@KarenGrossEdu Homework Doesn’t Always Work
I have long been troubled by “homework” assigned to students of all ages and at all stages. I have been concerned that for some students, the homework produces stress and anxiety that is not ameliorated in their home. They worry that they are “getting it wrong.” They will get a bad grade. Some students seek parental help and the parents are either not there or cannot help because the assignments are outside their experience. The student may worry about disappointing their teacher. The student may not be in a home environment in which homework time is even possible. There are too many chores or a job or obligatory care-taking for parents or younger siblings; and there may be other choices that are more appealing: playing with friends, going outside, watching a favorite show on TV, speaking to friends. Then there is homework that is busywork, designed to just keep students busy; ask yourselves how much of the assigned work is creative and skill building?
At the college level (and some high schools), we change up the name from “homework” to “assignments” but the change in nomenclature does not always mean the work is useful or productive. And, sometimes we assign way too much work — reading that cannot be absorbed well given the quantity assigned. It is as if faculty are encouraging skimming. And too much work messages that other things in the lives of students do not matter — family, friends, sports, hobbies.
What happened to the adage: less is more?
There is a reason there are “Cliff” notes and other resources that enable students to take shortcuts. There is a continuing struggle that homework creates, forcing students to balance when balancing is a skill that is neither simple nor easily learned. And, while we tout “responsibility” as the core importance of homework, we forget that there are many things for which students may feel responsible. A student may be responsible for younger siblings including helping them so often with homework that they cannot do their own work. When parents are working evenings, students may be responsible for making their own dinner or caring for grandparents or simply cleaning a house that is a mess from too much parental partying.
To sum it up, we wholesale embrace homework without contexualizing it and without considering what values it has and whether what has been assigned is supportive of those values. Sadly, we fail to make homework “fit” and “be meaningful” in too many cases. We miss understanding how it sits in the lives of students outside the school doors. Homework per se is not bad; it is our failure to use it well that is bad.
Homework Contracts
Some parents/teachers have turned to “homework” contracts, as if they will bind students to do the assigned work both well and on time. There are rewards and consequences if students fail to comply with the contract. (Yes, some parents hire tutors and online tutoring services if they can afford these items. And yes, some are free if one has access to the Internet and is aware of and willing to try these approaches.)
Some of these contracts are pre-prepared. Others allow families to fill in the blanks By way of example. If Student A does her homework each night on time, then she gets a point and when she gets 10 points, she can go to a store and buy something. If Student A does not do her homework on night one, she loses use of her phone for an hour. If she continues to fail to do her homework, she cannot go play with friends or do sports. Cutting off internet, cutting off play time: these are all problematic solutions because they truncate connection.
Whether rewards and punishments are the best way to incentivize homework completion is questionable for me. I worry that the failures are not well connected to the punishment — not balanced or appropriate. And, many contracts in real life are negotiated between the parties (a point that I will return to momentarily) but I wonder how many parents and children actually negotiate the homework contract. Not exactly a level playing field (so to speak).
Wouldn’t we be wiser and smarter to create “homework” that is creative and doable and fun and desired? Wouldn’t we be wiser and smarter to create homework that lessen stress and facilitates learning? Wouldn’t we be wiser and smarter to create homework that has meaning and value that can be recognized by students? And, we need to acknowledge vastly different learning styles among kids, meaning homework needs to be individualized or varied to capture the strengths of all students.
Shared Concerns
My concerns are not unique. There has been a movement to eliminate homework for some of the reasons identified above. There have been studies demonstrating the stress homework creates. (I haven’t seen studies on homework contracts but I am sure they exist.)
There are, to be sure, studies showing the benefits of homework for students’ academic achievement and the development of skills like time management. And, there is a recognition that the amount of homework needs to vary depending on the age and stage of the students. And surely, we must not see homework as punishment if we are trying to encourage learning. To complicate matters, not all students actually need the same homework but it is far easier to give every student the same assignment.
