it/don’t like it some/don’t like it at all Question: Do you think homework helps you learn? Responses: helps very much/helps some/doesn’t help at all Question: Do you think homework increases or decreases your interest in school? Responses: increases it a lot/increases it some/doesn’t make a difference/decreases it some/decreases it a lot Question: Do you think homework helps your study skills? Responses: helps very much/helps some/doesn’t help at all Question: Do you think homework helps you learn how to manage your time? Responses: helps very much/helps some/doesn’t help at all

adult was home when their child returned from school. One hundred seventy-four parents (25%) responded ‘‘some of the time’’ or ‘‘never.’’ Next, parents were asked numerous questions about their parenting style as it related to homework. While the questions were developed based on issues of concern raised in the applied homework literature, Table 1 suggests how they might relate to the dimensions of parenting style and presents the specific wording of these questions. Two questions appeared to relate to autonomy support, or a lack thereof: (a) how often others helped with homework the child should really be doing alone and (b) how often others helped their child so homework could be finished faster. Because these questions were worded so that higher scores meant less autonomy support, we reverse-scored them in all the analyses described below. Two questions related to parental provision of structure but more narrowly to elimination of distractions when doing homework: (a) how often parents made their child set aside quiet time for doing homework and (b) whether the television was on or off when their child did homework. Three questions appeared related to direct involvement: (a) how often homework required the parent or another person to be involved, (b) how often others helped their child with homework because their child needed help, and (c) how often parents or others helped so as to increase their child’s understanding. Finally, parents were asked one question related to their mentoring skills concerning their possible interference in the homework process: how often helping their child actually made homework harder. One question on the parents’ version of the HPI relating to student outcomes asked how much of their assigned homework the student typically finished. Measures of achievement. The state of Tennessee administers a standard achievement test, called the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (or TCAP), to all students in the 2nd through 8th and 10th grades. The TCAP includes both a norm-referenced and a criterionreferenced component (see Cooper et al., 1998, for details). For this study, we used as the standardized achievement measure each student’s total battery score. We felt that because the

474

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

questions asked of parents referred to homework in general without reference to specific subjects, the total battery score corresponded best to the nature of the parents’ responses. In addition, we used teacher-assigned grades as a second measure of achievement. That is, teachers were asked to provide the class grade each participating student would receive if the class ended on the day they completed the questionnaires. For elementary school students, teachers provided a single overall grade, not grades in individual subjects. For secondary school students, the grade was specific to the subject matter of the course. In most instances (especially at the secondary school level), teachers provided grades as percentages. The mean grade given by all teachers was 88.74, SD ⫽ 7.96. In all grade-level groups, teacher-assigned grades were moderately correlated with TCAP scores, for Grades 2 through 4, r(273) ⫽ .48, p ⬍ .0001; for Grades 6 through 10, r(269) ⫽ .50, p ⬍ .0001, but not so highly correlated that similar relations with other variables could be assumed. Student attitudes toward homework. Five questions on the upper grade students’ version of the HPI asked about their beliefs and affective reactions to homework (see Table 1). When we examined the interrelations between responses to these questions we found the interitem correlations ranged from .31 to .58. The raw alpha coefficient for a scale composed of all five questions was .77. Therefore, in the results described below a single ‘‘homework attitudes scale’’ was used which combined both cognitive and affective components to measure attitudes (cf. Rajecki, 1990). Scale scores could range from 0, indicating a very negative attitude toward homework, to 14, indicating a very positive attitude toward homework. Students in lower grades were asked only the question, ‘‘Do you think homework helps you learn?’’ This served as their measure of attitude toward homework.

Procedures Recruitment of schools and teachers. In October 1994, a meeting was held between the primary investigators and administrative personnel from each of the three participating school districts. After this meeting, each of the district administrators asked school principals if they were interested in allowing the study to be conducted in their schools. Names and addresses of consenting principals were then forwarded to the research staff and a letter of consent was sent to each principal. Principals then sent to the research staff lists of teachers who had agreed to learn more about the study. A letter describing the study and a consent form were then sent to each interested teacher. A $20 honorarium was offered to each teacher who agreed to participate. Questionnaire administration. Students, their teachers, and parents completed the HPI in February, March, and April 1995. Materials for completion by parents or guardians of elementary school students were sent home with the child. Materials for parents or guardians of secondary school students were sent to the students’ homes by U.S. mail. About 4 weeks after the initial contact, new surveys were sent to parents who had not returned the survey. Parents who did not respond to the second contact were lost to the study. Achievement data collection. The TCAP was administered to students in April 1995, roughly concurrent with the completion of the homework surveys. Teacher-assigned grades were collected in June 1995.

