how does homework affect after school activities

• Future Students
• Current Students
• Faculty/Staff

News and Media

• News & Media Home
• Research Stories
• School's In
• In the Media

You are here

More than two hours of homework may be counterproductive, research suggests.

A Stanford education researcher found that too much homework can negatively affect kids, especially their lives away from school, where family, friends and activities matter.   "Our findings on the effects of homework challenge the traditional assumption that homework is inherently good," wrote Denise Pope , a senior lecturer at the Stanford Graduate School of Education and a co-author of a study published in the Journal of Experimental Education .   The researchers used survey data to examine perceptions about homework, student well-being and behavioral engagement in a sample of 4,317 students from 10 high-performing high schools in upper-middle-class California communities. Along with the survey data, Pope and her colleagues used open-ended answers to explore the students' views on homework.   Median household income exceeded $90,000 in these communities, and 93 percent of the students went on to college, either two-year or four-year.   Students in these schools average about 3.1 hours of homework each night.   "The findings address how current homework practices in privileged, high-performing schools sustain students' advantage in competitive climates yet hinder learning, full engagement and well-being," Pope wrote.   Pope and her colleagues found that too much homework can diminish its effectiveness and even be counterproductive. They cite prior research indicating that homework benefits plateau at about two hours per night, and that 90 minutes to two and a half hours is optimal for high school.   Their study found that too much homework is associated with:   • Greater stress : 56 percent of the students considered homework a primary source of stress, according to the survey data. Forty-three percent viewed tests as a primary stressor, while 33 percent put the pressure to get good grades in that category. Less than 1 percent of the students said homework was not a stressor.   • Reductions in health : In their open-ended answers, many students said their homework load led to sleep deprivation and other health problems. The researchers asked students whether they experienced health issues such as headaches, exhaustion, sleep deprivation, weight loss and stomach problems.   • Less time for friends, family and extracurricular pursuits : Both the survey data and student responses indicate that spending too much time on homework meant that students were "not meeting their developmental needs or cultivating other critical life skills," according to the researchers. Students were more likely to drop activities, not see friends or family, and not pursue hobbies they enjoy.   A balancing act   The results offer empirical evidence that many students struggle to find balance between homework, extracurricular activities and social time, the researchers said. Many students felt forced or obligated to choose homework over developing other talents or skills.   Also, there was no relationship between the time spent on homework and how much the student enjoyed it. The research quoted students as saying they often do homework they see as "pointless" or "mindless" in order to keep their grades up.   "This kind of busy work, by its very nature, discourages learning and instead promotes doing homework simply to get points," said Pope, who is also a co-founder of Challenge Success , a nonprofit organization affiliated with the GSE that conducts research and works with schools and parents to improve students' educational experiences..   Pope said the research calls into question the value of assigning large amounts of homework in high-performing schools. Homework should not be simply assigned as a routine practice, she said.   "Rather, any homework assigned should have a purpose and benefit, and it should be designed to cultivate learning and development," wrote Pope.   High-performing paradox   In places where students attend high-performing schools, too much homework can reduce their time to foster skills in the area of personal responsibility, the researchers concluded. "Young people are spending more time alone," they wrote, "which means less time for family and fewer opportunities to engage in their communities."   Student perspectives   The researchers say that while their open-ended or "self-reporting" methodology to gauge student concerns about homework may have limitations – some might regard it as an opportunity for "typical adolescent complaining" – it was important to learn firsthand what the students believe.   The paper was co-authored by Mollie Galloway from Lewis and Clark College and Jerusha Conner from Villanova University.

Clifton B. Parker is a writer at the Stanford News Service .

More Stories

⟵ Go to all Research Stories

Get the Educator

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter.

Stanford Graduate School of Education

482 Galvez Mall Stanford, CA 94305-3096 Tel: (650) 723-2109

• Contact Admissions
• GSE Leadership
• Site Feedback
• Web Accessibility
• Career Resources
• Faculty Open Positions
• Explore Courses
• Academic Calendar
• Office of the Registrar
• Cubberley Library
• StanfordWho
• StanfordYou

Improving lives through learning

• Stanford Home
• Maps & Directions
• Search Stanford
• Emergency Info
• Terms of Use
• Non-Discrimination
• Accessibility

© Stanford University , Stanford , California 94305 .

• About the Hub
• Announcements
• Faculty Experts Guide
• Subscribe to the newsletter

Explore by Topic

• Arts+Culture
• Politics+Society
• Science+Technology
• Student Life
• University News
• Voices+Opinion
• About Hub at Work
• Gazette Archive
• Benefits+Perks
• Health+Well-Being
• Current Issue
• About the Magazine
• Past Issues
• Support Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Subscribe to the Magazine

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Credit: August de Richelieu

Does homework still have value? A Johns Hopkins education expert weighs in

Joyce epstein, co-director of the center on school, family, and community partnerships, discusses why homework is essential, how to maximize its benefit to learners, and what the 'no-homework' approach gets wrong.

By Vicky Hallett

The necessity of homework has been a subject of debate since at least as far back as the 1890s, according to Joyce L. Epstein , co-director of the Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships at Johns Hopkins University. "It's always been the case that parents, kids—and sometimes teachers, too—wonder if this is just busy work," Epstein says.

But after decades of researching how to improve schools, the professor in the Johns Hopkins School of Education remains certain that homework is essential—as long as the teachers have done their homework, too. The National Network of Partnership Schools , which she founded in 1995 to advise schools and districts on ways to improve comprehensive programs of family engagement, has developed hundreds of improved homework ideas through its Teachers Involve Parents in Schoolwork program. For an English class, a student might interview a parent on popular hairstyles from their youth and write about the differences between then and now. Or for science class, a family could identify forms of matter over the dinner table, labeling foods as liquids or solids. These innovative and interactive assignments not only reinforce concepts from the classroom but also foster creativity, spark discussions, and boost student motivation.

"We're not trying to eliminate homework procedures, but expand and enrich them," says Epstein, who is packing this research into a forthcoming book on the purposes and designs of homework. In the meantime, the Hub couldn't wait to ask her some questions:

What kind of homework training do teachers typically get?

Future teachers and administrators really have little formal training on how to design homework before they assign it. This means that most just repeat what their teachers did, or they follow textbook suggestions at the end of units. For example, future teachers are well prepared to teach reading and literacy skills at each grade level, and they continue to learn to improve their teaching of reading in ongoing in-service education. By contrast, most receive little or no training on the purposes and designs of homework in reading or other subjects. It is really important for future teachers to receive systematic training to understand that they have the power, opportunity, and obligation to design homework with a purpose.

Why do students need more interactive homework?

If homework assignments are always the same—10 math problems, six sentences with spelling words—homework can get boring and some kids just stop doing their assignments, especially in the middle and high school years. When we've asked teachers what's the best homework you've ever had or designed, invariably we hear examples of talking with a parent or grandparent or peer to share ideas. To be clear, parents should never be asked to "teach" seventh grade science or any other subject. Rather, teachers set up the homework assignments so that the student is in charge. It's always the student's homework. But a good activity can engage parents in a fun, collaborative way. Our data show that with "good" assignments, more kids finish their work, more kids interact with a family partner, and more parents say, "I learned what's happening in the curriculum." It all works around what the youngsters are learning.

Is family engagement really that important?

At Hopkins, I am part of the Center for Social Organization of Schools , a research center that studies how to improve many aspects of education to help all students do their best in school. One thing my colleagues and I realized was that we needed to look deeply into family and community engagement. There were so few references to this topic when we started that we had to build the field of study. When children go to school, their families "attend" with them whether a teacher can "see" the parents or not. So, family engagement is ever-present in the life of a school.

My daughter's elementary school doesn't assign homework until third grade. What's your take on "no homework" policies?

There are some parents, writers, and commentators who have argued against homework, especially for very young children. They suggest that children should have time to play after school. This, of course is true, but many kindergarten kids are excited to have homework like their older siblings. If they give homework, most teachers of young children make assignments very short—often following an informal rule of 10 minutes per grade level. "No homework" does not guarantee that all students will spend their free time in productive and imaginative play.

Some researchers and critics have consistently misinterpreted research findings. They have argued that homework should be assigned only at the high school level where data point to a strong connection of doing assignments with higher student achievement . However, as we discussed, some students stop doing homework. This leads, statistically, to results showing that doing homework or spending more minutes on homework is linked to higher student achievement. If slow or struggling students are not doing their assignments, they contribute to—or cause—this "result."

Teachers need to design homework that even struggling students want to do because it is interesting. Just about all students at any age level react positively to good assignments and will tell you so.

Did COVID change how schools and parents view homework?

Within 24 hours of the day school doors closed in March 2020, just about every school and district in the country figured out that teachers had to talk to and work with students' parents. This was not the same as homeschooling—teachers were still working hard to provide daily lessons. But if a child was learning at home in the living room, parents were more aware of what they were doing in school. One of the silver linings of COVID was that teachers reported that they gained a better understanding of their students' families. We collected wonderfully creative examples of activities from members of the National Network of Partnership Schools. I'm thinking of one art activity where every child talked with a parent about something that made their family unique. Then they drew their finding on a snowflake and returned it to share in class. In math, students talked with a parent about something the family liked so much that they could represent it 100 times. Conversations about schoolwork at home was the point.

How did you create so many homework activities via the Teachers Involve Parents in Schoolwork program?

We had several projects with educators to help them design interactive assignments, not just "do the next three examples on page 38." Teachers worked in teams to create TIPS activities, and then we turned their work into a standard TIPS format in math, reading/language arts, and science for grades K-8. Any teacher can use or adapt our prototypes to match their curricula.

Overall, we know that if future teachers and practicing educators were prepared to design homework assignments to meet specific purposes—including but not limited to interactive activities—more students would benefit from the important experience of doing their homework. And more parents would, indeed, be partners in education.

Posted in Voices+Opinion

You might also like

News network.

• Johns Hopkins Magazine
• Get Email Updates
• Submit an Announcement
• Submit an Event
• Privacy Statement
• Accessibility

Discover JHU

• About the University
• Schools & Divisions
• Academic Programs
• Plan a Visit
• my.JohnsHopkins.edu
• © 2024 Johns Hopkins University . All rights reserved.
• University Communications
• 3910 Keswick Rd., Suite N2600, Baltimore, MD
• X Facebook LinkedIn YouTube Instagram

Search form

• Find Stories
• For Journalists

Stanford research shows pitfalls of homework

A Stanford researcher found that students in high-achieving communities who spend too much time on homework experience more stress, physical health problems, a lack of balance and even alienation from society. More than two hours of homework a night may be counterproductive, according to the study.

Education scholar Denise Pope has found that too much homework has negative effects on student well-being and behavioral engagement. (Image credit: L.A. Cicero)

A Stanford researcher found that too much homework can negatively affect kids, especially their lives away from school, where family, friends and activities matter.

“Our findings on the effects of homework challenge the traditional assumption that homework is inherently good,” wrote Denise Pope , a senior lecturer at the Stanford Graduate School of Education and a co-author of a study published in the Journal of Experimental Education .

The researchers used survey data to examine perceptions about homework, student well-being and behavioral engagement in a sample of 4,317 students from 10 high-performing high schools in upper-middle-class California communities. Along with the survey data, Pope and her colleagues used open-ended answers to explore the students’ views on homework.

Median household income exceeded $90,000 in these communities, and 93 percent of the students went on to college, either two-year or four-year.

Students in these schools average about 3.1 hours of homework each night.

“The findings address how current homework practices in privileged, high-performing schools sustain students’ advantage in competitive climates yet hinder learning, full engagement and well-being,” Pope wrote.

Pope and her colleagues found that too much homework can diminish its effectiveness and even be counterproductive. They cite prior research indicating that homework benefits plateau at about two hours per night, and that 90 minutes to two and a half hours is optimal for high school.

Their study found that too much homework is associated with:

• Greater stress: 56 percent of the students considered homework a primary source of stress, according to the survey data. Forty-three percent viewed tests as a primary stressor, while 33 percent put the pressure to get good grades in that category. Less than 1 percent of the students said homework was not a stressor.

• Reductions in health: In their open-ended answers, many students said their homework load led to sleep deprivation and other health problems. The researchers asked students whether they experienced health issues such as headaches, exhaustion, sleep deprivation, weight loss and stomach problems.

• Less time for friends, family and extracurricular pursuits: Both the survey data and student responses indicate that spending too much time on homework meant that students were “not meeting their developmental needs or cultivating other critical life skills,” according to the researchers. Students were more likely to drop activities, not see friends or family, and not pursue hobbies they enjoy.

A balancing act

The results offer empirical evidence that many students struggle to find balance between homework, extracurricular activities and social time, the researchers said. Many students felt forced or obligated to choose homework over developing other talents or skills.

Also, there was no relationship between the time spent on homework and how much the student enjoyed it. The research quoted students as saying they often do homework they see as “pointless” or “mindless” in order to keep their grades up.

“This kind of busy work, by its very nature, discourages learning and instead promotes doing homework simply to get points,” Pope said.

She said the research calls into question the value of assigning large amounts of homework in high-performing schools. Homework should not be simply assigned as a routine practice, she said.

