Improving Homework Effort in Engineering Education
Nathan A. Minami
This paper was completed and submitted in partial fulfillment of the Master Teacher Program, a 2-year
faculty professional development program conducted by the Center for Teaching Excellence, United States
Military Academy, West Point, NY, 2009.
Abstract
This study examines the literature in an attempt to better understand what drivers can be used to
help encourage undergraduate engineering students to complete their homework outside the
classroom without actually grading homework. A review of the literature suggested that
different techniques using operant conditioning, verbal praise, and ridicule might help to improve
student homework performance. All three of these techniques were applied in a classroom
research experiment, and data coded using a variety of techniques. While more research in this
area may be warranted, the data collected in this experiment indicates that operant conditioning,
verbal praise and ridicule are not effective techniques for motivating undergraduate engineering
students to complete their homework.
Introduction
Most educators at the university level agree that homework completion and extensive student
effort outside the classroom/lecture hall is critical to successful undergraduate education. Talk to
many of these professors, however, and you will hear that one of their biggest frustrations is
students that are not prepared for class. At most universities students are expected to spend at
least one to two hours reading over course material and working through problems prior to
attending class. This allows for extended learning to take place inside the classroom, advancing
the student's comprehension of the material. Unfortunately, this system does not always work as
well as intended when students do not show up to class prepared. This is alarming, as Corno
(2000) notes that due to new social, cultural and educational challenges in the 21st Century,
homework completion is now more crucial than ever to a successful education. Corno also
asserts that new ideas on homework are needed in order to improve student learning. This paper
reviews a number of previous studies on student motivation to complete homework, discusses
experimental design and data collection techniques for this study, and then concludes with the
results found and some implications that might be helpful to educators at all levels.
Previous Studies
There have been several previous studies that address student motivation and methods and
techniques for encouraging students to do homework. Cooper, Lindsay and Nye (1998) note that
many researchers do not agree on the positive and negative advantages of homework, and that
many conflicting results have emerged from previous studies on the role of homework,
especially among younger age groups. They found that a weak relationship was present between
the amount of homework assigned and student achievement, but found that among older students
(grades 6-12) a strong positive relationship was found between the amount of homework
completed and student achievement.
Wlodkowski and Jaynes (1990) argue that motivation is the key component in learning and that
properly structured study habits are critical to learning. Their research shows that homework is
crucial to a student's success in school and that homework completion must be enforced at an
early age. They also found that homework must be relevant to the current lessons being taught in
class and that in the information age homework should be seen as a valued part of our lives that
students will continue to do even after graduating from school.
Pintrich, Paul and DeGroot (1990) examined how various motivational components are related to
self-regulated learning. They found that self-efficacy and intrinsic value are positively related to
performance. Their findings show that both motivational and self-regulated learning components
should be considered in enhancing academic performance.
Zimmerman (2002) notes that in the 21st Century with everything from the internet to cellular
phones to distract students, it is easy to understand why students do not learn to self-regulate
their academic studying. Zimmerman's study suggests that it is important for educators to set the
conditions properly that motivate students to do their homework. In addition, Zimmerman's
(1986) study shows that there is a high correlation between students who self-regulate well and
academic achievement. Finally, Bembenutty and Zimmerman (2003) found that motivational
beliefs play an important role in college students' completion of homework and that students that
are better at self-regulation are more likely to complete their homework.
Risley (2001) describes the challenge of getting students to do homework practice problems
because students are often "reluctant to expend the time and energy required to complete the
work." He specifically notes that this is a problem when assignments are not graded, and that
telling students that the practice problems will help them on the upcoming exams is not enough
to motivate them to do the work. Risley experimented with an online homework submission and
grading system that allows instructors to give graded homework more often without the added
burden of having to spend many hours grading the homework problems. Risley's experiments
found that use of the system encouraged students to do their homework and that students were
better prepared for class.
Corno (2000) argues that if homework is assigned appropriately in an environment that
facilitates homework completion, that a student experiences both satisfaction and
accomplishment in support of having "a sense of oneself as a student." Corno also notes that
homework is dynamic, in that a positive feedback cycle is involved in homework completion.
Students who feel engaged and accomplished in completing their homework will be further
motivated to complete homework assignments in the future. Finally, Bartscher (1995) found that
a project based educational curriculum can help to increase student motivation and homework
completion.
From reviewing the available literature, it is evident that most experts agree that homework
completion is a critical component in a student's education. It also appears clear that more
research could be conducted to see what techniques might be most effective in motivating
college level engineering students to complete their homework.
