Reduce homework, lengthen schooltime

My thanks to Bull Diesel for his response. Before I begin rebuttals and my arguments I’d just like to remind readers of arguments that I presented in R2 that haven’t been countered. These points were cost, reduction in general mischief and my working mindset / lack of agrarian workforce points. Granted, the rules themselves disallowed direct rebuttal (!), but it’s important to note these extensions – they are all important points. Con had best rebut them this round lest they be considered dropped by myself and readers. This leaves my other points – memory retention and homework vs. instruction somewhat up for discussion, as well as my opponent’s arguments which centre on the length of the school day, the components of homework and memory / motivation. Let’s go to the arguments – Con’s then a focus on mine. School day length Con’s first point is that increasing the school day will put pressure on the time available for extracurricular activities. His second point is that reductions in homework have negative consequences. His choice of my poison makes no sense – either there’s more time allocated to homework (this is incorporated into the extra school hours) under my model and pressure is put on extracurricular activities or there’s less time spent on homework despite these hours and there’s more time for extracurricular activities. He can’t run both points simultaneously. If the net amount of homework is the same then these points both don’t apply and things stay the same. That is... aside from all the other benefits of the scheme, particularly memory retention, which we’ll touch on later. Also, there’s actually extra time for extracurricular activities given no change in the time spent on homework, should the student organise their day appropriately. What am I talking about? Under the current model lunch, recess and all other breaks occur at set times – they are immovable to the student; it is bad luck if you’d like to sacrifice a break at school for an equivalent amount of time outside school – you can’t. Under my model, as readers may recall, you can. Recall in R1 how we had 80 minutes of break built into the day, and how 40 was automatically set aside for lunch. That left 40 minutes which students could elect to have at the start or the end of the day. If they chose the day’s end then they could leave school at the start of that break. So, in terms of time which students can utilise freely (hint: free time) , my model provides 20 minutes extra for extracurricular activities notwithstanding any changes in the amount of homework. Of course, if Con argues for a change in homework amount (the extra time ought to cancel out the reduction) then he gets to drink the associated poison. The value of homework Con painstakingly lays out the case for homework and it’s benefits. It’s a formidable case. What’s the issue with it? The case applies very strongly for work done at school as well! Indeed, many points for homework are made stronger when it is done at school. Let’s take a look. On Con’s list of 7 points: On preparation, school also prepares students. On scheduling, school more formally schedules a student’s time than they do at home – there’s less drifting and procrastination. On control and assessment, it is far easier to assess students and control them when they are there under a teacher’s eye than at home! On love and care, homework can promote this, but it can harm as well – parents get frustrated at the school for impinging on their free time. From his 3rd article: “In the worst cases, children who fare less well in tests based on homework, get more homework to do. Peter Frost concludes that many children suffer from the effects of homework: it causes much conflict in the home” . See above for why my model grants more free time for family time. Identity and status: Con says homework promotes a subject’s importance; so does more lessons and homework done in school. On community, homework may promote contact between teacher and parent, but work at school promotes teacher-student bonds. It’s a null impact. On work performance, children may carry out other tasks they deem more important than homework in the additional free time they have. Con then discusses how homework ought to be given out and how students whose parents have greater educational success do more homework. It’s a good educational lesson, but Con doesn’t specify how it makes homework done at home better. Then homework is given out at the same intervals, and it’s done in a spaced manner (spaced presentation is better than massed presentation) . As to educationally minded parents encouraging the completion of homework being beneficial, I couldn’t agree more. Parents without the right mindset can affect their children’s future. That’s why we need trained professionals in the field of education – teachers – to instill this mindset. Teachers also have more time, and incentive (they are getting paid) to do this as opposed to parents. Hence, my model actually encourages children from worse backgrounds to do more of their homework (and get the benefits) as per Con’s logic. Memory retention and homework Con is 100% right to say that homework reviews what is done in the classroom and that this review is beneficial. I couldn’t agree more, but again, Con’s points don’t argue for his model. They’re applicable to both. Now, as to when and where this review is done in, as well as the emotional state of mind, that’s a completely different thing – there are differences between home and school. In R2 I outlined how spaced presentation was superior to massed presentation for memory retention purposes, and how school promoted spaced presentation by virtue of the lessons being spaced out on the timetable. Indeed, school forces spaced presentation vs. the massed presentation of the home. This point was completely ignored by Con (he couldn’t rebut last round though) and is critical to my case. But it doesn’t end there for memory retention. I recently read Memory by Jonathan K. Foster (first published 2009), one of OUP’s fascination very short introductions. To quote one part: “Other things being equal, we tend to remember information better if we are in a similar physical context and emotional state at the time we wish to retrieve information as we were in at the time we were exposed to that information.” School is more akin to work than the home environment, so as per a more similar physical context we remember better. This is specified in the encoding specificity principle. Also, the emotional state at school is more constant than at home, more like work. This again promotes better memory retention as the retrieval cue matches memories better. This sort of logic strongly explains why we can’t remember dreams – the physical context is different, our emotional state different and our physiological state are also different. To recap, homework done at school is done in a manner of spaced presentation. This is superior for memory retention. Furthermore, recall is strengthened by a similar emotional state and physical context, which happens when learning is conducted more strongly in a given place, such as school. Memory is strengthened tremendously by shifting homework to school time. Homework vs. Instruction This wasn’t considered ‘not attacked’ , but it was close to that. As said in R2, teachers can assist if homework is moved into school time. At home a student may waste time aimlessly, not learn the content as well, or worse cheat or copy answers if they can. Teacher supervision prevents cheating, assists in learning content and reduces time wasted. Professional instruction is beneficial for students vs. self learning in many cases. Conclusion Con must refute the points of this round + those of mine unscathed of mine by his R2 (in part as per the rules). Con has much work to do.