“Rather, any homework assigned should have a purpose and benefit, and it should be designed to cultivate learning and development,” wrote Pope.

High-performing paradox

In places where students attend high-performing schools, too much homework can reduce their time to foster skills in the area of personal responsibility, the researchers concluded. “Young people are spending more time alone,” they wrote, “which means less time for family and fewer opportunities to engage in their communities.”

Student perspectives

The researchers say that while their open-ended or “self-reporting” methodology to gauge student concerns about homework may have limitations – some might regard it as an opportunity for “typical adolescent complaining” – it was important to learn firsthand what the students believe.

The paper was co-authored by Mollie Galloway from Lewis and Clark College and Jerusha Conner from Villanova University.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

The Long-Term Effects of Time Use during High School on Positive Development

Jasper tjaden.

Global Migration Data Analysis Centre, International Organization for Migration

Dom Rolando

Department of Family, Youth & Community Services, University of Florida-Gainesville

Jennifer Doty

Jeylan t. mortimer.

Department of Sociology, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities

Associated Data

This longitudinal study examines how the time that youth spend in activities during high school may contribute to positive or negative development in adolescence and in early adulthood. We draw on data from 1103 participants in the longitudinal Youth Development Study, followed from entry to high school to their mid-twenties. Controlling demographic, socioeconomic, and psychological influences, we estimate the effects of average time spent on homework, in extracurricular activities, and with friends during the four years of high school on outcomes measured in the final year of high school and twelve years later. Our results suggest that policies surrounding the implementation and practice of homework may have long-term benefits for struggling students. In contrast, time spent with peers on weeknights was associated with both short- and long-term maladjustment.

Introduction

Time use in adolescence is a contentious topic that has generated extensive research and policy discussion. Parents, teachers, and the wider public have strong opinions about how students should spend their time during high school ( Farb & Matjasko, 2012 ; Zuzanek, 2009 ). Out-of-school activities are thought to shape life outcomes beyond the senior year ( U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007 ), and research supports this claim ( Broh, 2002 ; Fredricks & Eccles, 2006 ; Gibbs, Erickson, Dufur, & Miles, 2015 ; McHale, Crouter, & Tucker, 2001 ; Peck et al., 2008 ; Viau, Denault, & Poulin, 2015 ). Homework and extracurricular activities (e.g. theater, music, sports, church youth groups) are found to have positive effects on educational achievement, prosocial behavior, problem behavior, and delinquency ( Cooper, Robinson, & Patall, 2006 ; Farb & Matjasko, 2012 ; Fredricks & Eccles, 2006 ; Zaff, Moore, Papillo, & Williams, 2003 ; Vandell, Larson, Mahoney, & Watts, 2015 ). 1 In contrast, unsupervised time with peers may be detrimental to positive development in and out of school at various ages ( Barnes, Hoffman, Welte, Farrell, & Dintcheff, 2007 ; Mahoney, Larson, Eccles, & Lord, 2005 ; Osgood & Anderson, 2004 ; Vandell et al., 2015 ), though evidence indicates that positive relationships with peers can be beneficial for youth emotionally, socially, and academically (e.g. MacLeod 1987 ; Oberle, Shonert-Reichl, & Thompson, 2010 ; Vitaro et al. 2009 ; Wentzel, 2009 ).

We aim to extend existing studies of adolescents’ use of time and positive youth development ( Peck et al., 2008 ) in several ways: First , most studies in this area are cross-sectional or rely on just a few years of observation ( Bartko & Eccles, 2003 ; Busseri et al., 2006 ; Camacho & Fuligni, 2015 ; Darling, 2005 ; Fredricks & Eccles, 2006 ; Fredricks & Simpkins, 2012 ; Simpkins, Eccles, & Becnel, 2008 ; Wolf et al., 2015 ). Relatively little is known about the long-term implications of the ways time is spent during high school. The transition to adulthood is often conceived as a “fresh start,” a time of exploration, with opportunity to develop new commitments, enter new social contexts, and form new relationships ( Arnett, 2007 ; Settersten & Ray, 2010 ). At this time of life, some youth turn their lives around despite difficulties in adolescence ( Masten, 2015 ). In contrast, other youth may falter when they encounter new responsibilities as they take on adult roles. We use longitudinal data to follow students prospectively over 12 years, from mid-adolescence (age 14/15) to early adulthood (age 26/27). The temporal ordering of time spent in high school and outcomes later in life, as well as the use of a wide range of earlier socio-demographic, socio-economic, and psychological controls, help to establish directionality ( Sacker & Schoon, 2007 ).

Second, previous research mainly examines single outcomes of youth development, such as educational achievement or delinquency. As we will elaborate in the following sections, we propose a multi-dimensional definition of positive youth development. Positive youth development refers to the dynamic integration of personality strengths; constructive engagement with families, peer groups, schools, organizations, and communities; adaptation to environmental contexts; and other positive outcomes that indicate “thriving” across adolescence and into young adulthood ( Larson, 2000 ; Lerner et al., 2009 ; Sesma et al., 2013 ). This framework obviously encompasses multiple kinds of characteristics and experiences, and cannot be captured by single outcomes alone. Thus, it must be measured in broader, holistic terms to capture the complex array of potential time-use effects and to accommodate the multi-faceted nature of positive development. Accordingly, we constructed multivariate measures of development in adolescence and early adulthood using a Latent Class Analysis based on educational, occupational, behavioral, and psychological outcomes.

Third , most previous studies of time use focus on average effects for a student cohort. Yet, different student populations face distinct challenges from the outset. We expect that time use may have different implications for students with more favorable starting positions compared to students who are situated less favorably. We explore whether time allocation during high school is associated with positive development for teenagers who face initial difficulties ( Luthar, Crossman, & Small, 2015 ; Yates, Tyrell, & Masten, 2015 ), and whether outcomes are different for students who started out in more sanguine positions.

Fourth , many previous studies examine one type of time use, for example, extracurricular activities, in isolation from other types (e.g. homework, time with peers). Time spent on one activity may be conditional on time spent on other activities and the effects of each may be highly interdependent. We take into account three measures of time use (extracurricular activities, homework, evenings with peers) to disentangle net effects. As such, we respond to the call to examine extracurricular activities in tandem with other ways that adolescents spend their time ( Farb & Matjasko, 2012 ).

We find positive medium- to long-term effects of time spent on homework and extracurricular activities on positive youth development and negative effects of time spent with peers in the evenings. Time spent in organized activities may enhance adolescents’ positive development by providing structure and by reducing the amount of time available to spend in unsupervised contexts. Policies that encourage the practice of homework and extracurricular activities, particularly for youth whose developmental attributes are less favorable at the start of high school, may have the potential to promote positive development far beyond high school in ways that may not have been primarily intended by such homework or extracurricular programs.

Positive Youth Development and Time Use

The Positive Youth Development (PYD) literature (see, for example, Lerner et al., 2009 ; Sesma, Mannes, & Scales, 2013 ) provides a framework for assessing the complex trajectories of youth throughout and beyond high school. PYD is often described as the development of mutually adaptive and beneficial relations between youth and the contexts in which they grow up (i.e. Lerner, 2017 ). There is no common agreement, however, about how positive development should be measured. Studies vary substantially in terms of the outcomes used to indicate positive development, including educational performance, problem behavior, employment, aspirations, etc. (see, e.g. Leman, Smith, Peterson & SRCD Ethnic-Racial Issues and International Committees, 2017 ). Common to most studies relying on the PYD framework is the notion that positive development is a complex, multifaceted process that may affect multiple life domains ( Lerner et al., 2009 ).

PYD frames development as resulting from the reciprocal relationship between individual choices and youth contexts. The study of adolescents’ use of time is integral to understanding this dynamic (e.g., Wolf et al., 2015 ). Policies that provide opportunities for growth and protect against risk are critical from the PYD perspective (Roth & Brooks-Gunn, 2003). While researchers and practitioners previously embraced a deficit-oriented perspective, recent literature stresses the importance of developing assets to promote strength (promotive factors) and resources for those exposed to risk ( Sesma et al., 2013 ; Luthar et al., 2015 ). The ways students spend their time during high school reflect the contexts of development that youth are regularly exposed to and that are either more or less conducive to positive outcomes.

However, relatively little attention outside the field of criminology (e.g. Barnes et al., 2007 ) has been directed to factors that protect adolescents with favorable starting points from negative development over time. Because those youth are seen as advantaged, scholars have been less interested in the personal strengths and circumstances that enable young people in favorable starting positions to maintain their positive development over time, and those factors that lead some of them to falter. We are therefore interested in both differential and long-term correlates of time use. From a policy standpoint, so-called ‘overscheduling’ youth in activities may be a problem for more affluent high school districts, involved parents, and active teachers. It may be less of a problem for at-risk youth who face difficulties at home or impoverished schools, with few resources for extracurricular activities, and poor neighborhoods ( Putnam, 2015 ).

Although numerous factors have been shown to contribute to positive youth development, few have examined time spent in activities during the high school period as a predictor of positive or negative development in adulthood. In light of the proposition that children’s activities constitute developmental opportunities ( Larson, 1994 ; Larson & Verma, 1999 ), in the following sections we describe how three ways youth allocate time may enhance or reduce their exposure to promotive and protective processes.

Homework, Extracurricular Activities, and Time Spent with Peers

Despite some controversy about the drawbacks of too much homework (e.g. Zuzanek, 2009 ) and the challenges of homework for students with learning disabilities or economically disadvantaged students ( Bennet & Kalish, 2006 ), studies of homework time and effort have consistently demonstrated positive associations with academic achievement ( Cooper et al., 2006 ; Farb & Matjasko, 2012 ). Beyond promoting educational achievement, a positive factor in itself, homework may have beneficial spill-over. Doing homework, and seeing its results, may enhance motivational resources, including self-regulation, discipline, time-management, self-determination, goal-setting, and achievement motivation ( Bempechat, 2004 ; Ramdass & Zimmerman, 2011 ). Adolescents who invest more time in doing their homework consistently and thoroughly across their high school years may learn to appreciate its long-term benefits (e.g., better grades, admission to selective colleges).

Studies of extracurricular activities consistently show that mere participation is associated with positive outcomes ( Farb & Matjasko, 2012 ; Lauer et al., 2006 ; Vandell et al., 2015 ), including prosocial behavior, educational achievement, and college completion, as well as lower risk of dropout, substance abuse, and criminal behavior ( Broh, 2002 ; Durlak, Weissberg, & Pachan, 2010 ; Farb & Matjasko, 2012 ; Gibbs et al., 2015 ; Shulruf, 2010 ; Vandell et al., 2015 ). Extracurricular activities can broadly be defined as activities officially or semiofficially approved and usually organized student activities connected with school and usually carrying no academic credit (e.g., theater, music, sports, church youth groups). The positive effects of such activities increase with program quality, duration, intensity, and consistency ( Hirsch et al., 2011 ; Vandell et al., 2015 ). A few studies indicate benefits over the transition to young adulthood. Fredericks and Eccles (2006) found that participating in sports and clubs in high school was associated with educational status and civic engagement a year after high school. In a study of female high school athletes, participation in sports was associated with greater odds of college graduation ( Troutman & Dufur, 2007 ). The current study extends this body of research by examining the long-term associations of extracurricular activities and adjustment in young adulthood at age 26/27.

While extracurricular activities are diverse in character and heterogeneous in their effects ( Eccles, Barber, Stone, & Hunt, 2003 ), they are typically designed with the intention to enhance adolescent development. As such, they have a number of attributes in common. First, extracurricular activities (e.g., theater, music, sports, church youth groups) provide opportunities for the development of positive social ties, and they promote cooperative prosocial behavior, social skills, and a sense of community (e.g., Gibbs et al., 2015 ; Mahoney, 2000 ). Second, supervised programs expose adolescents to potential adult role models and facilitate relationships with teachers, coaches, and community workers ( Viau et al., 2015 ). Third, many extracurricular activities involve goal setting, long-term commitment, and self-determination (e.g., competitive sports, rehearsing for a play or concert). They offer opportunities to explore interests, acquire skills, develop talents, and experience success (e.g. Hansen, Larson, & Dworkin, 2003 ; Mahoney et al., 2005 ). Fourth, when youth are participating in extracurricular activities they are not in ‘harmful’ environments, such as stressful circumstances at home. Thus, structured activities, like homework and participation in the extra curriculum, may enhance the development of protective factors that prevent problem behaviors in adolescence ( Barnes et al., 2007 ; Wolf et al., 2015 ).

In contrast, research on unsupervised settings has revealed a very different developmental course. Large amounts of unsupervised time with peers may foster problem behaviors like substance use and delinquency ( Barnes et al., 2007 ; Dishion et al., 2015 ), interfere with school bonding, and reduce achievement ( Maimon & Browning, 2010 ; Mahoney et al., 2005 ; Osgood & Anderson, 2004 ). Time spent in the company of other adolescents may also reduce time spent with parents, parental monitoring and control, and routine social interaction in the family that reinforces social norms. However, in some circumstances a lack of time with friends may be harmful to development (e.g., Twenge, Martin, Campbell, 2018 ), perhaps because students who are socially isolated do not build the interpersonal skills needed for adult roles. Additionally, time with friends – in some cases – is believed to be a strategy to avoid problem situations at home, which could lead to even more adverse consequences (e.g. MacLeod 1987 ). Thus, peer influence can be positive or negative, depending largely on the pro- or anti-social orientations of friends and the context ( Vitaro et al., 2009 ). In the current study, we specifically focus on unsupervised settings of peer influence by examining evening time with friends.

