ERG SES C 02, Poster Session
Homework is defined as a set of school tasks assigned by teachers to be completed by students outside of school hours, that is, in the extracurricular period (Cooper, Steenbergen-Hu, & Dent, 2012).
In the homework process, teacher feedback is one of the relevant variables to understanding the relationship between homework and academic achievement (Núñez et al., revise & resubmited; Trautwein, Lüdtke, Schnyder and Niggli, 2006). For example, some studies have analyzed the impact of this feedback on student interest in homework (e.g., Xu, 2008), on doing homework (Xu, 2011), on managing homework (e.g., Rosário et al., 2009; Xu and Wu, 2013), on the effort students display (e.g., Trautwein, et al., 2006), and on academic performance (e.g., Elawar and Corno, 1985). In spite of the recognized importance of teacher feedback to student learning and performance (e.g., Evans, 2013; Hattie and Timperley, 2007), the effects of different homework feedback types on learning and academic achievement have not been extensively studied.
Recently, Xu (2010, 2011, 2012) and Xu and Wu (2013), for example, used a unique measure of homework feedback without considering the effect of different feedback types. Trautwein et al. (2002) found that more homework control by teachers has a positive effect on achievement. However Trautwein et al. (2006) focused just on negative teacher responses (one aspect of homework control). These authors noted the need to include other dimensions of homework feedback in future studies (e.g., control of homework completion, homework correction and grading).
Regarding research into English classes, laboratory studies predominate in the study of both oral feedback and written feedback (e.g., Bitchener and Knoch, 2010a,b), while fewer have been done in the classroom (Lee, 2013; Lyster, et al., 2013).
According to our knowledge, the study by Cardelle and Corno (1981) is the only one that has analyzed the effects of different written homework feedback types on the learning of a second language (i.e., Spanish). The authors suggest that the effect of other homework feedback types should be further studied. Lee (2013) and Lyster et al. (2013) also note the need to conduct new studies in real learning contexts to evaluate the effect of different types of feedback on academic achievement.
Thus, this study aimed to analyze the different effects of different types of teacher homework feedback on academic performance in EFL within a real learning context. In order to better control the effect of feedback type on academic achievement, our study design initially included as covariables prior student achievement,, and later, the quantity of feedback given to students. Concretely, we aimed to answer the following questions:
(a) Is there a relationship between the type of homework feedback given by teachers and student academic achievement?
(b) In the case that it does exist, which treatment (or treatments) is responsible for this relationship? and
(c) Does prior student performance affect the relationship between the type of homework feedback given and student academic achievement?
Considering the scarce results of prior studies, it was not possible to establish specific hypotheses regarding the relationship between homework feedback type and student academic achievement. However, taking into account the nature of each type of feedback and its implications for student learning process, in this study we hypothesize:
a) that different homework feedback types are differentially associated with student academic achievement, decreasing from type 5 (collecting and grading homework) to type 1 (Checking whether homework was completed).
b) that the magnitude of the impact of teacher homework feedback on academic achievement is affected by the prior level of achievement by students.
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010a). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19, 207–217. Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010b). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31, 193–214. Cooper, H., Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Dent, A. L. (2012). Homework. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook, Vol. 3: Application to learning and teaching. (pp. 475–495)Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Evans, C. (2013). Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70-120. Núñez, J. C., Suárez, N., Rosário, P., Vallejo, G., Cerezo, R., & Valle, A. (revise & resubmit). Teachers’ feedback on homework, homework-related behaviors and academic achievement. The Journal of Educational Research. Rosário, P., Mourão, R., Baldaque, M., Nunes, T., Núñez, J.C., ... & Valle, A. (2009). Homework, self-regulated learning and math achievement. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 14, 179-192. Trautwein, U., Ludtke, O., Schnyder, I., & Niggli, A. (2006). Predicting homework effort: Support for a domain-specific, multilevel homework model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 438–456. Walberg, H. J., & Paik, S.J. (2000). Effective educational practices. International Bureau of education. Educational practices series – 3, 9. http://www.ibe.unesco.org. Xu, J. (2008). Models of secondary school students’ interest in homework: A multilevel analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 1180–1205. Xu, J. (2010). Predicting homework distraction at the secondary school level: A multilevel analysis. Teachers College Record, 112, 1937–1970. Xu, J. (2011). Homework completion at the secondary school level: A multilevel analysis. The Journal of Educational Research, 104, 171–182. Xu, J. (2012). Predicting students’ homework environment management at the secondary school level, Educational Psychology. An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 32(2), 183-200. Xu, J., & Wu, H. (2013). Self-Regulation of Homework Behavior: Homework Management at the Secondary School Level. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(1), 1-13.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.