Theoretical Construct
This study examines the effectiveness of Operant Conditioning on a student's homework
completion. Operant Conditioning derives from Pavlov's Classical Conditioning, his most well
known experiment which included developing a conditioned reflex where a dog would salivate
upon hearing a bell ring because the dog was conditioned to associate the bell with snack time
(Hilgard & Bower, 62-89). Skinner, building on Pavlov's work, developed the theory of Operant
Conditioning which distinguishes between positive and negative re-inforcers (Lindgren and
Suter, 141-145). In Operant Conditioning the conditioned response does not resemble the
response to the reinforcing stimulus (the bell in Pavlov's example); rather its relationship to the
reinforcing stimulus is what causes the reinforcer to appear.
Therefore, in Operant Conditioning reinforcement follows only after the conditioned response
appears (or does not appear) Lindgren and Suter (1985) demonstrate the effectiveness of both
negative and positive re-inforcers in influencing human behavior, where both focus on
increasing the probability of a response. They note that negative re-inforcers are often
misunderstood as punishment, but this is incorrect as punishment is aimed at decreasing the
probability of a response. They also note that the effects of punishment are less predictable than
effects of reinforcement.
There have been a couple of previous studies that test the effectiveness of Operant Conditioning
theory on homework completion. Examining the effectiveness of a negative reinforcer; Bryant,
Brown and Parks (1981) found that while a gentle reminder and insult increased test scores
slightly in comparison to the control population, only ridicule resulted in a significant
improvement in information acquisition. They also noted sex differences, in that women
responded better than men to ridicule, and males scored higher than females when insulted.
In contrast, Hancock (2002) examined the effectiveness of a positive reinforcer on homework
completion. He found in an experiment that graduate students exposed to verbal praise
performed better on an instructor created test, spent more time doing homework, and
demonstrated greater motivation to learn in the classroom than students that did not receive
verbal praise.
Experimental Design
Drawing on Pavlov and Skinner's theories and the previous studies mentioned above, a
classroom research experiment was set up in an undergraduate level engineering management
classroom. The test was designed to examine the effect of two different positive re-inforcers,
and one negative reinforcer, on homework completion. The experiment was conducted using 31
students. During the first ten lessons of the course, a control sample was taken to examine the
level of classroom participation, the percentage of non-graded homework problems completed,
and the number of minutes students spent preparing for class each day. Classroom participation
was measured using an empirical method in which the instructor rated general classroom
participation during each class on a scale of 1-5 and took notes on how prepared students were
for class. The percentage of non-graded, but mandatory, homework problems completed was
measured by collecting all of the homework completed to date by each student on lesson ten,
assessing the quality of homework to ensure sufficient effort was given to each problem, and
then finding the percentage of problems completed for the entire class. Finally, the number of
minutes students spent preparing for class each day was collected daily by a random student
survey, the results of which the instructor could not see until the end of the course.
Next, during lessons 11-20 the instructor tested the effectiveness of a positive reinforcer on
student homework completion. Student homework was inspected quickly each day in class, and
students who completed the homework were given a small prize (a piece of candy). During
lessons 21-30, a negative reinforcer was tested. Select students were required each day to
present their homework requirements to the class, and all students who were not prepared to
present their results were ridiculed by the instructor (in a serious but fun and constructive
manner). Finally, during lessons 31-40, the instructor tested the effectiveness of a positive
reinforcer on student homework completion. As done previously, students were randomly
selected each class to present the results of their homework, but instead of ridiculing students
who were not prepared, the instructor lavishly praised the students who did a good job in front of
the entire class.
Results
Figure 1 shows the results of the experiment as measured by the instructor's perception of change
in class participation and level of student preparedness for each class over the course of the
semester. The data suggests that both Operant Conditioning and Ridicule produce a moderate
increase in student preparedness and participation, while Verbal Praise actually produced a
decrease in student performance.
Ave Qualitative
Rating
2.72
Block
Benchmark
Operant
Conditioning
Ridicule
Verbal Praise
3.43
3.00
2.38
Figure 1: Instructor Perception of Class Participation & Student Preparedness
Figure 2 shows the results of the experiment as measured by the students' completion of
homework over the course of the semester. The data here contradicts the data seen in Figure 1.
Here we see that student performance on homework decreases rapidly over the course of the
semester, and it appears possible that according to this data that Operant Conditioning, Ridicule,
and Verbal Praise all have a negative relationship with the completion of student homework
outside of the classroom.