Statistical Analyses Before undertaking statistical analyses, we first standardized the four outcome measures (i.e., standardized test scores, class grades, homework completion rate, and homework attitude) within classrooms so that each classroom had a mean score of 0 and a standard deviation of 1. Thus, students’ scores on the four measures were expressed in standard deviation units as their departure from the mean of all participating students in their class.

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

475

The primary function of this transformation was to remove any effects on the outcome measures associated with variation in teachers, classrooms, schools, and school districts. It would have been very informative to examine variation in responses associated with these levels of aggregation. However, because we were interested primarily in family differences and parenting behaviors rather than school or classroom practices, limiting our focus to deviations around classroom norms most directly addressed our questions. Also, it considerably simplified our analytic task and the number of results. In addition, it was necessary to transform the TCAP scores, even though these were from a standardized instrument, because a scoring metric was used that permitted grade-level differences to appear. Finally, the transformation of the attitude measures of elementary and secondary school students also put them on the same metric, allowing us to include them in the same analyses. Three types of statistical procedures were used in the data analyses. First, we examined the frequencies with which parents used each response category. Second, factor analyses were performed so we could explore interrelations between the eight parent involvement variables and determine if these were consistent with the theoretical dimensions of parenting style. The factor analyses were carried out for the sample as a whole and separately for elementary, middle, and high school parents. The factor analyses led to a reduction of the eight parentinvolvement measures to four parenting-style measures. Third, we conducted eight multipleregression analyses, with four using the family and student variables to predict the parentingstyle measures and four more using the parenting-style measures to predict the student school performance and attitude variables. Also, we used the regressions to test for statistical interactions involving the students’ grade level. All analyses were carried out using the SAS statistical package (SAS, 1985).

RESULTS

Frequency of Different Types of Parent Involvement About one in eight parents (12.3%) reported that the teacher ‘‘never’’ required another person to be involved in their child’s homework, whereas 7.5% reported others were required to be involved ‘‘every night.’’ The most frequent response suggested that parents were required to be involved ‘‘less than once a week’’ (39.5%), followed by ‘‘about once a week’’ (24.3%) and ‘‘more than once a week’’ (16.4%). Most parents (57.8%) reported helping their child with homework because their child needed help ‘‘some of the time.’’ Parents rarely said they never gave needed help (10.9%). A similar result was found concerning how often parents helped because their child did not understand the homework; 49.9% of parents said they helped to increase understanding ‘‘some of the time,’’ while only 10.2% said this never occurred. About two-thirds of parents (67.6%) said they ‘‘never’’ helped their child with homework so that it could be finished faster. About a quarter of parents (26.6%) said they helped to make homework go faster ‘‘some of the time.’’ The three responses that suggested this type of help was given more frequently were chosen a total of 5.8% of the time. About three-quarters of parents (73.1%) said they ‘‘never’’ helped their child with homework that should have been done alone. One in five parents