Now, one caveat: For me, someone who was overregulated and lived in a home filled with mental illness, homework was a suitable excuse pursuant to which I could exit the awful family dynamics and work, work, work. And, work I did and academic success was forthcoming (at a high psychic price to be sure).
Football
In a recent extension of his football contract, the quarterback Kyler Murray’s contract had what people have termed a “homework clause” or an “independent study” clause. And, it has generated controversy (rightly) as I will share. And, it is not a secret; the clause became the subject of debate almost as soon as the ink was dry (so to speak)
https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/cardinals-homework-kyler-murray-nfl-summer/
Start with the language in the contract that provides that Murray will “complete at least four (4) hours of independent study (as defined below) each week (excluding any bye week) during each playing season (as defined below) during the term of the contract.” This surely didn’t land in the contract between Murray and the Cardinals by accident. No one slipped it in. Murray had an agent and lawyers review the agreement; the Cardinals had professionals doing the same thing. And, both parties signed the agreement. The playing field was more or less even.
Note (having taught contracts to law students for over two decades I can’t help myself here) that the language is deliberate. The study needed is a defined term in the agreement (see the words “as defined below”) and there is a clear exception crafted in for a bye week) and the homework obligation is limited to the playing season (also a defined term). That’s lawyer language and to be clear, the definitions matter.
One source provided what it says are some of the definitional terms. Here is how they say the contract defines “independent study;”
Quote: “Independent Study” [i]s (sic) material provided by the Cardinals to help them prepare for an upcoming game, and the time must be earned outside of mandatory meetings.
According to this source, there is language disallowing Murray from “engaging in other distractions during these study hours, citing video games and browsing the internet as some of the activities that would disqualify him from getting credit.”
Source: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10043327-kyler-murrays-new-homework-clause-and-other-strange-nfl-contract-stipulations
These are thought out definitions.
Now ask why 4 hours. How was that number chosen? Certainly 4 hours a week is vastly less than most NFL players put into preparation. Is the point to make a token gesture? Please, that can’t be right. Is it that Murray learns better independently so encourage that learning approach? Given what doesn’t count as learning, why not create what you want him to learn in savvy video games. Just saying. The words, when contextualized, make even less sense.
Why?
Why, I keep asking myself as others are asking themselves, would a quarterback in the NFL need such a clause if his contract is being renewed for sizable dollars? Does the team not trust the quarterback to work hard to prepare for games? Is there a history of non-preparation? Is the player behind in his knowledge of the team’s schemes each week? Are his errors due to a lack of homework time? Is the team sending a message about the player and their lack of respect for his work ethic? Is that based on experiences which suggest some problems?
And, why would a player agree to this? Perhaps he does the studying anyway so it is not a big deal. Perhaps the player saw it as a way to give away something that generated more money for him — an easy give away or so it seemed at the time. Perhaps the player recognized that he needed to show commitment to game preparation and this was a way of demonstrating that. Four hours is hardly a hearty commitment. Middle schoolers do more homework than that.
I can’t help but notice that this is a black quarterback who has this unusual clause in his contract and there has been a plethora of discussion over time (infuriating to me that race is seen as defining quarterback capacity and leadership strength) about black quarterbacks and whether they have the skills and leadership qualities to lead a team to success. Why haven’t others mentioned this hideous possibility?
Is the Murray Homework Clause Like Homework Contracts?
There is something off with the Murray “independent study” clause. Like student homework contracts (and the clause was part of a larger contract), it sits there to provide both rewards and punishment. So, here are my questions: How will the team know if Murray is complying? Does he send a note regarding completion? Will it be judged by his play on the field (assuming there is a direct and visible and measurable correlation between his study time and his on field success.
Is there a study monitor?
What happens if there is non-compliance and is it spelled out in the contract? What is the “best” punishment for failure to do the needed study? Dock in pay? No off week? Tutoring? What happens if there is compliance but poor performance? Does the team bench Murray? Do they change up, with consent, the nature and definition of the clause? The questions are endless, not to speak of the messaging embedded in giving an NFL quarterback the net equivalent of a student homework contract.