The review of key research on adolescents’ use of time in the previous section informs a clear set of expectations:

• 1) Time investments in homework and extracurricular activities will enable students with less favorable starting positions to achieve positive developmental outcomes as well as help students with favorable starting positions to avoid losing their relative advantage.
• 2) Unstructured time spent with peers in the evenings during high school will reduce chances for positive development and increase the likelihood that adolescents with favorable starting positions will show lower levels of later positive development.
• 3) Adolescents’ use of time during high school will matter not only over the course of high school (from middle to late adolescence) but also in early adulthood.

In 1987, Youth Development Study participants ( N = 1,139) were recruited as ninth graders (mostly age 14–15) entering all high schools in the St. Paul, Minnesota Public School District via random sampling ( Mortimer, 2012 ). U.S. Census data show that this site was comparable to the nation as a whole with respect to several economic and sociodemographic indicators ( Mortimer, 2003 ). In 1989, per capital incomes in St. Paul and in the nation at large were $13,727 and $14,420 respectively. However, St. Paul residents were more highly educated than in the U.S. (among persons 25 and older, 33% and 20%, respectively, were college graduates). The minority population in the St. Paul School District was 30 percent in the mid-1980s, and 25 percent in the YDS panel. Because the YDS panel represented the ethnic/racial composition of the St. Paul community, the largest minority group consisted of Hmong children (11% of the initial panel) who were recent refugees. Comparison of census tract data for those who consented and those who refused the invitation to participate in the study did not reveal significant differences in socioeconomic variables.

Children were surveyed annually, during the first four years in their school classrooms, and subsequently by mail. The current study utilizes waves 1 (1988), 2 (1989), 3 (1990), 4 (1991), and 12 (2000). In 2000, 12 years after the first wave, 70% of the original sample (age 26–27) remained. Because of attrition, analyses of time use and developmental change during adolescence are based on a larger sample than those covering the period of transition to adulthood. Although a wide range of attitudes and behaviors (measured in 1988) do not predict retention in the study, attrition has been greater among men, minorities, and youth without an employed parent ( Mortimer, 2012 ).

Dependent variable.

To capture the complex array of potential time-use effects and to accommodate the multi-faceted nature of positive development, we constructed holistic, multivariate measures of development in adolescence and early adulthood using a person-centered approach. Person-centered analyses, like Latent Class Analysis (LCA), enable a global focus on the whole person, which is more naturalistic than the traditional regression approach of statistically “controlling” various aspects of life ( Masten, 2015 ). Based on a range of indicators of positive development over time, the LCA statistically identified ‘more favorable’ and ‘less favorable’ positions at three stages of development:

• wave 1—middle adolescence, or the freshman year of high school, when most respondents were 14 and 15 years old;
• wave 4—late adolescence, or the senior year of high school, ages 17–18;
• and wave 12—early adulthood, ages 26/27.

Subsequently, we look at movements between categories across adolescence and the transition to adulthood. We examined “upward” movement from less favorable to more favorable positions over time (i.e. positive development). Conversely, “downward” movement refers to moving from favorable positions at the start to overall less favorable positions indicated by a range of outcomes. Figure 1 provides a graphic representation of our conceptual framework, showing positive and negative development over time.

Movement between latent classes across developmental stages

Using the period between Grades 9 and 12 as an example, if a respondent is identified as having a more favorable developmental status in the 9 th grade, but is then seen to exhibit less favorable attributes in 12 th Grade, he or she is considered to experience negative development (downward movement). If instead, the movement seen is from the less favorable to more favorable categories, they are thought to experience positive development (upward movement). Respondents can also be stable if there is no movement between any two periods.

An advantage of LCA is that it allows groups to emerge from relationships in the data, rather than imposing groupings based on researchers’ preconceived notions, in this case, of what constitutes positive development. In using this method, we assume that choices, attitudes, motivations, and behaviors can be observed and that the interrelations of these phenomena are similar for individuals in a specific group and distinct from other groups. Therefore, identifying how these observable characteristics converge lets us construct a plausible grouping of individuals exhibiting similar multifaceted patterns.

Latent classes were constructed based on variables in educational, behavioral, and psychological domains that are time-variant and indicative of “positive development” in each phase. 2 These domains have close and complementary relationships over time ( Masten, 2015 ; Obradovíc et al., 2009.) The choice of indicators was informed by the Policy Research Team in Ramsey County, Minnesota, which oversees and evaluates several programs targeted to improving the prospects of at-risk youth. We established variable cut-offs indicating the points at which students might be considered to be in more or less favorable positions based on past literature and practical guidelines (e.g., a GPA of C+ is below the average of students admitted to college), not to separate the most high-achieving students from others. As a result, cut-offs for some variables may be considered a rather “low bar.” In setting these markers, we also considered the variable distributions to have sufficient numbers of cases in each category. Though this measurement strategy might be considered a limitation (given restricted variance), it honors the empirical linkages among several variables in a holistic manner.

In middle and late adolescence, educationally-related variables included grade point average (C+ or better, less than C+); educational aspiration, or the highest level of schooling the students think they will achieve (4 years of college or more, less than 4 years of college); and intrinsic motivation toward school (high, low). In the behavioral domain, we included getting in trouble at school (low, high), number of alcoholic drinks in the last 30 days (2 or less, more than 2); and smoking cigarettes in the last 30 days (no, yes). Psychological orientations included certainty about achieving career goals (high certainty, not as certain) and an index of more general expectations concerning the future (high, or more optimistic, or low, more pessimistic).

Considering these indicators together produces strong, holistic measures of more or less favorable development in adolescence. 3 Table 1 shows the prevalence of each class in our sample in middle and late adolescence, as well as the respective predicted probabilities of each indicator in our latent class analysis. In middle adolescence (age 14–15), 64% of the respondents were likely to be in a latent class we call “favorable development”; 32% were likely to be in the “less favorable development” latent class.

Estimated Prevalence and Conditional Probabilities of Observed Attitudes and Behaviors for Development Classes in Middle and Late Adolescence

In young adulthood, development categories were defined by the following stage-appropriate developmental indicators 4 : educational attainment (high school or less; vocational or associates degree; some college; or bachelor’s degree or more); currently employed (yes, no); job satisfaction (satisfied; somewhat satisfied; dissatisfied); how one’s current job relates to one’s career goal (yes; it is a stepping stone; no); certainty about eventually achieving one’s career goal (already achieved it; very certain; somewhat or not certain); economic self-sufficiency (100% spouse/self; 25% or more from relatives or government; other); and physical or emotional health problems that interfere with daily activities (no, yes). Table 2 shows the conditional probabilities of observed attitudinal and behavioral indicators of respondents assigned to each class, as well as the likelihood of each class assignment. 5

Estimated Prevalence and Conditional Probabilities of Observed Attitudes and Behaviors for Positive Development in Early Adulthood.

In our study, we are less interested in those who remain stable over time than in movement between classes through adolescence and during the transition to adulthood. Table A1 and A2 in the Appendix show movement from middle to late adolescence (freshman to senior year of high school) and movement from late adolescence to early adulthood (senior year of high school to age 26/27). Overall, 28% of respondents move between categories from middle to late adolescence and 46% from late adolescence to early adulthood. In early adulthood, we thus observe less stability than during high school. Forty-eight percent of those who were starting with a less favorable developmental pattern at the end of high school (late adolescence) experience positive development by early adulthood (upward movers); 41 percent of youth in the more favorable latent class in late adolescence experienced negative development eight years later (downward movers).

When considering transition patterns across all three periods (see Table A3 in the supplementary material ), we find that 39% of cases (N= 264) with valid responses across all three periods neither move up nor down (they are stable). Thirty-five percent of all students (N= 233) in the sample are one-time downward movers. Among downward movers, most move down after senior year. Thirteen percent (N= 86) are one-time upward movers and another 13% (N= 90) move at each period. However, it must be noted that comparing rates of transition across all three periods may be misleading given that the sample is reduced by more than 50%, due to attrition, and the indicators of positive development change between period 2 (late adolescence) and 3 (early adulthood). We therefore focus our attention on movement from mid to late adolescence, and then from late adolescence to early adulthood.

Independent variables.

The independent variables included hours spent per week on homework, hours spent per week in extra-curricular activities, and number of weekday evenings spent with friends during adolescence. Time spent on homework and extracurricular activities include the weekend, as students may catch up on homework on the weekend and many extracurricular events occur during the weekend. Time spent with peers includes only weekday evenings. Time spent with friends in the evening on weekdays is more likely to be time spent in ‘unstructured’ environments than in the afternoon, since during the latter time organized programs may take place that are not interpreted as “extracurricular activities.” We use averages of reported time spent in activities across four annual waves of data (one for each year of high school). Averaging across years is preferable to relying exclusively on information from one particular year because adolescent use of time can change substantially during high school. Moreover, we use continuous scores of hours spent on an activity as the independent variable of central interest. Arguably, the effect of time use may be sensitive to certain threshold values. For example, while a moderate amount spent on homework may be beneficial, too many late-night hours on homework may be harmful. To test the sensitivity of our time-use measures, we estimated all models with various cut-off points.

We use the average of all four high school years because the survey question can be considered retrospective for the current school year. This means that the number of hours spent on homework, for example, in the last year of high school, reflects time spent on this activity during the school year up to the day of the survey. As such, this measure maintains the temporal ordering of time use measures (independent variable) and developmental outcomes (dependent variable). In addition, we test the robustness of time-use effects by estimating the models with alternate measures (years 1–3, and years 2–3).

Covariates included background and psychological variables, measured in the first wave, that could affect time spent in activities during high school as well as the multidimensional indicators of positive development in adolescence and early adulthood, reflected in the latent classes. Background variables include parental household income, parental education, race, gender, and family structure. These measures are commonly included to reflect the relative advantages of youth at the beginning of high school. Additional psychological variables include depressed mood, self-esteem, self-mastery, academic self-efficacy, and parental educational expectations for the child. These constructs represent relatively stable, long-term characteristics. All controls could drive movement toward more or less beneficial uses of time, as well as eventual positive development during adolescence and the transition to adulthood; including them in the analyses reduces the risks of endogeneity and time-use effects. Table A6 in the Appendix shows how each variable in the analysis was operationalized.

Table 3 shows descriptive statistics for the independent, dependent, and control variables in the two key analytic samples, representing adolescence and the transition to adulthood (the latter smaller due to sample attrition). On average, the adolescents spent 7.9 hours in extracurricular activities per week; 9.1 hours per week doing homework, and 2.5 evenings per week with peers. Descriptives for all variables are presented for the analytic adolescent sample as well as the analytic transition to adulthood sample (see Table 3 ). Summary statistics of all model variables are shown by the dependent variable, i.e. movement category (upward, downward, stable high, stable low), in Table A9, Table A10, and Table A11 in the Appendix.

Descriptive Statistics (Analytic Samples)

Analytic Strategy.

As described above, a latent class analysis of key indicators of positive youth development at three times (freshman year of high school, senior year of high school, and early adulthood) distinguished a “favorable” class and a less favorable class. Then, because “class movement” is categorical, consisting of four categories (stable favorable status, stable unfavorable status, positive development, negative development), we used multinomial logistic regression to assess the likelihood of upward movement and downward movement across adolescence and over the transition to adulthood.

As our key analysis, we estimate two models: The first “adolescence” model predicts the 1) Relative Risk Ratio, or odds, of being an upward mover, i.e. positive development by the end of high school despite initial difficulty; and 2) the Relative Risk Ratio of being a downward mover, negative development over the course of the high school years for those who start out in an initially more favorable position. The second model repeats this analysis for the period from the end of high school to early adulthood (age 26/ 27). We only report results for changes across time rather than stability because these findings, particularly factors promoting movement from less favorable to more favorable outcomes, could inform interventions designed to support positive youth development. Variables measuring time spent in activities during high school are entered in the model simultaneously to ascertain their independent effects net of one another (e.g., the effects of extracurricular time above and beyond time spent with friends and time doing homework). To include the maximal number of cases, we estimate the adolescent model with data from all respondents who were retained by 1991, the last year of high school; we estimate the transition to adulthood model with those remaining by 2000, when most respondents were 26–27 years old.

Robustness Checks.

To assess the sensitivity of the results to our methods, model specification, sample, and missing cases, we conducted a series of robustness checks. First, sample attrition is of concern, particularly at the transition into adulthood. In response, we estimated all models for the earlier stage (mid to late adolescence) using the smaller sample for the “transition to adulthood” model. Second, we re-estimated the model incorporating multiple imputation using chained equations. Third, we checked how sensitive the results were to different codings of time variables. Fourth, we estimated our key models for development between the beginning of high school and early adulthood – spanning a period of 12 years. Fifth, we assessed the impact of including and excluding basic socio-demographic and psychological controls into the model. Our reported results were robust against all the outlined checks (available upon request).