476

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

(20.3%) said they did this ‘‘some of the time.’’ The remaining parents (6.7%) chose a response suggesting more frequent help with homework that should have been done alone. Three of 5 parents (59%) said their help ‘‘never’’ made their child’s homework harder. Three in 10 (30%) said help made homework harder ‘‘some of the time.’’ The remaining parents (10.9%) chose a response suggesting help was more frequently a hindrance to homework. Finally, we sought to determine what percentage of parents reported giving help with homework that interfered or may have inhibited student autonomy. We did this to generate a rough gauge of parent thinking concerning how often their help might have been construed as inappropriate. To do this, we created a new variable that assigned to each parent a value of ‘‘1’’ for each response other than ‘‘never’’ to the questions concerning the frequency of help with homework that meant to make it go faster, that should have been done alone, and that made it harder. Thus, a parent’s score could range from ‘‘0’’ if none of these forms of help ever occurred to ‘‘3’’ if all three occurred at least some of the time. The results indicated that 38.2% of parents reported these potentially negative forms of help never occurred, 33.1% said one of these forms of help occurred at least some of the time, 17.1% said two forms occurred at least some of the time, and 11.6% said all three forms of help occurred some of the time. Interrelations Among Parent-Involvement Measures A Principal Components Analysis was used to examine the interrelationships between the eight parent-involvement measures. The number of factors was set by those with eigenvalues greater than 1. Then, in order to facilitate interpretation, these factors were rotated using the Varimax rotation procedure to arrive at final factor placements and loadings. The results of the factor analyses are presented in Table 2. The Principal Components Analysis on the responses of the entire sample of parents revealed three factors with eigenvalues greater than 1. The first factor was composed of responses concerning the frequency with which parents reported others helped with homework because the teacher required it, because the student needed it, and in order to improve the student’s understanding. Thus, Factor 1 clearly resembles the direct involvement dimension of parenting style. The second factor was composed of responses concerning the frequency with which others helped with homework that should have been done alone, when help was given to make homework go faster, and when help made homework harder. This factor corresponds to the autonomy support dimension or, more precisely, lack of autonomy support, since the questions were worded so that more frequent occurrence of the behaviors would interfere with student autonomy. However, Factor 2 also included the question relating to parent interference. The third factor was composed of

477

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

TABLE 2 Factor Analysis Results for Interrelations among Family Homework Processes

Entire sample Teacher requires help Student needs help Help understand Help to make faster Help but should do alone Help makes harder Done with TV off Require quiet time High school sample Teacher requires help Student needs help Help understand Help to make faster Help but should do alone Help makes harder Done with TV off Require quiet time

Factor 1: direct involvement

Factor 2: autonomy support (lack of)

Factor 3: elimination of distractions

.73 .81 .61 .37 .34 ⫺.29 .16 ⫺.23

.30 .17 ⫺.07 .68 .72 .67 .12 .06

⫺.15 ⫺.05 .06 ⫺.01 ⫺.03 .04 .83 .81

.67 .78 .75 .01 .25 ⫺.01 .13 ⫺.14

.35 .31 ⫺.20 .87 .76 .08 .07 ⫺.09

.07 ⫺.02 ⫺.06 .06 ⫺.10 .04 .80 .82

Factor 4: interference

⫺.05 ⫺.18 .20 .04 .06 .95 .22 ⫺.15

Note. Entries are the factor loadings for each variable using a principal components analysis followed by a Varimax rotation.

the questions concerning how often the television was on and how often parents required quiet time when the student did homework. This factor corresponds to an elimination of distractions dimension and is related to the provision of structure dimension of parenting style. The separate factor analyses conducted on responses of elementary, middle, and high school parents all revealed factors of direct involvement and elimination of distractions similar to those obtained using the entire sample. Interestingly, however, the factor containing both the autonomy support and interference questions when the entire sample was used showed a clear pattern of increased differentiation when the schooling level of the child was taken into account. Specifically, for parents of elementary school students the questions about helping with homework that should be done alone, helping so that homework goes faster, and help making homework harder all clearly loaded on the same factor, with loading of .75, .63, and .77, respectively. For middle school parents, the three questions remained on the same factor, but the interference question showed a weaker relation to the other two, with factor loading of .83, .83, and .41, respectively. For high school parents, the interference question did not load on the same factor as the two