Now What
The Cardinals, given all the controversy, have agreed to delete the clause. Ok, good move but too little too late. And, apparently “workout” clauses are part and parcel of NFL quarterback contracts so that clause still exists.
It reminds me of toothpaste: once out of the tube, there is nothing one can do about it.
Sports radio will be abuzz each game this upcoming season and if it is a loss, they will say: Murray didn’t study enough (expressed perhaps as a joke?). And if there is a win, they will say: Murray sure studied this week.
Pitiful.
Here’s my point for the quarterback and for students: You can’t contractually make people care. You have to enable someone to care because you respect them and want their cooperation. I also told students that contracts aren’t there for when things go right; they are there for when things fall apart.
Trust is key — in a quarterback and in students. If a team or teachers don’t believe in the person/the students, then it is hard to achieve success. People know if they are trusted and respond accordingly. Authenticity is key here; it isn’t manufactured and it isn’t words on a page. It is deeds that speak.
Homework contracts/clauses bespeak for me an incentive problem. There is something deeper that is wrong if neither a quarterback nor students “want” to be prepared (assuming they are unprepared) and want to learn and want to progress. The goal here is to help someone become their best selves and we can all work on that.
The way to do that is not by contract. It is by caring and consideration and concern. It is by showing support and sensitivity and sensible measures. All quarterbacks are not the same, All students are not the same. How to motivate people (if they need that) is a question leaders/teachers need to be asking all the time. And, what motivates one person may not work for another.
Contracts/clauses are not the answer as I see it. And “homework” failure is about something more than homework. It is about a failure to connect between the team and the player or the teacher/professor and the student. I get that every day is not the same and we can not do what we are supposed to do daily. But if there is more generalized failure to comply with quality homework designed with intentionality, the problems run deeper.
Let’s be honest and look at those problems and not mask them in the guise of failure to do “homework.” Let’s contextualize. Let’s respect others. And, let’s help, not hurt, potential success. After all, isn’t that what we all want?
More from Karen Gross
Author, Educator & Commentator; Former President, Southern Vermont College; Former Senior Policy Advisor, US Dept. of Education; Former Law Professor
I have long been troubled by “homework” assigned to students of all ages and at all stages. I have been concerned that for some students, the homework produces stress and anxiety that is not ameliorated in their home. They worry that they are “getting it wrong.” They will get a bad grade. Some students seek parental help and the parents are either not there or cannot help because the assignments are outside their experience. The student may worry about disappointing their teacher. The student may not be in a home environment in which homework time is even possible. There are too many chores or a job or obligatory care-taking for parents or younger siblings; and there may be other choices that are more appealing: playing with friends, going outside, watching a favorite show on TV, speaking to friends. Then there is homework that is busywork, designed to just keep students busy; ask yourselves how much of the assigned work is creative and skill building?
At the college level (and some high schools), we change up the name from “homework” to “assignments” but the change in nomenclature does not always mean the work is useful or productive. And, sometimes we assign way too much work — reading that cannot be absorbed well given the quantity assigned. It is as if faculty are encouraging skimming. And too much work messages that other things in the lives of students do not matter — family, friends, sports, hobbies.
What happened to the adage: less is more?
There is a reason there are “Cliff” notes and other resources that enable students to take shortcuts. There is a continuing struggle that homework creates, forcing students to balance when balancing is a skill that is neither simple nor easily learned. And, while we tout “responsibility” as the core importance of homework, we forget that there are many things for which students may feel responsible. A student may be responsible for younger siblings including helping them so often with homework that they cannot do their own work. When parents are working evenings, students may be responsible for making their own dinner or caring for grandparents or simply cleaning a house that is a mess from too much parental partying.
To sum it up, we wholesale embrace homework without contexualizing it and without considering what values it has and whether what has been assigned is supportive of those values. Sadly, we fail to make homework “fit” and “be meaningful” in too many cases. We miss understanding how it sits in the lives of students outside the school doors. Homework per se is not bad; it is our failure to use it well that is bad.