Median Score
Average Score
Completion Percentage
# Students Submitting
Benchmark
Operant
Conditioning
Ridicule
Verbal
Praise
5
4.45
44.52%
25
0
2.87
28.71%
12
0
0.65
6.45%
5
0
0.00
0.00%
0
% Students Submitting
80.65%
38.71%
16.13%
0.00%
Figure 2: Homework Completion
Figure 3 shows the results of the experim
ent as m easured by the amount of ti me students
reported that they spen t preparing for each class. The data seem s to corroborate the results seen
in Figure 2, suggesting that student preparatio n for class dim inishes over the course of the
semester.
Block
Benchmark
Operant
Conditioning
Ridicule
Verbal Praise
TOTAL (MIN)
16.79
10.95
10.09
1.51
Figure 3: Student Reported Preparation Time for Class
While the data is inconclusive, the results of this experiment seem to suggest that neither Operant
Conditioning, Ridicule, nor Verbal Praise have much of an effect on the amount of effort
students put in to preparing for class each day. This data appears even more disheartening when
one considers that in this experiment the average student spent only 11 minutes preparing for any
given class!
Another interesting insight that emerged from the data is that there is strong evidence from this
experiment supporting the idea that as the course progresses deeper into the semester, students
spend less time preparing for class. The regression/trend line in Figure 4 shows this. Indeed,
the correlation coefficient of -.78 suggests that there is a strong correlation between the Lesson #
and the amount of time students spend preparing for class. Much anecdotal evidence supports
this also, as many students comment that the reason they do not prepare for class later in the
semester is because of all of the graded assignments they have due in any given week. This
undoubtedly skewed the data collected in this study for measuring the effectiveness of Operant
Conditioning, Ridicule and Verbal Praise; as they were all tested later in the semester as
compared to the baseline which was established during the first ten lessons.
Preparation Time (MIN)
Lesson # vs. Preparation Time
35
y = -0.581x + 20.065
30
2
R = 0.6038
25
20
15
10
5
0
-5 0
10
20
30
40
Lesson #
Figure 4: Trend of Lesson # vs. Preparation Time
In addition to the data collected above, the students were all given a questionnaire to fill out at
the end of the semester (see Appendix 1). This data collected in this questionnaire appears to
also support the idea that none of the techniques used in this experiment were very helpful in
increasing student preparation for class. Only five out of 31 students responded "Very True" or
"Somewhat True" that candy helped to motivate them to do their homework. Likewise, only 9
students responded that ridicule was helpful, and only 5 students responded that verbal praise
was helpful. Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that ridicule was perceived by the students as
being the most helpful out of all three techniques used.
So if Operant Conditioning, Ridicule and Verbal Praise do not appear to have the desired affect
on student completion of homework outside the classroom, then what does? All 31 students
responded in the questionnaire that they would do the homework if it was graded. This seems to
support the findings of Risley (2001) that it is difficult to motivate students to do their homework
if it is not graded. The students commented that in order to do a good job on the homework, it
would have to be worth anywhere from 5-20% of the overall course grade. Other students
responded that if there were daily quizzes they would put more effort into preparing for class, or
if they perceived that their home preparation for class would have a direct effect on their grade
that they would spend more time preparing for class. Some students also commented that if they
had to put their homework on the boards before each class they would do the homework, or if the
homework interests them they are more inclined to spend time studying outside of class.
Conclusions/Implications
Based on this research data, it appears fairly clear that if instructors want to maximize the
amount of time students will spend preparing for class each day they must in some manner find a
way for it to reflect in a student's grade. Daily or pop quizzes might be one technique, as would
be making classes so challenging that students can not possibly follow in class without preparing
first. In addition, the homework could simply be graded. This research also suggests that
Operant Conditioning, Ridicule and Verbal Praise have little to no effect on motivating students
to prepare outside of class, although the results on this are not entirely conclusive. Another key
learning point from this study is that students will spend less time preparing for class as the
semester goes on, and that teachers should keep this in mind when preparing the course syllabus.