478

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

autonomy support questions, with a loading of .08 on the autonomy support factor. Instead, responses to the question about how often parent help makes homework harder appeared to constitute a separate factor. These results are also given in Table 2. The interference question was the only one showing a sizable loading on this fourth factor; the two next highest loadings were for the questions concerning how often the television was off (.22) and how often help was meant to increase understanding (.20). Based on the results of the factor analysis, we decided to reduce the eight parent-involvement questions to four scales for use in subsequent analyses. The two questions in Table 1 related to autonomy support were combined into a single scale (their correlation being .52), as were the three directinvolvement questions (their coefficient α being .64) and the two elimination-of-distractions questions (their correlation being .38). The interference question remained alone. We chose to use parental interference as a separate scale rather than combine it with autonomy support because of its differentiation from autonomy support for students in higher grades. Also, as mentioned above, we reverse scored the autonomy support scale so that higher scores indicated more support for autonomous student behavior. Relationships between Family and Student Characteristics and Parenting Styles in Homework Four multiple regressions were conducted in which student and family characteristics were used to predict the parenting-style variables. In all cases the parenting style main effects were entered first as a group and were followed by entry of the interaction vectors of grade level by each of the other predictors. The semipartial correlations derived from the multiple regressions are presented in Table 3. The multiple regression using the autonomy support measure as the criterion revealed significant relationships involving the student’s grade level, F(1, 683) ⫽ 38.21, p ⬍ .0001, and the family’s SES, F(1, 683) ⫽ 9.67, p ⬍ .002. The direction of relationships indicated that parents of older students or middle-class families reported more autonomy support, or more precisely less frequent involvement that undermined their student’s independent completion of homework. There were no significant interactions. The multiple regression predicting direct involvement revealed a single significant main effect. Higher student grade level was associated with parent reports of less frequent direct involvement in homework, F(1, 680) ⫽ 116.59, p ⬍ .0001. There was also a significant interaction between the student’s gender and grade level, F(1, 675) ⫽ 9.09, p ⬍ .003. Examination of correlations (or beta weights) by grade level indicated that in elementary school males received more direct involvement than females, r(281) ⫽ ⫺.15, p ⬍ .013; in middle school there was no significant difference between gen-

479

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

TABLE 3 Semipartial Correlations between Student and Family Characteristics and Parenting Style Parenting style Student and family characteristics

Autonomy support

Direct involvement

Elimination of distractions

Interference

Student gender (1 ⫽ male/2 ⫽ female) Grade level Family SES Adult home after school (1 ⫽ no/2 ⫽ yes)

.03

⫺.01

⫺.06

⫺.10

.23* .11* .05

⫺.38* ⫺.02 .00

⫺.19* .05 .08*

⫺.14* .08* .00

Note. Semipartial correlations control for all other listed student and family characteristics as well as the number of adults and number of children in the home, which produced no significant results. Semipartial correlations with asterisks are significant at at least p ⬍ .05. The R 2 for autonomy support was .08, for direct involvement .16, for elimination of distractions .06, and for interference .04.

ders, r(237) ⫽ .08, ns; and in high school females received more direct involvement than males, r(180) ⫽ .15, p ⬍ .047. Elimination of distractions by parents was found significantly associated with grade level and whether an adult was at home when the student returned from school. Eliminating distractions by parents covaried with students being in earlier grades, F(1, 679) ⫽ 27.24, p ⬍ .0001, and in families where an adult was usually home after school, F(1, 679) ⫽ 4.22, p ⬍ .041. Significant interactions were also found involving grade level and the number of adults and children in the home; for adults, F(1, 674) ⫽ 3.96, p ⬍ .048, for children, F(1, 674) ⫽ 9.90, p ⬍ .002. The correlations for each grade level indicated that the association between elimination of distractions and the number of adults in the home was barely positive for elementary school students r(282) ⫽ .03, ns, but negative for middle school, r(240) ⫽ ⫺.10, ns, and high school students, r(180) ⫽ ⫺.10, ns, although none of these relationships approached statistical significance. Opposite relationships were found involving the number of other children in the home. More children in the home was associated with less elimination of distractions for elementary school students, r(282) ⫽ ⫺.15, p ⬍ .009, but more elimination of distractions for middle school, r(240) ⫽ .07, ns, and high school students, r(180) ⫽ .10, ns. Parents reports of interfering, or more precisely how often their help made homework harder, was significantly associated with the student’s gender, grade level, and the family’s SES. Parents reported that their help more often made homework harder for females than for males, F(1, 674) ⫽ 6.47, p ⬍

480

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

TABLE 4 Semipartial Correlations between Parenting Style and Student School Variables Student school variables Parenting style

Standardized tests

Class grades

Homework completed

Student attitude

Autonomy Support Direct Involvement Elimination of Distractions Interference

.15* ⫺.18* ⫺.01 .01

.13* ⫺.11* .03 .06

.21* .03 .07 .06

.02 .05 .02 .01

Note. Semipartial correlations control for all other listed parenting style variables. Semipartial correlations with asterisks are significant at at least p ⬍ .05. The R 2 for standardized tests was .10, for class grades .06, for homework completed .06, and for student attitude .00.