Homework Contracts
Some parents/teachers have turned to “homework” contracts, as if they will bind students to do the assigned work both well and on time. There are rewards and consequences if students fail to comply with the contract. (Yes, some parents hire tutors and online tutoring services if they can afford these items. And yes, some are free if one has access to the Internet and is aware of and willing to try these approaches.)
Some of these contracts are pre-prepared. Others allow families to fill in the blanks By way of example. If Student A does her homework each night on time, then she gets a point and when she gets 10 points, she can go to a store and buy something. If Student A does not do her homework on night one, she loses use of her phone for an hour. If she continues to fail to do her homework, she cannot go play with friends or do sports. Cutting off internet, cutting off play time: these are all problematic solutions because they truncate connection.
Whether rewards and punishments are the best way to incentivize homework completion is questionable for me. I worry that the failures are not well connected to the punishment — not balanced or appropriate. And, many contracts in real life are negotiated between the parties (a point that I will return to momentarily) but I wonder how many parents and children actually negotiate the homework contract. Not exactly a level playing field (so to speak).
Wouldn’t we be wiser and smarter to create “homework” that is creative and doable and fun and desired? Wouldn’t we be wiser and smarter to create homework that lessen stress and facilitates learning? Wouldn’t we be wiser and smarter to create homework that has meaning and value that can be recognized by students? And, we need to acknowledge vastly different learning styles among kids, meaning homework needs to be individualized or varied to capture the strengths of all students.
Shared Concerns
My concerns are not unique. There has been a movement to eliminate homework for some of the reasons identified above. There have been studies demonstrating the stress homework creates. (I haven’t seen studies on homework contracts but I am sure they exist.)
There are, to be sure, studies showing the benefits of homework for students’ academic achievement and the development of skills like time management. And, there is a recognition that the amount of homework needs to vary depending on the age and stage of the students. And surely, we must not see homework as punishment if we are trying to encourage learning. To complicate matters, not all students actually need the same homework but it is far easier to give every student the same assignment.
Now, one caveat: For me, someone who was overregulated and lived in a home filled with mental illness, homework was a suitable excuse pursuant to which I could exit the awful family dynamics and work, work, work. And, work I did and academic success was forthcoming (at a high psychic price to be sure).
Football
In a recent extension of his football contract, the quarterback Kyler Murray’s contract had what people have termed a “homework clause” or an “independent study” clause. And, it has generated controversy (rightly) as I will share. And, it is not a secret; the clause became the subject of debate almost as soon as the ink was dry (so to speak)
https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/cardinals-homework-kyler-murray-nfl-summer/
Start with the language in the contract that provides that Murray will “complete at least four (4) hours of independent study (as defined below) each week (excluding any bye week) during each playing season (as defined below) during the term of the contract.” This surely didn’t land in the contract between Murray and the Cardinals by accident. No one slipped it in. Murray had an agent and lawyers review the agreement; the Cardinals had professionals doing the same thing. And, both parties signed the agreement. The playing field was more or less even.
Note (having taught contracts to law students for over two decades I can’t help myself here) that the language is deliberate. The study needed is a defined term in the agreement (see the words “as defined below”) and there is a clear exception crafted in for a bye week) and the homework obligation is limited to the playing season (also a defined term). That’s lawyer language and to be clear, the definitions matter.
One source provided what it says are some of the definitional terms. Here is how they say the contract defines “independent study;”
Quote: “Independent Study” [i]s (sic) material provided by the Cardinals to help them prepare for an upcoming game, and the time must be earned outside of mandatory meetings.
According to this source, there is language disallowing Murray from “engaging in other distractions during these study hours, citing video games and browsing the internet as some of the activities that would disqualify him from getting credit.”
Source: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10043327-kyler-murrays-new-homework-clause-and-other-strange-nfl-contract-stipulations
These are thought out definitions.
Now ask why 4 hours. How was that number chosen? Certainly 4 hours a week is vastly less than most NFL players put into preparation. Is the point to make a token gesture? Please, that can’t be right. Is it that Murray learns better independently so encourage that learning approach? Given what doesn’t count as learning, why not create what you want him to learn in savvy video games. Just saying. The words, when contextualized, make even less sense.