Development from Middle Adolescence to Late Adolescence

The findings shown in Table 4 clearly demonstrate that how students spend their time in high school was associated with their development over the course of high school. Students starting in less favorable positions in the ninth grade were 7% more likely to move upward with each additional hour spent, on average, per week on homework (compared to participants who remained in the less favorable developmental status). The effects for time in extracurricular activities and with peers were not statistically significant.

Multinomial Logistic Regression Estimates (Relative Risk Ratios) of Positive and Negative Development in Adolescence

Exponentiated coefficients; Standard errors in parentheses

Note: See Table A7 for a full list of coefficients.

Next, we estimated the effects of time use on the likelihood of negative development, that is, moving to the less favorable developmental condition. Negative development during the course of high school did not depend on homework time or extracurricular involvement. Instead, the effect of time spent with peers was substantial. An additional evening with peers during the week, on average, increases the risk of negative development by 42% (p < .01). The multivariate results are consistent with patterns in the descriptive summary statistics ( Table A9 – A11 in the Appendix) – Upward movers spent on average more time on homework, on extracurricular activities and less time with peers compared to downward movers and students with stably low development.

Development from Late Adolescence to Early Adulthood

Adolescents’ use of time during high school also predicted positive and negative development during the transition from late adolescence to adulthood. Having spent more hours a week on homework and extracurricular activities increased the likelihood of upward movement (positive development) by age 26/27.

What about late adolescents who started off more favorably? Strikingly, earlier involvement with peers had a large and deleterious effect on their future (see Table 5 ). Those who had spent one more evening on average a week with friends during high school were 38% (p < .05) more likely to be downward movers. All effects shown in Table 5 are net of key socio-demographic, socio-economic, and psychological variables.

Multinomial Logistic Regression Estimates (Relative Risk Ratios) of Positive and Negative Development during the Transition to Adulthood

Note: See Table A8 for a full list of coefficients.

In sum, our findings show that the ways students spend their time in high school are associated with their development, both in the short- and long-term. Homework and, to some degree, extracurricular activities, increase the likelihood of positive development, but are less implicated in the likelihood of moving downward. Time spent with peers increases the likelihood of negative development for youth who started out more favorably both in adolescence and early adulthood. Contrary to our expectations, the effects of time spent in activities on positive development and negative development are not mirror images of one another. We discuss this asymmetry in the next section.

This study aimed at extending the literature on time use during high school and positive youth development in several ways. We examined long-term effects at 4 and 12 years after starting high school. We assessed predictors of positive development for those who started high school with unfavorable developmental attributes, as well as predictors of negative development for those who started out as relatively promising. We constructed holistic measures for positive development rather than relying on single outcomes such as educational achievement or delinquency. Lastly, we took into account different types of time use (homework, extracurricular activities, time spent with peers) simultaneously rather than studying each one of them in isolation.

We conceptualized and operationalized the positive development of adolescents and young adults as multifaceted phenomena that encompass several psychological orientations, achievements, and other behaviors. As such, we used a person-centered approach, Latent Class Analysis, to assess positive development. According to Yates and colleagues (2015) : “Cumulative risk is best met by cumulative protection efforts that prevent risk, promote resources, and buffer adaptive functioning” (2015, pp.778). Our results suggest that adolescents’ use of time may be a fruitful avenue for such “cumulative protection efforts”.

Most attention in the developmental literature has been directed to understanding risk and vulnerability. Long-term disadvantage and repeated failures (in school, work, with peers, etc.) engender cumulative risk and negative developmental outcomes necessitating multiple protective resources and strategies. But even in dire circumstances, many disadvantaged adolescents manage to thrive by the time they reach adulthood. The transition into adulthood is often portrayed as a “fresh start,” with developmental pathways dependent on exposure to new contexts and the greater capacity to exercise individual agency and autonomy ( Arnett, 2007 ; Crosnoe 2001 ; Masten, 2015 ; Settersten & Ray, 2010 ). Laub and Sampson (2003) draw attention to “knifing off” experiences in the military (see also London and Wilmoth 2016 ), support from a conforming spouse, and positive work experiences, all of which lead to desistance from crime. However, it is important to acknowledge that continued exposure to disadvantaged contexts, and the cumulative risks they pose, may limit the opportunities many youth have to get a fresh start ( Bynner, 2005 ; Cote, 2008 ; Dannefer, Kelley-Moore, & Huang, 2016 ; Furstenberg, 2008 ; Putnam, 2015 ). For example, structural factors in high school, such as ability tracking within and across schools, limit individual choices beyond the senior year (e.g. Lucas 2001). Those less favorably positioned, and particularly those who do not achieve a post-secondary degree of any kind (i.e., bachelors’ or associates degrees, vocational certificates) face considerable challenges in the new “gig” economy, in achieving stable employment, independent residence, and economic self-sufficiency. Many join the working “precariat” and become “boomerang children.” In fact, difficult experiences in attaining key markers of adulthood may have led a substantial portion of young people in this study to experience “downward movement” during the transition from adolescence to adulthood.

While “fresh start” and “knifing off” processes signify sharp discontinuities, breaking from the past, the present study sheds light on more mundane, quotidian uses of time (i.e., homework, extracurricular pursuits) that may interrupt negative developmental trajectories. Our results suggest that time use during high school may be one leverage point that opens doors. For example, early decisions about homework and extracurricular activities may influence later decisions about the use of time in post-secondary settings, including continued schooling and occupational pathways that foster continued attainments.

We find that the average time spent on homework and with peers during the four years of high school matter for development. Because students in middle to late adolescence spend a lot of their time in the structured environments under consideration, we would expect homework and extracurricular activities to have immediate effects on positive development over the course of high school. As discussed in the beginning of this article, homework may boost achievement, and extracurricular activities promote the development of non-cognitive skills and social ties. It is reasonable to suppose that the effects of adolescent time use would wane once students leave the structured environment of high school.

Surprisingly, however, the use of time in high school still had predictive power several years later when respondents had reached early adulthood. In the current study, time spent doing homework and, to a lesser extent, in extracurricular activities (in the transition to adulthood period only) increased the probability of positive development. Interestingly, the effects of time spent in these two activities on those who started off more favorably at the beginning of each interval were not statistically significant (at the p < 0.05 level). In other words, time spent in homework and extracurricular activities did not protect students from negative development. But every additional weekday evening spent with peers during high school increased the chances of negative development in late adolescence and in early adulthood.

These results link back to the ongoing and heated debate about “overscheduling” students, which may be a concern only for some students. More time spent doing homework and extracurricular activities had positive effects, in particular, for students starting off less favorably, independent of socio-economic origins and early psychological orientations. In contrast, our findings indicate that doing more homework or more extracurricular activities may not help students to maintain an initial advantage. This implies that policies encouraging homework may be especially important for students facing challenges at the beginning of high school; increasing homework time is likely to affect favorable development across multiple domains over time. Although many have argued against giving too much homework or homework that is merely “busy work” ( Marzano & Pickering, 2007 ), the current research underscores the importance of homework for students starting with a less favorable developmental status, including, for example, at-risk subgroups of students. Rather than shielding at-risk students from homework, providing support for a diverse range of students to complete homework is important ( Voorhees, 2011 ).

Interestingly, the negative effects of evening time spent with peers were significant among youth who started out more favorably in both periods. Spending four evenings a week on average with friends compared to one doubled the probability of negative development. A study of low-income minority children similarly found high levels of problem behaviors (e.g., delinquency, substance use, and peer substance use) for those who spent unstructured time away from home, presumably with peers, compared to unstructured time at home ( Wolf et al., 2015 ). Notwithstanding a body of research that highlights potential benefits from positive friendships ( Vitaro et al., 2009 ), our findings also corroborate a body of work on peer deviance training (e.g., Dishion, Kim, & Tein, 2015 ). That is, youth are more likely to engage in delinquent behaviors when they are together with other youth in unstructured contexts (Dodge et al., 2008; Osgood and Anderson, 2004 ).

Time spent in extracurricular activities during high school predicted upward movement, or a positive developmental pathway, over the transition to adulthood. Although extra-curricular activities are a possible support mechanism for young people, policy makers are cautioned against simply grouping vulnerable youth together in after school activities (Dodge et al., 2008). Instead, mixed groups, structured activities, and connections with adult mentors are key components that contribute to positive development in extra-curricular contexts. Additionally, practices that discourage at-risk students from engaging in extra-curricular activities should be reexamined, particularly fees that may be prohibitive to families from lower socio-economic backgrounds ( Putnam, 2015 ).

While our design was not able to directly test explanations of why time spent in homework, extracurricular activities, and peers has such strong and long-lasting statistical “effects,” we offer a number of potential mechanisms that could explain our key results. The persistent effects of adolescents’ use of time can be explained if distinct activities are understood as opportunity structures for non-cognitive skill and habit formation. The impacts of non-cognitive skills (such as self-regulation, motivation, values, etc.) on life outcomes are key interests of psychologists; such interests are increasingly spreading to other fields such as economics ( Heckman, Stixrud, & Urzua, 2006 ) and sociology ( Johnson & Mortimer, 2011 ; Vuolo, Staff, & Mortimer, 2012 ). While homework may be primarily intended to improve cognitive skills, increase learning, raise grades and heighten achievement, homework time may also contribute to the development of discipline, self-regulation, achievement motivation, time discounting preferences, and delayed gratification ( Bempechat, 2004 ; Ramdass & Zimmerman, 2011 ). Homework may also teach high school students how to acquire information, solve problems, and learn new things, and these lessons stay with them after they leave school. Extracurricular activities constitute a venue for developing social and cooperative skills, making friends, setting goals to be pursued in a vigorous and systematic manner, and acquiring positive adult role models ( Mahoney et al., 2005 ). Each of these processes sets the stage for positive development in adulthood despite challenges.

The negative effect of time with peers in largely unsupervised environments is well established ( McHale et al., 2001 ; Osgood & Anderson, 2004 ; Vandell et al., 2015 ). Structured lives with more routine, organized activities reduce opportunity for deviant behavior and enhance social control ( Cohen & Felson, 1979 ; Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990 ; Hirschi, 1969 ). Organized processes constructed and supervised by adults (e.g. homework, extracurricular activities) constrain the violation of social norms, whereas unsupervised evening time with peers may boost the opportunity for delinquency ( Dodge, Dishion, & Lansford, 2007 ). The absence of adult control enables adolescents to pursue peer norms that are often detrimental to long-term development, achievement, and progress. These norms may condone or support deviant behavior, a lack of effort in school, disengagement from conventional activities and contexts, and detachment from positive adult role models.

Our study faces certain limitations. First, our sample is based on a panel of youth in a single Midwest community in the US. While any judgment about the applicability of our findings to other settings is beyond the scope of this study, we encourage similar research in other contexts to explore the external validity of our results. International comparisons may be of particular interest as educational regimes and the transition to the labor market vary systematically and dramatically across societies. Some countries, such as Germany, have tightly regulated school-to-work pathways. Since individuals are channeled into vocational and college preparatory tracks at an early age, and because these trajectories lead directly into work or post-secondary education, discretionary experiences during high school such as the ones studied here (extracurricular activities, peer involvements) may have less impact on developmental and attainment outcomes. Other countries, such as Israel, have mandatory conscription which may present an opportunity for a “fresh start” for some youth with less favorable development during high school. Furthermore, it is important to note that positive development is socio-historically constructed and highly dependent on place and time (see Dannefer, 1984 ; Mortimer & Moen, 2016 ).

Second, use of self-reported hours or evenings spent on each activity raises threats of measurement error. It does not reveal the quality of the activity or how the individual engages with the opportunity structure provided by the use of time ( Hirsch et al., 2011 , Vandell et al., 2015 ). Unfortunately, we lack more detailed information about the features of homework or extracurricular activities that might yield the most beneficial results, and the kinds of peer activities, or characteristics of peers, that may be most harmful. Future studies are needed to address these nuances and to understand the mechanisms through which time use during high school contributes to positive or negative development.

Third, as in most observational studies, we face issues of unobserved heterogeneity. There may be unobserved student characteristics that drive both patterns of time investment in activities and patterns of development. We have tried to address this issue by identifying and controlling a wide range of plausible social background and psychological confounders. Lastly, more research is needed on the interaction of time use with smart phone use and social media (see e.g. Twenge et al., 2018 ). Given the period of our data collection, we were not able to capture this new development.

Despite these limitations, our study confirms previous evidence on the positive effects of homework and extracurricular activities and the potentially negative effects of peers on development in mid-to-late adolescence. We extend this evidence by showing that time use during high school predicts developmental outcomes well beyond the high school years, into early adulthood. Findings indicate that homework should be promoted, especially for adolescents who are not doing as well as their peers upon entry to high school. However, unsupervised time with peers appears to be detrimental to the positive development of all mid-adolescents, irrespective of their initial starting positions.

Supplementary Material

1 Throughout this paper, we do not use the term, effects, to suggest causal relationships given that the study design does not ensure causality. Here effects refer to statistically significant associations that have been adjusted for a wide range of prior and intervening factors.