.012, for students in higher grades, F(1, 674) ⫽ 12.94, p ⬍ .0003, and in low-SES families, F(1, 674) ⫽ 4.09, p ⬍ .044. There were no significant interactions. Relationships between Parenting Styles in Homework and Student Schooling Outcomes The semipartial correlations arising from the four multiple regressions in which the parenting-style variables were used to predict student schooling variables are presented in Table 4. In these analysis the parenting-style main effects were entered first as a group followed by entry of the interaction vectors of grade level by each of the parenting-style predictors. The multiple regression on standardized test scores revealed two significant predictors. Higher test scores were associated with greater parental support for autonomy, F(1, 577) ⫽ 15.36, p ⬍ .0001. More frequent direct parent involvement was associated with lower student standardized test scores, F(1, 577) ⫽ 21.80, p ⬍ .0001. There were no significant interactions involving grade level and the parenting-style variables. The grades that students received in class were significantly associated with the amount of parental autonomy support and direct involvement. Higher student class grades covaried with more autonomy support, F(1, 612) ⫽ 11.22, p ⬍ .0009, and less direct parent involvement, F(1, 612) ⫽ 7.18, p ⬍ .008. There was also a significant interaction between grades and direct parent involvement, F(1, 608) ⫽ 19.20, p ⬍ .0001. The correlations for the three grade levels indicated that the negative relation between grades and direct involvement was strongest at the elementary school level, r(279) ⫽ ⫺.44, p ⬍ .0001, and became weaker at the middle school level, r(215) ⫽ ⫺.02, ns, and the high school level, r(140) ⫽ ⫺.04, ns. One parenting style measure proved to be a significant predictor of stu-

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

481

dents’ completion of homework assignments. More completion of assignments was associated with more autonomy support, F(1, 682) ⫽ 31.43, p ⬍ .0001. No significant interaction was found involving grade level and the parenting style variables. Finally, regressing the parenting style variables on the measure of student’s attitude toward homework revealed no significant main effects or interactions. DISCUSSION

At the most global level, our results support the claims that (a) negative forms of parent involvement in homework occur at least some of the time in most families, (b) more general models of parenting style can be used to illuminate the homework process, (c) different parenting styles in homework are associated with student and family differences, and (d) parenting styles in homework covary with schooling outcomes in ways that suggest how parent involvement is and can be used to improve student achievement. Frequency and Interrelations of Different Types of Parent Involvement Not surprisingly, parents reported the occurrence of both positive and negative types of involvement in homework. More than half of all parents gave their child help even when it was not required and often did so in order to increase their child’s understanding. On the negative side, about two-thirds of parents reported instances of help with homework occurred in their family that interfered with student development. Over 40% of parents said their involvement made homework harder at least some of the time. Given that our sample likely overrepresented families who had generally positive experiences with schooling, these numbers might be taken as conservative estimates of the prevalence of homework problems. The Dimensional Structure of Types of Parent Involvement Grolnick and Ryan’s (1989) model of parenting styles was found to be a useful predictor of factor analyses of eight questions about involvement in homework. Three factors underlying questionnaire responses emerged and these were interpretable as the parenting style dimensions of (lack of) support for autonomy, direct involvement, and elimination of distractions, with the latter clearly related to provision of structure. Importantly, the eight questions on our survey were not developed to test the parenting-styles model but rather were derived from the applied homework literature. Thus, they differed from questions that might have been asked had a more direct test of the model been undertaken. On the negative side, this means that concerns may be raised about the face validity of some questions or, by implication, the labeling of dimensions. For example, our questions about how often parents provided help with homework that should