Why?
Why, I keep asking myself as others are asking themselves, would a quarterback in the NFL need such a clause if his contract is being renewed for sizable dollars? Does the team not trust the quarterback to work hard to prepare for games? Is there a history of non-preparation? Is the player behind in his knowledge of the team’s schemes each week? Are his errors due to a lack of homework time? Is the team sending a message about the player and their lack of respect for his work ethic? Is that based on experiences which suggest some problems?
And, why would a player agree to this? Perhaps he does the studying anyway so it is not a big deal. Perhaps the player saw it as a way to give away something that generated more money for him — an easy give away or so it seemed at the time. Perhaps the player recognized that he needed to show commitment to game preparation and this was a way of demonstrating that. Four hours is hardly a hearty commitment. Middle schoolers do more homework than that.
I can’t help but notice that this is a black quarterback who has this unusual clause in his contract and there has been a plethora of discussion over time (infuriating to me that race is seen as defining quarterback capacity and leadership strength) about black quarterbacks and whether they have the skills and leadership qualities to lead a team to success. Why haven’t others mentioned this hideous possibility?
Is the Murray Homework Clause Like Homework Contracts?
There is something off with the Murray “independent study” clause. Like student homework contracts (and the clause was part of a larger contract), it sits there to provide both rewards and punishment. So, here are my questions: How will the team know if Murray is complying? Does he send a note regarding completion? Will it be judged by his play on the field (assuming there is a direct and visible and measurable correlation between his study time and his on field success.
Is there a study monitor?
What happens if there is non-compliance and is it spelled out in the contract? What is the “best” punishment for failure to do the needed study? Dock in pay? No off week? Tutoring? What happens if there is compliance but poor performance? Does the team bench Murray? Do they change up, with consent, the nature and definition of the clause? The questions are endless, not to speak of the messaging embedded in giving an NFL quarterback the net equivalent of a student homework contract.
Now What
The Cardinals, given all the controversy, have agreed to delete the clause. Ok, good move but too little too late. And, apparently “workout” clauses are part and parcel of NFL quarterback contracts so that clause still exists.
It reminds me of toothpaste: once out of the tube, there is nothing one can do about it.
Sports radio will be abuzz each game this upcoming season and if it is a loss, they will say: Murray didn’t study enough (expressed perhaps as a joke?). And if there is a win, they will say: Murray sure studied this week.
Pitiful.
Here’s my point for the quarterback and for students: You can’t contractually make people care. You have to enable someone to care because you respect them and want their cooperation. I also told students that contracts aren’t there for when things go right; they are there for when things fall apart.
Trust is key — in a quarterback and in students. If a team or teachers don’t believe in the person/the students, then it is hard to achieve success. People know if they are trusted and respond accordingly. Authenticity is key here; it isn’t manufactured and it isn’t words on a page. It is deeds that speak.
Homework contracts/clauses bespeak for me an incentive problem. There is something deeper that is wrong if neither a quarterback nor students “want” to be prepared (assuming they are unprepared) and want to learn and want to progress. The goal here is to help someone become their best selves and we can all work on that.
The way to do that is not by contract. It is by caring and consideration and concern. It is by showing support and sensitivity and sensible measures. All quarterbacks are not the same, All students are not the same. How to motivate people (if they need that) is a question leaders/teachers need to be asking all the time. And, what motivates one person may not work for another.
Contracts/clauses are not the answer as I see it. And “homework” failure is about something more than homework. It is about a failure to connect between the team and the player or the teacher/professor and the student. I get that every day is not the same and we can not do what we are supposed to do daily. But if there is more generalized failure to comply with quality homework designed with intentionality, the problems run deeper.
Let’s be honest and look at those problems and not mask them in the guise of failure to do “homework.” Let’s contextualize. Let’s respect others. And, let’s help, not hurt, potential success. After all, isn’t that what we all want?
More from Karen Gross
Author, Educator & Commentator; Former President, Southern Vermont College; Former Senior Policy Advisor, US Dept. of Education; Former Law Professor