2 The Latent Class Analysis (LCA) was performed using the Stata package ( Lanza, Dziak, Huang, Wanger, and Collins 2015 ). According to Nylund, Asparouhov, and Muthen (2007) , the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) and the Bootstrapped Likelihood Ratio Test (BLRT) are good indicators of the number of classes to retain. We chose the number of latent classes corresponding to the lowest BIC. Additionally, high entropy suggests that observations fit well into a defined number of classes. Clark and Muthen (2009) claim that an entropy of 0.8 is considered high entropy. For each of our chosen models, the entropy scores ranged from 0.77 to 0.85. The highest entropy scores for each model corresponded to the lowest BIC. The Log-Likelihood, BIC, and Entropy R-Squared for each LCA specification are reported in Table A4 in the Appendix. A review of all variables included, as well as their operationalizations, are reported in Table A5 of the Appendix.

3 Appendix Table A4 shows the log-likelihood estimates and fit statistics, indicating two latent classes in middle adolescence, two in late adolescence, and three in early adulthood.

4 We acknowledge that stage-appropriate indicators are social constructions that may vary largely across time and space (see Dannefer (1984) ; Mortimer, J. & Moen, P. (2016) )

5 This stage includes three classes: one clearly “favorable” (with higher probability of an advantageous position on each indicator and a prevalence of 46%) and two less “favorable.” The distinguishing feature of one less favorable class is an absence of employment (with a prevalence of 12%); the other is employed, but has other less favorable characteristics (prevalence of 42%). Due to the similarity between the classes with respect to our intended measure of development and to simplify the analysis, we combine the two less favorable classes into a single group. Employment in young adulthood is generally more fluid and unstable than later in the work career, and this is especially the case for those with fewer educational credentials. It is therefore not surprising to find two latent classes, both having less favorable characteristics, which are distinguished mainly by the presence of employment. The more favorable group has stronger educational credentials than either of the less favorable ones. Respondents in this class are also more likely to be economically self-sufficient, to have no physical or mental problems that interfere with daily routines, and (compared to those in the less favorable employed group) to be more satisfied with their work and more optimistic about their career progress.

Contributor Information

Jasper Tjaden, Global Migration Data Analysis Centre, International Organization for Migration.

Dom Rolando, Department of Family, Youth & Community Services, University of Florida-Gainesville.

Jennifer Doty, Department of Family, Youth & Community Services, University of Florida-Gainesville.

Jeylan T. Mortimer, Department of Sociology, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.

• Alvord MK, & Grados JJ (2005). Enhancing resilience in children: a proactive approach . Professional Psychology: Research and Practice , 36 ( 3 ), 238–245. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arnett JJ (2007). Emerging adulthood: What is it, and what is it good for? Child Development Perspectives , 1 ( 2 ), 68–73. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barnes GM, Hoffman JH, Welte JW, Farrell MP, & Dintcheff BA (2007). Adolescents’ time use: Effects on substance use, delinquency and sexual activity . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 36 ( 5 ), 697–710. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bartko WT, & Eccles JS (2003). Adolescent participation in structured and unstructured activities: A person-oriented analysis . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 32 ( 4 ), 233–241. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bennett S, & Kalish N (2006). The case against homework: How homework is hurting our children and what we can do about it . New York, NY: Crown. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bempechat J (2004). The motivational benefits of homework: A social-cognitive perspective . Theory into Practice , 43 ( 3 ), 189–196. [ Google Scholar ]
• Broh BA (2002). Linking extracurricular programming to academic achievement: Who benefits and why? Sociology of Education 75 ( 1 ), 69–95. [ Google Scholar ]
• Buckner JC, Mezzacappa E, & Beardslee WR (2003). Characteristics of resilient youths living in poverty: The role of self-regulatory processes . Development and Psychopathology , 15 ( 1 ), 139–162. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Busseri MA, Rose-Krasnor L, Willoughby T, & Chalmers H (2006). A longitudinal examination of breadth and intensity of youth activity involvement and successful development . Developmental Psychology , 42 ( 6 ), 1313–1326. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bynner J (2005). Rethinking the youth phase of the life-course: The case for emerging adulthood?” Journal of Youth Studies , 9 , 367–384. [ Google Scholar ]
• Camacho DE, & Fuligni AJ (2015). Extracurricular participation among adolescents from immigrant families . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 44 ( 6 ), 1251–1262. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Clark SL, & Muthén B (2009). Relating latent class analysis results to variables not included in the analysis . Retrieved from https://www.statmodel.com/download/relatinglca.pdf
• Cohen LE, & Felson M (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach . American Sociological Review , 44 ( 4 ), 588–608. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooper H, Robinson JC, & Patall EA (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003 . Review of Educational Research , 76 ( 1 ), 1–62. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cote J (2008). Changes in the transition to adulthood in the U.K. and Canada: The role of structure and agency in emerging adulthood. Journal of Youth Studies 11 , 251–268. [ Google Scholar ]
• Crosnoe R (2011). Fitting In, Standing Out: Navigating the Social Challenges of High School to Get an Education . New York: Cambridge University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dannefer D (1984). Adult development and social theory: A paradigmatic reappraisal . American Sociological Review , 49 ( 1 ): 100–116. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dannefer D, Kelley-Moore J, & Huang W (2016). Opening the social: Sociological imagination in life course studies In Shanahan MJ, Mortimer JT, & Johnson MK (Eds.), Handbook of the Life Course , Vol. II , pp.87–110. New York: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Darling N (2005). Participation in extracurricular activities and adolescent adjustment: Cross-sectional and longitudinal findings . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 34 ( 5 ), 493–505. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dishion TJ, Kim H, & Tein J-Y (2015). Friendship and adolescent problem behavior: deviancy training and coercive joining as dynamic mediators In Beauchaine Theodore P. & Hinshaw Stephen P. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Externalizing Spectrum Disorders (pp. 303–312). Oxford/ New York: Oxford Universitz Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dodge KA, Dishion TJ, & Lansford JE (2007). Deviant peer influences in programs for youth: Problems and solutions . New York/ London: Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Durlak JA, Weissberg RP, & Pachan M (2010). A meta‐analysis of after‐school programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents . American Journal of Community Psychology , 45 ( 3–4 ), 294–309. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eccles JS, Barber BL, Stone M, & Hunt J (2003). Extracurricular activities and adolescent development . Journal of Social Issues , 59 ( 4 ), 865–889. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farb AF, & Matjasko JL (2012). Recent advances in research on school-based extracurricular activities and adolescent development . Developmental Review , 32 ( 1 ), 1–48. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fergus S, & Zimmerman MA (2005). Adolescent resilience: A framework for understanding healthy development in the face of risk . Annual Review Public Health , 26 ( 1 ), 399–419. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fredricks JA, & Eccles JS (2006). Is extracurricular participation associated with beneficial outcomes? Concurrent and longitudinal relations . Developmental Psychology , 42 ( 4 ), 698. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fredricks JA, & Simpkins SD (2012). Promoting Positive Youth Development through organized after‐school activities: Taking a closer look at participation of ethnic minority youth . Child Development Perspectives , 6 ( 3 ), 280–287. [ Google Scholar ]
• Furstenberg FF (2008). The Intersections of Social Class and the Transition to Adulthood . New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development , 119 , 1–10. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gibbs BG, Erickson LD, Dufur MJ, & Miles A (2015). Extracurricular associations and college enrollment . Social Science Research , 50 ( 1 ), 367–381. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gottfredson MR, & Hirschi T (1990). A general theory of crime . Standord, CL: Stanford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hansen DM, Larson RW, & Dworkin JB (2003). What adolescents learn in organized youth activities: A survey of self-reported developmental experiences . Journal of Research on Adolescence , 13 ( 1 ), 25–55. [ Google Scholar ]
• Heckman JJ, Stixrud J, & Urzua S (2006). The effects of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior . Journal of Labor Economics , 24 ( 1 ), 411–482. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hirsch BJ, Deutsch NL & DuBois DL (2011). After-school centers and youth development: Case studies of success and failure : Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hirschi T (1969). Causes of delinquency : University of California Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson MK & Mortimer JT 2011. Origins and Outcomes of Judgments about Work . Social Forces , 89 , 1239–1260. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Interagency Working Group on Youth Programs. (n.d.). Positive Youth Development . Retrieved from https://youth.gov/youth-topics/positive-youth-development [ Google Scholar ]
• Lanza ST, Dziak JJ, Huang L, Wagner AT, & Collins LM (2015). LCA Stata plugin users’ guide (Version 1.2) University Park: The Methodology Center, Penn State. [ Google Scholar ]
• Larson R (1994). Youth organizations, hobbies, and sports as developmental contexts In Silbereisen RK & Todt E (Eds.), Adolescence in context: The interplay of family, school, peers, and work in adjustment (pp. 46–65). New York: Springer-Verlag. [ Google Scholar ]
• Larson R (1999). How children and adolescents spend time across the world: work, play, and developmental opportunities . Psychological Bulletin , 125 ( 6 ), 701–736. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Larson RW (2000). Toward a psychology of positive youth development . American psychologist , 55 ( 1 ), 170–183. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Laub JH, & Sampson RJ (2003). Shared beginnings, divergent lives: Delinquent boys to age 70 . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lauer PA, Akiba M, Wilkerson SB, Apthorp HS, Snow D, & Martin-Glenn ML (2006). Out-of-school-time programs: A meta-analysis of effects for at-risk students . Review of Educational Research , 76 ( 2 ), 275–313. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leman PJ, Smith EP, Petersen AC, SRCD Ethnic–Racial Issues and International Committees, Seaton E, Cabrera N, ... & Leman P (2017). Introduction to the special section of Child Development on positive youth development in diverse and global contexts . Child development , 88 ( 4 ), 1039–1044. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lerner RM (2017). Commentary: Studying and Testing the Positive Youth Development Model: A Tale of Two Approaches . Child Development ., 88 ( 4 ), 1183–1185. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lerner RM, Abo-zena MM, Bebiroglu N, Brittian A, Lynch AD, & Issac SS (2009). Positive youth development: Contemporary theoretical perspectives In DiClemente RJ, Santelli JS & Crosby RA (Eds.), Adolescent health: Understanding and preventing risk behaviors . (pp. 116–130). New York, NY: Jossey-Bass. [ Google Scholar ]
• Luthar SS, Cicchetti D, & Becker B (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work . Child Development , 71 ( 3 ), 543–562. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• London AS, & Wilmoth JM. (2016). Military service in lives: Where do we go from here? In Shanahan MJ, Mortimer JT, & Johnson MK (Eds.), Handbook of the Life Course , Vol. II , pp.277–300. New York: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Luthar SS, Crossman EJ, & Small PJ (2015). Resilience and adversity In Lerner Richard M. (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (pp. 1–40). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
• MacLeod J (1987). Ain’t no makin’it: Leveled aspirations in a low-income neighborhood . Westview Press, Boulder. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mahoney JL (2000). School extracurricular activity participation as a moderator in the development of antisocial patterns . Child Development , 71 ( 2 ), 502–516. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mahoney JL, Larson RW, Eccles JS, & Lord H (2005). Organized activities as developmental contexts for children and adolescents In Mahoney JL, Larson RW, & Eccles JS (Eds.), Organized activities as contexts of development: Extracurricular activities, after-school and community programs (pp. 3–22). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Publisher. [ Google Scholar ]
• Maimon D, & Browning CR (2010). Unstructured socializing, collective efficacy, and violant behaviour among urban youth . Criminology , 48 ( 2 ), 443–474. [ Google Scholar ]
• Marzano RJ, & Pickering DJ (2007). Special topic: The case for and against homework . Educational Leadership , 64 ( 6 ), 74–79. [ Google Scholar ]
• Masten AS (2015). Ordinary magic: Resilience in development . New York: Guilford Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Masten AS, & Coatsworth JD (1998). The development of competence in favorable and unfavorable environments: Lessons from research on successful children . American Psychologist , 53 ( 2 ), 205–220. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McHale SM, Crouter AC, & Tucker CJ (2001). Free‐time activities in middle childhood: Links with adjustment in early adolescence . Child Development , 72 ( 6 ), 1764–1778. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mortimer JT (2003). Working and Growing Up in America . Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mortimer JT (2012). The evolution, contributions, and prospects of the Youth Development Study: An investigation in life course social psychology . Social Psychology Quarterly , 75 ( 1 ), 5–27. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mortimer J & Moen P (2016). The Changing Social Construction of Age and the Life Course: Precarious Identity and Enactment of ‘Early’ and ‘Encore’ Stages of Adulthood” Pp. 111–129 in Handbook of the Life Course , Vol 2 NewYork: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nylund KL, Asparouhov T, & Muthén BO (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study . Structural Equation Modeling , 14 ( 4 ), 535–569 [ Google Scholar ]
• Oberle E, Schonert-Reichl KA, Thomson KC (2010). Understanding the link between social and emotional well-being and peer relations in early adolescence: Gender-specific predictors of peer acceptance . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 39 , 1330=1342. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Osgood DW, & Anderson AL (2004). Unstructured socializing and rates of delinquency . Criminology , 42 ( 3 ), 519–550. [ Google Scholar ]
• Peck SC, Roeser RW, Zarrett N, & Eccles JS (2008). Exploring the Roles of Extracurricular Activity Quantity and Quality in the Educational Resilience of Vulnerable Adolescents: Variable‐and Pattern‐Centered Approaches . Journal of Social Issues , 64 ( 1 ), 135–156. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Putnam RD (2015). Our kids: The American dream in crisis . New York: Simon and Schuster. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ramdass D, & Zimmerman BJ (2011). Developing self-regulation skills: The important role of homework . Journal of Advanced Academics , 22 ( 2 ), 194–218. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sacker A, & Schoon I (2007). Educational resilience in later life: Resources and assets in adolescence and return to education after leaving school at age 16 . Social Science Research , 36 ( 3 ), 873–896. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sesma A, Mannes M, & Scales PC (2013). Positive adaptation, resilience and the developmental assets framework In Fernando C & Ferrari M (Eds.), Handbook of resilience in children (pp. 427–442). Springer, Boston, MA. [ Google Scholar ]
• Settersten R, & Ray BE (2010). Not quite adults: Why 20-somethings are choosing a slower path to adulthood, and why it’s good for everyone . New York: :Bantam Books. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shulruf B (2010). Do extra-curricular activities in schools improve educational outcomes? A critical review and meta-analysis of the literature . International Review of Education , 56 ( 5–6 ), 591–612. [ Google Scholar ]
• Simpkins S, Eccles J, & Becnel J (2008). The role of breadth in activity participation and friends in adolescents’ adjustment . Developmental Psychology , 44 ( 4 ), 1081–1094. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Troutman KP, & Dufur MJ (2007). From High School Jocks to College Grads Assessing the Long-Term Effects of High School Sport Participation on Females’ Educational Attainment . Youth & Society , 38 ( 4 ), 443–462. [ Google Scholar ]
• Twenge JM, Martin GN, & Campbell WK (2018). Decreases in Psychological Well-Being Among American Adolescents After 2012 and Links to Screen Time During the Rise of Smartphone Technology . Advance online publication . doi: 10.1037/emo0000403 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• US Department of Health and Human Services. (2007). Putting positive youth development into practice: A resource guide . Wahsington, D.C. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vandell DL, Larson RW, Mahoney JL, & Watts TW (2015). Children’s organized activities In Lerner RM, Bornstein MH, & Leventhal T (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (7 ed., Vol. 4 , pp. 305–344). New Jersey: Wiley. [ Google Scholar ]
• Viau A, Denault A-S, & Poulin F (2015). Organized activities during high school and adjustment one year post high school: Identifying social mediators . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 44 ( 8 ), 1638–1651. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vitaro F, Boivin M, & Bukowski WM (2009).The role of friendship in child and adolescent psychosocial development In Rubin KH, Bukowski WM, & Laursen B (Eds.), Social, emotional, and personality development in context. Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 568–585). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Voorhees S (2011). Why the dog eats Nikki’s homework: Making informed assignment decisions . Reading Teacher , 64 ( 5 ), 363–367. doi: 10.1598/RT.64.5.8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vuolo M, Staff J, Mortimer JT (2012). Weathering the great recession: Psychological and behavioral trajectories in the transition from school to work . Developmental Psychology , 48 : 1759–1773. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wentzel KR (2009). Peers and academic functioning at school In Rubin KH, Bukowski WM, & Laursen B (Eds.), Social, emotional, and personality development in context. Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 531–547). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wolf S, Aber JL, & Morris PA (2015). Patterns of time use among low-income urban minority adolescents and associations with academic outcomes and problem behaviors . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 44 ( 6 ), 1208–1225. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yates TM, Tyrell F, & Masten AS (2015). Resilience theory and the rractice of positive psychology from individuals to societies In Joseph S (Ed.), Positive Psychology in Practice: Promoting Human Flourishing in Work, Health, Education, and Everyday Life (2 ed., pp. 773–788). New Jersey: Wiley. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zaff JF, Moore KA, Papillo AR, & Williams S (2003). Implications of extracurricular activity participation during adolescence on positive outcomes . Journal of Adolescent Research , 18 ( 6 ), 599–630. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zolkoski SM, & Bullock LM (2012). Resilience in children and youth: A review . Children and Youth Services Review , 34 ( 12 ), 2295–2303. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zuzanek J (2009). Students’ study Ttime and their “homework problem” . Social Indicators Research , 93 ( 1 ), 111–115. [ Google Scholar ]