482

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

have been done alone and how often they helped to make homework go faster dealt with instances of parents interfering with autonomy. No questions were asked about parent behaviors that promoted autonomy, such as how often parents expressed the importance of independent learning or included the student in decision making about homework. On the positive side, despite the fact that our questions were derived from applied and open-ended surveys of teachers and parents the theoretical model was still able to predict the factor structure. These results suggest that the model provides a valuable heuristic for organizing and helping interpret concerns about homework as they exist in real schools, classrooms, and families. The factor-analytic results also suggested that a fourth parenting-style dimension may have relevance to involvement with homework. Again, based on teacher and parent comments reported in previous surveys, we asked a question regarding interference by parents. The factor analyses suggested that interference was indistinguishable from autonomy support for students in early grades but became an independent dimension as students moved through school. One explanation for this developmental differentiation might be related to the difficulty of material at different grade levels. Homework content in elementary school is not difficult, and most parents ought to possess the knowledge required to be effective home-teachers. Therefore, parents of young students may reveal their most important difference in how much independence they provide for the child. At higher grade levels material becomes more complex. Good mentoring skills might involve both the provision of autonomy and, independently, the parents’ refraining from providing help that actually interferes with their child’s studying. This interpretation of the factor-analytic findings is consistent with another of our findings that higher student grade levels were associated with parent reports of both more autonomy training and less effective attempts at help. Student and Family Characteristics and Parenting Style in Homework In addition to more interference, parent reports indicated that students in higher grade levels received more autonomy support but less direct involvement and less elimination of distractions. This result is consistent with Eccles and colleagues (1991) stage–environment fit notion that independence and autonomy ought to increase as children mature. The result also supports the findings of research that has suggested teachers and parents hold similar views and implicit theories about the purposes of homework (cf. Chandler et al., 1986; Cooper, 1989; Xu & Corno, 1998). Parents in poorer families reported less support for autonomy and more interference. Also, parents reported less elimination of distractions when an adult was not at home after school and, for elementary school students, when there were more children living in the home. Several researchers have con-

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

483

ceptualized the impact on children of both low economic status and singleparent or two-working-parent families as reflecting limitations in resources, be they parent time and education or the ability to provide appropriate study space and materials (cf Scott-Jones, 1984; Kronholtz, 1997; Odum, 1994). This resource approach is consistent not only with our SES and after-school findings but also with our finding regarding the number of children in the home. That is, as the number of children sharing the same home and therefore vying for the same parent resources increases, the resources available for involvement with any single child would be predicted to decrease and possibly be of lesser quality. Further, the disparity in parent involvement based on the number of children in families was greatest when children were youngest and required the most involvement. Thus, conceptualizing families as varying in resources available to support children’s education provides a valuable framework for understanding several findings relating parenting style to family differences in the homework process. For elementary school students, parents of males reported more direct involvement in homework, while in high school parents of females reported more direct involvement. This result may suggest that as children grow older males are expected to become more autonomous than females in their achievement-related behaviors (cf. Pomerantz & Ruble, 1998). Parenting Style in Homework and Student Outcomes Most significantly, our results revealed that (a) parental support for autonomy (or lack of interference with autonomy) showed a positive relationship with student achievement (measured by either standardized tests or class grades), while (b) direct parent involvement, however appropriate, showed negative relationships with these same outcomes. Thus, a categorical statement that any type of parent involvement is better than none at all appears unwarranted. To interpret these findings, we must address the issue of causal direction. Due to the correlational nature of this study, it is impossible to discern what portions of the revealed associations are due to parent involvement in homework causing achievement, achievement causing involvement, and/or some third factor causing both. In the present instance, we find it implausible to suggest that high levels of direct parent involvement (i.e., requests for help from the teacher or student or helping to improve understanding) are very often the cause of poorer student achievement. It is more plausible that greater support for autonomous homework behavior causes higher achievement. However, this causal direction would seem unlikely to predominate at earlier grades because amounts of homework are still relatively minimal (Campbell et al., 1996) and homework has had little time to have causal effects. Therefore, we suspect that the predominant causal mechanism underlying our findings involves parents modifying their type of involvement in