There are many implications for future research that emerge from this study. First, further
experiments should be conducted to test the utility of Operant Conditioning, Ridicule and Verbal
Praise. One suggestion would be to test each theory across the entire course of a semester, where
one section is the benchmark, another uses Operant Conditioning throughout the course of a
semester, and so forth for Ridicule and Verbal Praise. This would account for and prevent the
trend of students doing less preparation over the course of the semester from skewing the data as
occurred in this study. In addition, future research might test empirically/quantitatively the
effectiveness of grading homework vs. not grading homework on student homework completion
and preparation for class. The same should also be done for pop quizzes. Finally, it might also
be useful to test the utility of having all students daily present their homework on the boards
during the first 10 minutes of class. While it might require considerable effort by educators to
get to the bottom of this problem by continuing with classroom research on this topic, reaching a
better understanding of what motivates our students to prepare for class is well worth the effort,
and will save many of us much consternation in the classroom.
References
Bartscher, Kathy. (1995) Increasing Student Motivation through Project Based Learning.
Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC). Downloaded from the Internet Jan
9, 2008. http://eric.ed.gov
Bembenutty, H & B.J. Zimmerman. (2003) The Relation of Motivational beliefs and
Self-Regulatory Processes to Homework Completion and Academic Achievement.
Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC). Downloaded from the Internet Jan
23, 2008. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=Hefer+Bembenutty
Bryant, J., Brown, D. & S. Parks. (1981) Ridicule as an Educational Corrective. Journal
of Educational Psychology. Vol 73, No 5, 722-727l
Cooper, H. Lindsay, J.J. & B. Nye. Relationships Among Attitudes About Homework,
Amount of Homework Assigned, and Completed and Student Achievement. Journal
of Educational Psychology, Vol. 90.
Corno, Lyn. (2000). Looking at Homework Differently. The Elementary School
Journal. Vol. 100, No. 5. pp. 529-548.
Eilam, Billie. (2001). Primary Strategies for Promoting Homework Performance.
American Educational Research Journal. Vol. 38, No. 3, 691-725.
Hancock, Dawson R. (2002). Influencing Graduate Students' Classroom Achievement,
Homework Habits and Motivation to Learn with Verbal Praise. Educational
Research. Vol 4, Issue 1. pp. 83-95.
Hilgard, E. R. & G.H. Bower (1975). Century Psychology Series: Theories of Learning.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice Hall, Inc.
Lindgren, H.C. & Suter, W.N. (1985). Educational Psychology in the Classroom. (7th
ed.) Belmont, CA. Brooks/Cole Publishing.
Pintrich, Paul R. & De Groot, E.V. (1990) Motivational and Self-Regulated Learning
Components of Classroom Academic Performance. Journal of Educational
Psychology. Vol. 82, No. 1, 33-40.
Risley, John (2001). Motivating Students to Learn Physics Using an Online Homework
System. Forum on Education Newsletter. Downloaded from the Internet on Jan 9,
2008. http://units.aps.org/units/fed/newsletters/fall2001/ris.cfm.
Wlodkowski, R.J. & Jaynes, J. H. (1990). Eager to Learn: Helping Children Become
Motivated and Love Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Zimmerman, Barry J. (2002). Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview.
Theory Into Practice. Vol. 41, No. 2, 64-70.
Zimmerman, B.J. & Martinex-Pons, M. (1986). Construct Validation of a Strategy
Model of Student Self-Regulated Learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol.
80, 284-290.
APPENDIX 1
1. Your instructor attempted 3 techniques this semester to try and get you to do more homework
(prepare for class better). They were giving candy to those who did homework, ridicule of those
who did not do homework, and verbal praise for those who did homework. Which of the three,
if any, do you think best motivated you to do your homework/prepare for class (i.e. do the
reading, do the practice problems, etc).
a. The idea that I might receive candy for doing my homework helped motivate me to do my
homework:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Very True
Somewhat True
Kind of
Not Really
Absolutely Not
b. The idea that I might be ridiculed by my instructor for not doing my homework helped
motivate me to do my homework:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Very True
Somewhat True
Kind of
Not Really
Absolutely Not
c. The idea that I might receive verbal praise from my instructor for doing my homework
helped motivate me to do my homework:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Very True
Somewhat True
Kind of
Not Really
Absolutely Not
2. How effective is the homework for candy program? This is a form of operant conditioning.
3. Does being ridiculed in class (or seeing others ridiculed) for lack of preparation motivate you
to prepare better next time?
4. Does verbal praise (or seeing others receive verbal praise) motivate you to prepare better for
class?
5. What motivated you to prepare for class/do homework this semester for EM420?
6. What discouraged you from preparing for class/doing homework this semester in EM420?
7. If the homework was graded, would you do it? What percentage of the overall course grade
would the homework have to be worth to get you to do it?
8. Any other comments about what motivates you to do, or not to do, your homework and
prepare for class each day?