Does homework really work?

by: Leslie Crawford | Updated: December 12, 2023

Print article

You know the drill. It’s 10:15 p.m., and the cardboard-and-toothpick Golden Gate Bridge is collapsing. The pages of polynomials have been abandoned. The paper on the Battle of Waterloo seems to have frozen in time with Napoleon lingering eternally over his breakfast at Le Caillou. Then come the tears and tantrums — while we parents wonder, Does the gain merit all this pain? Is this just too much homework?

However the drama unfolds night after night, year after year, most parents hold on to the hope that homework (after soccer games, dinner, flute practice, and, oh yes, that childhood pastime of yore known as playing) advances their children academically.

But what does homework really do for kids? Is the forest’s worth of book reports and math and spelling sheets the average American student completes in their 12 years of primary schooling making a difference? Or is it just busywork?

Homework haterz

Whether or not homework helps, or even hurts, depends on who you ask. If you ask my 12-year-old son, Sam, he’ll say, “Homework doesn’t help anything. It makes kids stressed-out and tired and makes them hate school more.”

Nothing more than common kid bellyaching?

Maybe, but in the fractious field of homework studies, it’s worth noting that Sam’s sentiments nicely synopsize one side of the ivory tower debate. Books like The End of Homework , The Homework Myth , and The Case Against Homework the film Race to Nowhere , and the anguished parent essay “ My Daughter’s Homework is Killing Me ” make the case that homework, by taking away precious family time and putting kids under unneeded pressure, is an ineffective way to help children become better learners and thinkers.

One Canadian couple took their homework apostasy all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. After arguing that there was no evidence that it improved academic performance, they won a ruling that exempted their two children from all homework.

So what’s the real relationship between homework and academic achievement?

How much is too much?

To answer this question, researchers have been doing their homework on homework, conducting and examining hundreds of studies. Chris Drew Ph.D., founder and editor at The Helpful Professor recently compiled multiple statistics revealing the folly of today’s after-school busy work. Does any of the data he listed below ring true for you?

• 45 percent of parents think homework is too easy for their child, primarily because it is geared to the lowest standard under the Common Core State Standards .

• 74 percent of students say homework is a source of stress , defined as headaches, exhaustion, sleep deprivation, weight loss, and stomach problems.

• Students in high-performing high schools spend an average of 3.1 hours a night on homework , even though 1 to 2 hours is the optimal duration, according to a peer-reviewed study .

Not included in the list above is the fact many kids have to abandon activities they love — like sports and clubs — because homework deprives them of the needed time to enjoy themselves with other pursuits.

Conversely, The Helpful Professor does list a few pros of homework, noting it teaches discipline and time management, and helps parents know what’s being taught in the class.

The oft-bandied rule on homework quantity — 10 minutes a night per grade (starting from between 10 to 20 minutes in first grade) — is listed on the National Education Association’s website and the National Parent Teacher Association’s website , but few schools follow this rule.

Do you think your child is doing excessive homework? Harris Cooper Ph.D., author of a meta-study on homework , recommends talking with the teacher. “Often there is a miscommunication about the goals of homework assignments,” he says. “What appears to be problematic for kids, why they are doing an assignment, can be cleared up with a conversation.” Also, Cooper suggests taking a careful look at how your child is doing the assignments. It may seem like they’re taking two hours, but maybe your child is wandering off frequently to get a snack or getting distracted.

Less is often more

If your child is dutifully doing their work but still burning the midnight oil, it’s worth intervening to make sure your child gets enough sleep. A 2012 study of 535 high school students found that proper sleep may be far more essential to brain and body development.

For elementary school-age children, Cooper’s research at Duke University shows there is no measurable academic advantage to homework. For middle-schoolers, Cooper found there is a direct correlation between homework and achievement if assignments last between one to two hours per night. After two hours, however, achievement doesn’t improve. For high schoolers, Cooper’s research suggests that two hours per night is optimal. If teens have more than two hours of homework a night, their academic success flatlines. But less is not better. The average high school student doing homework outperformed 69 percent of the students in a class with no homework.

Many schools are starting to act on this research. A Florida superintendent abolished homework in her 42,000 student district, replacing it with 20 minutes of nightly reading. She attributed her decision to “ solid research about what works best in improving academic achievement in students .”

More family time

A 2020 survey by Crayola Experience reports 82 percent of children complain they don’t have enough quality time with their parents. Homework deserves much of the blame. “Kids should have a chance to just be kids and do things they enjoy, particularly after spending six hours a day in school,” says Alfie Kohn, author of The Homework Myth . “It’s absurd to insist that children must be engaged in constructive activities right up until their heads hit the pillow.”

By far, the best replacement for homework — for both parents and children — is bonding, relaxing time together.

Homes Nearby

Homes for rent and sale near schools

How families of color can fight for fair discipline in school

Dealing with teacher bias

The most important school data families of color need to consider

Yes! Sign me up for updates relevant to my child's grade.

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up!

Server Issue: Please try again later. Sorry for the inconvenience

Homework goal orientation, interest, and achievement: testing models of reciprocal effects

• Published: 26 February 2020
• Volume 36 , pages 359–378, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Jianzhong Xu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0269-4590 1 , 2  

947 Accesses

5 Citations

Explore all metrics

Whereas it is often a challenge to keep students motivated and interested in academic tasks, it is more of a challenge to have students stay motivated and interested in academic tasks outside school during nonschool hours—homework. Prior research, however, has largely overlooked the reasons or purposes students have for doing homework and their interest in homework. Informed by achievement goal theory and interest theory, along with cultural differences pertaining to these theories, the present study uses reciprocal models to study longitudinal relationships among homework goal orientation, interest, and math achievement. Participants were 1450 Chinese students in grade 8. Results found reciprocal influences of mastery-approach and math achievement. Additionally, prior mastery-approach had a positive effect on subsequent performance-approach. Furthermore, prior interest had a positive effect on subsequent mastery-approach. Meanwhile, prior performance-approach negatively influenced subsequent achievement. Taken together, the present study points to the complex interplay among mastery-approach, performance-approach, homework interest, and math achievement over time. These findings hold important practical implications (e.g., to promote mastery-approach and math achievement simultaneously and to help students focus on developing competencies through math homework, not how well they have done compared with their peers).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Are homework purposes and student achievement reciprocally related? A longitudinal study

A New Look at Multiple Goal Pursuit: the Promise of a Person-Centered Approach

Focus on Competing for Performance or Mastering New Knowledge? Insights from Discovering the Relations Between Classroom Goal Structures and Students’ Learning in Singapore Secondary Schools

Adachi, P., & Willoughby, T. (2015). Interpreting effect sizes when controlling for stability effects in longitudinal autoregressive models: implications for psychological science. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12 , 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2014.963549 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Bempechat, J., Li, J., Neier, S. M., Gillis, C. A., & Holloway, S. D. (2011). The homework experience: perceptions of low-income youth. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22 , 250–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X1102200204 .

Bong, M. (2001). Between- and within- domain relations of academic motivation among middle and high school students: self-efficacy, task-value and achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93 , 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.23 .

Brophy, J. (2005). Goal theorists should move on from performance goals. Educational Psychologist, 40 , 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4003_3 .

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park: Sage.

Google Scholar  

Cai, J. (2003). Investigating parental roles in students’ learning of mathematics from a cross-national perspective. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15 (2), 87–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217372 .

Chen, C., & Stevenson, H. W. (1989). Homework: a cross-cultural examination. Child Development, 60 (3), 551–561. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130721 .

Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14 , 464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834 .

Chen, W. W., & Wong, Y. L. (2015). Chinese mindset: theories of intelligence, goal orientation and academic achievement in Hong Kong students. Educational Psychology, 35 , 714–725. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2014.893559 .

Cooper, H. (1989). Homework . White Plains: Longman.

Book   Google Scholar  

Cooper, H., Lindsay, J. J., Nye, B., & Greathouse, S. (1998). Relationships among attitudes about homework, amount of homework assigned and completed, and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90 , 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.90.1.70 .

Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987-2003. Review of Educational Research, 76 , 1–62. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076001001 .

Corno, L. (2000). Looking at homework differently. Elementary School Journal, 100 , 529–548. https://doi.org/10.1086/499654 .

Corno, L., & Xu, J. (2004). Homework as the job of childhood. Theory Into Practice, 43 (3), 227–233.

Du, J., Xu, J., & Fan, X. (2016). Investigating factors that influence students' help seeking in math homework: A multilevel analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 48, 29–35.

Eccles, J. S. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic choice: origins and changes. In J. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 87–134). San Francisco: Freeman.

Elliot, A. J. (2006). The hierarchical model of approach-avoidance motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 30 , 111–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9028-7 .

Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72 , 218–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.1.218 .

Elliot, A. J., & Dweck, C. S. (2005). Competence and motivation: competence as the core of achievement motivation. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 3–12). New York: Guilford.

Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100 , 363–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.3.363 .