484

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

homework dependent on how well their child is doing in school. If the student is performing relatively poorly in school, the parent (often at the urging of the teacher) may become more proactively involved in the performance of homework, as measured by the direct involvement dimension. If the student is doing well in school, parents may shift their focus to providing autonomy support, or more precisely, given the nature of our questions, avoid interfering in their child’s independent completion of assignments. Our finding of opposite relations to achievement for different parenting styles in homework provides a possible explanation for the inconsistency in findings of previous research. That is, the simple, often single, questions used in past research about how often parents take part in homework may leave enough ambiguity that they trigger thoughts about providing autonomy support in some parents and direct involvement in other parents. Or we would predict differences in the direction of association if students were sampled from different points along the achievement distribution. Finally, homework completion rates and students’ attitudes toward homework revealed only a single significant relationship. Parents who reported more autonomy support also reported their student completed more of their homework assignments. Using this same data set, Cooper, Lindsay, Nye, and Greathouse (1998) found that among elementary school students homework completion rates could not be predicted by (a) the student’s, parents’, or teachers’ attitudes toward homework; (b) the amount of homework assigned; or (c) the students’ standardized test scores. Among secondary school students, homework completion rates were positively associated with students’ attitudes and negatively associated with the amount of homework. For all students, attitudes toward homework were positively associated with parent attitudes. Future Research Two kinds of research on parent involvement would improve most our understanding of when, how much, and what types of parent involvement benefit students. First, continued study of the microlevel processes that go on in homes while homework is being carried out are needed. These studies could use multiple-case interview and observational methods, such as those used by Chandler et al. (1986) and Snow et al. (1991), or ethnographic methods, such as those used by Xu and Corno (1998), as well as more finely gauged survey questions than we used here, including questions on parent time and resource allocation as a function of the age and achievement level of their children and their family’s SES. Studies that reveal microlevel processes can help us delineate more finely the skills, behaviors, and contexts that determine the impact of parent involvement. Second, experimental studies are needed to uncover the causal mechanisms that identify when and under what conditions parent involvement causes positive changes in a student’s school performance. The few studies

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

485

that looked at experimentally manipulated differences in parents’ involvement were small in scope and typically included active parent training. Maertens and Johnson (1972) found no differences between students who received immediate feedback on the correctness of arithmetic story problems and students who received delayed feedback. Anesko and O’Leary (1982) found that parents trained to identify and monitor homework problem behaviors were more successful in doing so than untrained parents. Kahle and Kelley (1994) found no difference in elementary school students’ number of homework problems completed or the accuracy of homework answers as a function of whether the parents were trained in goal setting, in establishing homework routines, or had received no training at all. Based on our results, we would suggest that future experimental studies separately manipulate parent (a) autonomy support and (b) direct involvement and that the effects of these manipulations be tested for moderation by the student’s ability and grade level. Practical Implications What, then, are the implications for teachers and parents of research on parent involvement in homework? First, teachers should be cautious in requesting that parents provide active instruction to their student. In making such requests, teachers should consider whether the families they serve generally have the needed economic, time, and skill resources. In determining parental skill levels, teachers should consider both the difficulty of the homework assignment and the educational background of the parent. When parent skill resources are low teachers might consider employing a program that trains parents in how to be effective facilitators, such as the Teachers Involve Parents in Schoolwork (TIPS) program (Epstein & Dauber, 1989). Second, teachers and parents should consider the ability level of the student in determining what role the parent should play in homework. Our results are consistent with the suggestion that an active teaching role for parents may be most appropriate for students in early grades who may be experiencing difficulty in school. However, given that training students to be autonomous learners may improve later achievement, parents of students who are doing well in school should be encouraged not to interfere with self-study. Proponents have pointed out that one of the major benefits of homework is its ability to help students develop time-management and study skills and to become autonomous, lifelong learners outside of formal educational settings (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1994). REFERENCES Anesko, K. M., & O’Leary, S. G. (1982). The effective of brief parent training for the management of children’s homework problems. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 4, 113– 126.

486

COOPER, LINDSAY, AND NYE

Becker, H. J., & Epstein, J. L. (1982). Parent involvement: A survey of teacher practices. Elementary School Journal, 83, 85–102. Brooks, E. C. (1916). The value of home study under parental supervision. Elementary School Journal, 17, 187–194. Campbell, J. R., Reese, C. M., O’Sullivan, C., & Dossey, J. A. (1996). NAEP 1994 trends in academic progress. Washington DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. Chandler, J. D., Argyris, W. S., Barnes, W. F., Goodman, I. F., & Snow, C. E. (1986). Parents as teachers: Observations of low-income parents and children in a homework-like task. In B. Schieffelin & P. Gilmore (Eds.), The acquisition of literacy: Ethnographic perspectives. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Cooper, H. (1989). Homework. White Plains, NY: Longman. Cooper, H., Lindsay, J. J., Nye, B., & Greathouse, S. (1998). Relationships between attitudes about homework, amount of homework assigned and completed, and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 70–83. Cooper, H., Valentine, J., Lindsay, J. J., & Nye, B. (1999). Relationships between five afterschool activities and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 1– 10. Corno, L. (1996). Homework is a complicated thing. Educational Researcher, 25, 27–30. Eccles, J. S., Buchanan, C. M., Flanagan, C., Fuligni, A., Midgley, C., & Yee, D. (1991). Control versus autonomy during early adolescents. Journal of Social Issues, 47, 53–68. Epstein, J. L. (1988). Homework practices, achievements, and behaviors of elementary school students. Baltimore, MD: Center for Research on Elementary & Middle Schools, Johns Hopkins University. Epstein, J. L., & Becker, H. J. (1982). Teachers reported practices of parent involvement: Problems and possibilities. Elementary School Journal, 83, 103–113. Epstein, J. L., & Dauber, L. D. (1989). Effects of the Teachers Involve Parents in Schoolwork (TIPS) social studies and art program on student attitudes and knowledge. (Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools Report No. 41). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University. Grolnick, W. S., Benjet, C., Kurowski, C. O., & Apostoleris, N. H. (1997). Predictors of paryent involvement in children’s schooling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 538–548. Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children’s self-regulation and competence in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 143–154. Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., Bassler, O. C., & Burow, R. (1995). Parent’s reported involvement in student homework: Strategies and practices. Elementary School Journal, 95, 435–450. Hunt, D. E. (1975). Person–environment interaction: A challenge found wanting before it was tried. Review of Educational Research, 45, 209–230. Kahle, A. L., & Kelley, M. L. (1994). Children’s homework problems: A comparison of goal setting and parent training. Behavior Therapy, 25, 275–290. Kay, P. J., Fitzgerald, M., Paradee, C., & Mellencamp, A. (1994). Making homework work at home: The parent’s perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 550–561. Keith, T. Z., Keith, P. B., Troutman, G. C., Bickley, P. G., Trivette, P. S., & Singh, K. (1993). Does parent involvement affect eighth-grade students achievement? Structural analysis of national data. School Psychology Review, 22, 474–496. Kronholtz, J. (1997, June 6). Homework becomes a critical assignment for moms and dads. The Wall Street Journal, A1 and A8.

HOMEWORK IN THE HOME

487

Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill. Maertens, N. W., & Johnston, J. (1972). The effects of arithmetic homework upon the attitudes and achievement of fourth, fifth and sixth grade pupils. School Science and Mathematics, 72, 117–126. McDermott, R. P., Goldman, S. V., & Varenne, H. (1984). When school goes home: Some problems in the organization of homework. Teachers College Record, 85, 391–409. Odum, M. E. (1994, May 2). A tough assignment for teachers: Getting students to do homework is getting harder. Washington Post, A1 and A10. Pomerantz, E. M., & Ruble, D. N. (1998). The role of maternal control in the development of sex differences in child self-evaluative factors. Child Development, 69, 458–478. Rajecki, D. W. (1990). Attitudes (2nd ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer. Reetz, L. J. (1990). Parental perceptions of homework. Rural Educator, 12, 14–19. SAS (1985). SAS Users Guide: Statistics (Version 5). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Scott-Jones, D. (1984). Family influences on cognitive development and school achievement. In E. Gordon (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 11). Washington DC: American Educational Research Association. Snow, C. E., Barnes, W. S., Chandler, J., Goodman, I. F., & Hemphill, L. (1991). Unfulfilled expectations: Home and school influences on literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press. Wolf, R. M. (1977). Achievement in the United States. In H. J. Walberg (Ed.), Educational environments and effects. California: McCutcheon. Xu, J., & Corno, L. (1998). Case studies of families doing third grade homework. Teachers College Record, 100, 402–436.