Fisher, P. H., Dobbs-Oates, J., Doctoroff, G. L., & Arnold, D. H. (2012). Early math interest and the development of math skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104 , 673–681. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027756 .

Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Pekrun, R., & Watt, H. M. G. (2010). Development of mathematics interest in adolescence: influences of gender, family, and school context. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20 , 507–537. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00645.x .

Fan, H., Xu, J., Cai, Z., He, J., & Fan, X. (2017) Homework and student's achievement in math and science: A 30-year meta-analysis, 1986–2015. Educational Research Review 20 , 35–54.

Harackiewicz, J. M., Durik, A. M., Barron, K. E., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., & Tauer, J. M. (2008). The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: reciprocal relations between achievement goals, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100 , 105–122. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.105 .

Hau, K. T., & Salili, F. (1996). Achievement goals and causal attributions of Chinese students. In S. Lau (Ed.), Growing up the Chinese way: Chinese child and adolescent development (pp. 121–145). Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.

Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: a critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70 , 151–179. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070002151 .

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6 , 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 .

Jõgi, A. L., Kikas, E., Lerkkanen, M. K., & Mägi, K. (2015). Cross-lagged relations between math-related interest, performance goals and skills in groups of children with different general abilities. Learning and Individual Differences, 39 , 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.03.018 .

Köller, O., Baumert, J., & Schnabel, K. (2001). Does interest matter? The relationship between academic interest and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32 , 448–470. https://doi.org/10.2307/749801 .

Li, J. (2002). A cultural model of learning: Chinese “heart and mind for wanting to learn”. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33 , 248–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022102033003003 .

Little, R. J. A. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83 , 1198–1202.

Marsh, H. W., Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Guo, J., Arens, A. K., & Murayama, K. (2016). Breaking the double-edged sword of effort/trying hard: developmental equilibrium and longitudinal relations among effort, achievement, and academic self-concept. Developmental Psychology, 52 (8), 1273–1290. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000146 .

Marsh, H. W., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2005). Academic self-concept, interest, grades, and standardized test scores: reciprocal effects models of causal ordering. Child Development, 76 , 397–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00853.x .

Martin, A. J., Yu, K., & Hau, K. T. (2014). Motivation and engagement in the ‘Asian Century’: a comparison of Chinese students in Australia, Hong Kong, and Mainland China. Educational Psychology, 34 , 417–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.814199 .

Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57 , 487–503. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258 .

Meece, J. L., & Miller, S. D. (2001). A longitudinal analysis of elementary school students’ achievement goals in literacy activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26 (4), 454–480. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2000.1071 .

Meissel, K., & Rubie-Davies, C. M. (2016). Cultural invariance of goal orientation and self-efficacy in New Zealand: relations with achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86 , 92–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12103 .

Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: an under explored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 , 710–718. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.4.710 .

Mu, G. M. (2014). Chinese Australians’ Chineseness and their mathematics achievement: the role of habitus. Australian Educational Researcher, 41 (5), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-014-0152-1 .

Ni, Y., Li, Q., Li, X., & Zhang, Z. H. (2011). Influence of curriculum reform: an analysis of student mathematics achievement in Mainland China. International Journal of Educational Research, 50 , 100–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.06.005 .

Nicholls, J. G. (1992). Students as educational theorists. In D. H. Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Students perceptions in the classroom (pp. 267–287). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Niepel, C., Brunner, M., & Preckel, F. (2014). Achievement goals, academic self-concept, and school grades in mathematics: longitudinal reciprocal relations in above average ability secondary school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39 , 301–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.07.002 .

Paulick, I., Watermann, R., & Nückles, M. (2013). Achievement goals and school achievement: the transition to different school tracks in secondary school. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38 , 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.10.003 .

Phan, H. P. (2010). Empirical model and analysis of mastery and performance-approach goals: a developmental approach. Educational Psychology, 30 , 547–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2010.491936 .

Pintrich, P. R., Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (1998). The differential impact of task value and mastery orientation on males’ and females’ self-regulated learning. In L. Hoffmann, A. Krapp, A. K. Renninger, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning: proceedings of the Seeon conference on interest and gender (pp. 337–353). Kiel, Germany: IPN.

Plante, I., O’Keefe, P. A., & Théorêt, M. (2013). The relation between achievement goal and expectancy-value theories in predicting achievement-related outcomes: a test of four theoretical conceptions. Motivation and Emotion, 37 (1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-012-9282-9 .

Schiefele, U. (2001). The role of interest in motivation and learning. In J. M. Collis & S. Messick (Eds.), Intelligence and personality: bridging the gap in theory and measurement (pp. 163–194). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Seaton, M., Parker, P., Marsh, H. W., Craven, R. G., & Yeung, A. S. (2014). The reciprocal relations between self-concept, motivation and achievement: juxtaposing academic self-concept and achievement goal orientations for mathematics success. Educational Psychology, 34 , 49–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.825232 .

Selig, J. P., & Little, T. D. (2012). Autoregressive and cross-lagged panel analysis for longitudinal data. In B. Laursen, T. D. Little, & N. A. Card (Eds.), Handbook of developmental research methods (pp. 265–278). New York: Gilford Press.

Senko, C., Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2011). Achievement goal theory at the crossroads: old controversies, current challenges, and new directions. Educational Psychologist, 46 , 26–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538646 .

Senko, C., & Miles, K. M. (2008). Pursuing their own learning agenda: how mastery-oriented students jeopardize their class performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33 , 561–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.12.001 .

Siu, M. K. (1995). Mathematics education in ancient China: what lesson do we learn from it? Historia Scientiarum, 4 , 223–232.

Stapleton, L. M. (2006). Using multilevel structural equation modeling techniques with complex sample data. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: a second course (pp. 345–383). Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing.

Sun, M., Du, J., Xu, J., & Liu, F. (2019). Homework goal orientation scale: measurement invariance and latent mean differences across gender and grade level. Psychology in the Schools, 56 , 465–477. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22206 .

Sun, X., & Wong, N. Y. (2005). A culture-bound look on mathematics beliefs: differences between China and U.S.A. students. Mathematics Educator, 8 , 95–105.

Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Nagy, N., Lenski, A., Niggli, A., & Schnyder, I. (2015). Using individual interest and conscientiousness to predict academic effort: additive, synergistic, or compensatory effects? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109 (1), 142–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000034 .

Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Schnyder, I., & Niggli, A. (2006). Predicting homework effort: support for a domain-specific, multilevel homework model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98 , 438–456. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.438 .

Trautwein, U., Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., Lüdtke, O., Nagy, G., & Jonkmann, K. (2012). Probing for the multiplicative term in modern expectancy-value theory: a latent interaction modeling study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104 , 763–777. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027470 .

Wang, D. B. (2004). Family background factors and mathematics success: a comparison of Chinese students. International Journal of Educational Research, 41 , 40–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2005.04.013 .

Van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9 , 486–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.686740 .

Widaman, K. F., & Reise, S. P. (1997). Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: applications in the substance use domain. In K. J. Bryant, M. Windle, & S. G. West (Eds.), The science of prevention: methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research (pp. 281-324). https://doi.org/10.1037/10222-000 .

Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and interest: definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Developmental Review, 30 , 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.12.001 .

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Fredricks, J. A., Simpkins, S., Roeser, R. W., & Schiefele, U. (2015). Development of achievement motivation and engagement. In M. E. Lamb & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science , Vol. 3. Socioemotional processes (7th ed., pp. 657-700). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Schiefele, U., Roeser, R., & Davis-Kean, P. (2006). Development of achievement motivation. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Social, emotional, and personality development . Volume 3 of the Handbook of child psychology (6th ed., pp. 933-1002). Editors-in-Chief: W. Damon & R. M. Lerner. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Xu, J. (2008). Models of secondary students’ interest in homework: A multilevel analysis. American Educational Research Journal , 45 , 1180–1205. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208323276 .

Xu, J. (2015). Investigating factors that influence conventional distraction and tech-related distraction in math homework. Computers & Education , 81 , 304–314.

Xu, J. (2016). A study of the validity and reliability of the teacher homework involvement scale: A psychometric evaluation. Measurement, 93, 102–107.

Xu, J. (2018). Reciprocal effects of homework self-concept, interest, effort, and math achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 55 , 42–52.

Xu, J., Yuan, R., Xu, B., & Xu, M. (2014). Modeling students’ time management in math homework. Learning and Individual Differences , 34 , 33–42.

Yang, F., Xu, J., Tan, H., & Liang, N. (2016). What keeps Chinese students motivated in doing math homework? An empirical investigation. Teachers College Record, 118 (8), 1–26.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Foundations, Mississippi State University, P.O. Box 9727, Mississippi State, MS, 39762, USA

Jianzhong Xu

Faculty of Education, University of Macau, Macau, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jianzhong Xu .

Additional information

Current themes of research

Teaching and learning in the school, home, and online settings, in home-school relationships, and in partnerships with families from diverse cultural backgrounds.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education

Fan, H., Xu, J., Cai, Z., He, J., & Fan, X. (2017). Homework and students’ achievement in math and science: A 30-year meta-analysis, 1986–2015. Educational Research Review , 20 , 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.003 .

Sun, M., Du, J., Xu, J., & Liu, F. (2019). Homework Goal Orientation Scale: Measurement invariance and latent mean differences across gender and grade level. Psychology in the Schools , 56 , 465–477. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22206 .

Xu, J. (2015). Investigating factors that influence conventional distraction and tech-related distraction in math homework. Computers & Education , 81 , 304–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.024 .

Xu, J. (2018). Reciprocal effects of homework self-concept, interest, effort, and math achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 55 , 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.09.002 .

Xu, J., Yuan, R., Xu, B., & Xu, M. (2014). Modeling students’ time management in math homework. Learning and Individual Differences , 34 , 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.05.011 .

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Xu, J. Homework goal orientation, interest, and achievement: testing models of reciprocal effects. Eur J Psychol Educ 36 , 359–378 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-020-00472-7

Download citation

Received : 01 August 2019

Revised : 27 January 2020

Accepted : 17 February 2020

Published : 26 February 2020

Issue Date : June 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-020-00472-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Achievement
• Goal orientation
• Longitudinal relationships
• Reciprocal models
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser or activate Google Chrome Frame to improve your experience.

Homework or Personal Lives?

Many students get home and the first thing they do is homework. They’re pressured by their parents to do their homework while simultaneously being encouraged to spend time with family, eat, spend time with friends, go outside, participate in sports or other extracurricular activities, and sleep for 7+ hours. Rather than motivating students to master material and learn efficiently, homework negatively impacts students by taking away from personal time that is necessary for them to lead balanced lives.

In an article published by The Washington Post by Gerald K LeTendre, a professor of education in education policy studies at Penn State, states that, “Worldwide, homework is not associated with high national levels of academic achievement.” This means that there is no direct correlation between homework and test grades, and very few studies have been able to prove this, and the ones that have were more of a reach. At Science Leadership Academy in Philadelphia,  16 out of 19 of the students in Fire Stream agreed that homework adds extra stress onto them or takes time away from other things that they’re encouraged to do, such as sports, extra classes, extracurricular activities, family time, etc. This means that just over 84% of students in Fire Stream have agreed that homework is added stress and takes time away from things that they’re encouraged to do outside of school. Many students participate in these activities because they’re passionate about them and it makes them happy. Sports and exercise is proven to relieve stress, homework adds stress and if time for this stress reliever is taken away that just means more stress, this can cause more problems in many aspects of their lives.

In an article written by CNN about how homework has been banned in some cities and not others, “What is clear is that parents and kids don't live in the world of academic research; they live in the real world where there are piles of homework on the kitchen table.” Meaning that students don’t have the luxury of just easily saying that homework helps their academic performance or not, and they don’t have the luxury of just not doing homework. That is especially true to highschool students who have to regularly chose between sleep and doing work, especially when they get homework from every class every night and homework can be up to 30% of their grade. Students in every grade get piles of homework and a lot of the time they don’t have resources on hand to see if they’re right or to get help, meaning they might do it wrong and not learn anything at all.  Even if students do try and do their homework it might take a while, according to Nationwide Children’s Hospital adolescents should be getting 9 to 9 ½ hours of sleep per night. Due to homework and trying to fit other after school activities in many adolescents don’t get the necessary amount of sleep. Sleep deprivation in teens has many negative effects such as mood changes, being more inclined to engage in risky behavior such as driving fast, drinking, etc, doing worse in school, and declined cognitive abilities.

In an article published by the New York Times, a mother explained how… , “The stress homework places on families starts early.” The article also talks about how homework takes away from family time and family activities. The author also says that her kids “are fighting not just over the homework, but also over their share of my coveted attention and my unique ability to download and print images.” This shows how homework adds extra pressure and can cause tension in families. It takes away from family time and causes more stress on students and parents. It’s almost as if once children start school and the homework starts that it never stops, and that more family time is taken away while more stress is added.

In a study concluded in 2003 by Dr. Harris Cooper he tries to argue that homework has a positive effect on students, but his studies also found no direct correlation between increased homework for students and improved test scores. Cooper himself said that “The analysis also showed that too much homework can be counter-productive for students at all levels.” Meaning that excessive amounts of homework can cause negative effects on students, but who is judging what excessive amounts of homework means? He talks about the “10 minute rule” meaning that every grade that a student increases they should get 10 more minutes of homework, meaning that a second grader should get 20 minutes, and a twelfth grader should get around 2 hours of homework. That would seem ideal, but in most high school settings teachers don’t interact with each other to see how much homework each of them give to equal it out to around 2 hours. This means that one class’s homework could take a student 2 hours alone and that would be what the ideal amount of homework is, so if it takes 2 hours for one class’s homework then how are students supposed to have positive benefits from doing all of their homework? Cooper’s research was also limited because very little research was done to see if student’s race, socioeconomic status, or even their ability levels has an affect on how much homework is “good” for said age range. This means that other aspects than just that they’re students in a certain grade weren’t taken into consideration. These things could cause major changes to the data that was collected.

Rather than encouraging students to master material and learn efficiently, homework negatively impacts students and families by causing more stress and taking away from family time. This is a problem not just for the overworked students, but also for students who have more complex personal lives. Many students work or have family obligations that they have to deal with, but don’t necessarily feel comfortable talking to a teacher about them. Although teachers might not think that the amount of homework that they give matters much,its influence goes beyond giving students work to do at home to how they interact in other important personal aspects of their life.

Works Cited:

LeTendre, Gerald K. “Homework Could Have an Effect on Kids’ Health. Should Schools Ban It?” The Washington Post , WP Company, 2 Sept. 2015, www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/09/02/homework-could-have-an-effect-on-kids-health-should-schools-ban-it/?utm_term=.3ed6d0fa2c72.

Kralovec, Etta. “Should Schools Ban Homework?” CNN , Cable News Network, 5 Sept. 2014, www.cnn.com/2014/09/05/opinion/kralovec-ban-homework/index.html.

Dell'Antonia, Kj. “Homework's Emotional Toll on Students and Families.” The New York Times , The New York Times, 12 Mar. 2014, parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/12/homeworks-emotional-toll-on-students-and-families/.

“Duke Study: Homework Helps Students Succeed in School, As Long as There Isn't Too Much.” Duke Today , Duke Today, 7 Mar. 2006, today.duke.edu/2006/03/homework.html.

“Sleep in Adolescents (13-18 Years).” Sleep in Adolescents :: Nationwide Children's Hospital , www.nationwidechildrens.org/sleep-in-adolescents

Comments (1)

A question that I have after reading this is in what other ways can we as students improve our learning without homework?

This 2fer has changed my opinion about how much homework affects a student's life in a bad way more than a good way.

Log in to post a comment.

You can also log in with your email address.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Effects of Homework Programs and After-School Activities on School Success

2004, Theory Into Practice

Related Papers

Journal of Advanced Academics

Martha Putallaz

Jack Blendinger

Criminology & Public Policy

Denise Wilson

Campbell Systematic Reviews

Sherri Lauver

Applied Developmental Science

Deborah Vandell

Journal of Youth and Adolescence

Iliana Barrera Romero

Recent studies have questioned whether the nation's educational system is adequately preparing children to function productively in today's society. To examine this issue, the present study utilized the Experience Sampling Method to investigate the amount of time young adolescents spent doing classwork and homework, their inner subjective experience while doing so, and their companions while doing homework. The relationship between these variables and students' academic performance was also examined. Results revealed that students spent only 15.5 hours per week engaged in school work and only 6 hours per week doing homework, with increased homework time associated with better academic achievement. In addition, students were found to complete homework primarily alone or in classes, although doing homework with their parents was associated with better academic performance. Lastly, students' affect was found to be relatively neutral when doing classwork, but comparatively more negative while doing homework, particularly when doing homework alone. The implications of these findings for understanding the socializing influence of school are discussed.

Journal of Adolescent Health

Michael Kogan

Laura McLoughlin

RELATED PAPERS

Sinai W . Mohammed

Cuadernos De Etnologia Y Etnografia De Navarra

Alfredo Ansorena

Physical Review E

Masoud Shirazi

Medical Engineering & Physics

Fabrice Navarro

Mandar Gogate

International Journal of Molecular Sciences

Chantal Houée-levin

Philip A Clarke

Proceedings. Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences

Christophe Poulard

European Journal of Radiology

Peter Widhalm

• Mathematics

Houda Jouini

2017 International Conference on Computer and Drone Applications (IConDA)

Yin Chai Wang

Rafal Panfil

maria paula avila

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Alamgir Hossain

Geophysical Journal International

How-Wei Chen

UCChicago毕业证文凭芝加哥大学本科毕业证书 美国学历学位认证如何办理

antonio nicolas jimenez socorro

Journal of Family Research

Barbara Thiessen

Mathematics of Computation

Giuseppe piazza

Raphael Lencucha

Research Square (Research Square)

Christophe Jourdan

Journal of Internet Services and Applications

Lucas Alves

Hipertensión y Riesgo Vascular

Lautaro Vélez

Diana Ferrão

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Main Number: 714-997-3000
• Customer Service: 714-509-3200
• 24/7 Nurse Advice: 844-GET-CHOC
• Contact Us / Directions
• News Media Resources
• Quality and Patient Safety
• Patient and Family Centered Care
• CHOC Docs / Providers
• Residency / Training Programs
• CHOC Foundation
• Main Campus in Orange
• CHOC at Mission Hospital
• Specialty Centers
• Human Resources
• List ALL CHOC Locations
• PRIMARY SERVICES
• Wellness and Primary Care
• Specialty Services
• Mental Health
• OUR INSTITUTES
• Neuroscience
• Orthopaedics
• FEATURED SERVICES
• Emergency Department
• Surgical Services
• Neonatal Services (NICU)
• List of ALL CHOC Services
• Find a Provider
• Make an Appointment
• Access CHOC Portal
• Explore Career Opportunities
• Estimate My Charges
• Pay My Bill
• Request Medical Records
• Download Vaccine Records
• Refer a Patient
• Visit a Patient
• Sign up for eNewsletter
• Read the CHOC Blog
• Attend an Event
• Donate Online
• Donate Blood
• Donate Toys
• Find More Ways to Help

Home » News » After-school activities: The pros and cons of filling your kids’ schedule

    Contact us

    Press releases

    Subscribe to News

    B-roll footage

• News media resources
• Media contacts
• CHOC press releases
• Media policy
• Logo request

After-school activities: The pros and cons of filling your kids’ schedule

From www.care.com

By Emily Starbuck Gerson

When Robyn Parets’ two boys were young, she was torn in numerous directions, running all over Boston to take them to extracurricular activities. Like many parents, she thought her kids needed to be involved in as many activities as possible. But one day at her 7-year-old son Noah’s soccer game, she noticed he was more interested in pulling grass than actually kicking the ball.

“That was a lightbulb moment for me; my kid didn’t love it and he wasn’t good at it,” she says. “He isn’t a traditional sports type, so why am I even knocking myself to get to those games?”

Since her kids were little, Parets has owned Pretzel Kids, a nationwide kids yoga company that trains adults to teach yoga to kids, so she knew the importance of mindfulness and stress management. Following that aha moment, she focused on guiding her kids to just one activity each that they both were good at and liked — not just what all the other kids were doing.

In recent decades, there’s been increasing pressure on parents to involve their children in extracurriculars. Part of it is the competitive nature of getting into schools and college these days. Another factor is the need for after-school care with today’s working family. There are certainly mental, physical and developmental benefits to being involved in after-school activities like sports or the arts, but overscheduling kids can also do more harm than good.

Keeping your kids so busy outside of school that they lack free time for play or rest can lead to stress, anxiety and depression, says Dr. Harpreet Kaur , a licensed clinical psychologist for kids and teens at CHOC in Orange County, California.

“I think parents feel this pressure to prepare their kids for academic success and make them competitive college applicants and make them successful for a job, but they often miss out on that unstructured playtime that provides some of the skills that kids need to be successful anyway,” she says.

The benefits of extracurriculars

Don’t get us wrong — there are plenty of compelling reasons to have kids involved in extracurricular activities. Kaur says extracurriculars help improve the overall functioning of children.

Encourages positive habits

Kids do best when they have structure and routine, she says, and those involved in extracurriculars perform better academically and are more likely to finish high school.

“These children engage more with their parents and are more active in their community,” Kaur says. “They’re also less likely to engage in drug use or other criminal activities.”

Helps develop skills and interests

Jennifer Fink, a nurse-turned-freelance writer in Mayville, Wisconsin, is the mother of four boys. She founded the site BuildingBoys.net to help parents and teachers better support and advocate for boys, and she says an extracurricular activity “gives children a chance to develop their skills, learn more about their interests and connect with others who may share the same passions and interests that they do.”

Fosters time-management skills

Fink has found that getting involved in extracurriculars can also help teach the kids time management.

“Sometimes a kid wants to do a lot of different things, and it may look like too much to us,” she says. “I think there’s some value in letting them try it and see how it goes. If all of those things are really important to the kid, they may find a way to make it work and learn very important time management skills in the process — things like how to get your homework done even when you’re playing on a sports team and taking a dance class.”

The downside of overscheduling

Unfortunately, overscheduling kids in too many extracurricular activities can take a toll on both the children and their parents, and it’s becoming increasingly common — an alarming trend that Kaur has observed in her practice.

Interrupts valuable unstructured playtime

Kaur says there’s simply not enough information out there about how valuable play is.

“Unstructured playtime promotes social skill development, and kids develop problem-solving skills,” she says. “It allows them to be creative thinkers and develop assertiveness, and they learn how to cope with negative emotions. If you think about children when they get into a conflict on the playground, they have to manage some of these things without an adult present.”

Kaur says unstructured playtime has become so deprioritized that an American Academy of Pediatrics report recently encouraged pediatricians to prescribe play to help make it more common for children again.

Triggers stress, anxiety and depression

When kids are too overscheduled and stressed, they’re more prone to anxiety, irritability, tiredness and destructibility, Kaur says. She adds that rates of anxiety and depression are already somewhat high in the general adolescent population, and “overscheduling kids just makes those rates increase.”

Increases pressure on parents

In addition to stress the kids feel from being overscheduled, Fink says it’s also hard on the parents, who often have to be in more places at once than is physically possible.

“I think parents need to be cognizant of their own tolerance and capability and energy, as well, because sometimes I think that’s where the negatives first show up,” she says. “The kids might still be doing OK, but if you’re driving yourself crazy trying to get everybody to everything, it’s not necessarily worth it.”

7 ways to find balance

If your family feels hopelessly overbooked and overstressed, here’s the good news: There’s a lot you can do to regain a sense of balance.

1. Create a visual schedule

Kaur recommends that parents create some sort of visual reminder of everything that’s going on, whether it’s a calendar or list of activities, and to color code it by family member.

“If one person has too many things going on in their schedule, it’s easy to identify, and it helps families be more aware when they’re creating schedules for their children,” she says.

2. Schedule downtime

Another way to help busy kids, Kaur says, is to schedule at least an hour a week for family time to relax and have quality interactions together. This could be anything from cooking or playing a game to watching a movie as a family, she says.

3. Make room for unstructured play

Kaur also urges parents to give kids of all ages unstructured playtime.

“It’s so helpful for a child’s development and allowing them to pick an activity they enjoy and blocking out an afternoon or weekend time for the child to pursue their own interest,” she says.

4. Practice moderation

While it’s tempting to have your child involved in a million activities in order to look like a stellar college applicant, Kaur says, pay attention to what the children value and where their interests are, and consider picking just one or two activities that are meaningful. It’s wise to focus on quality over quantity and schedule in moderation, Kaur says.

5. Try mindfulness

In her business, Parets has also noticed a stark increase in stressed and overscheduled kids, and she sees yoga and mindfulness as a potent antidote. She started her own kids on yoga from a young age and saw how much it helped them. In families with frazzled kids, she recommends dropping them to just one extracurricular and then bringing them to yoga.

“Here, they’ll find a place that’s noncompetitive, where they can just be themselves, feel good in their own skin, gain confidence and all the other benefits that go along with it,” she says.

6. Celebrate kids’ differences and talents

Parets has noticed that many parents fear their kids being “different” from other kids if they aren’t involved in certain activities, and they worry that their kids won’t get into college if they aren’t involved in everything under the sun. But in her experience, tuning into your child’s true talent and nurturing it, even if it’s not the most popular extracurricular, makes them happier and healthier — and there are colleges that are happy to accept someone who shines at one thing rather than is simply involved in 10 things, she says.

7. Find the right balance for your family

While Fink points out that there’s no single definition of “overscheduled,” and it varies depending on each kid and family, the rule of thumb that’s worked best for her family is also just one extracurricular activity per season per child.

Parets says, “… when I saw that spark in their eyes, I knew. They had their one thing, and I wasn’t running myself ragged taking them to four activites a week. You have to find some balance; if that activity you’re taking them to is meaningful to them, then it works better for the whole family. They’re happy, you’re happy.”

CHOC is affiliated with the UC Irvine School of Medicine

CHOC LINKS Contact Us Directions Locations Pressroom Careers Giving

I WANT TO... Find a Doctor Refer a Patient Pay My Bill Request Medical Records MyCHOC Patient Portal Volunteer

LEGAL Privacy Notice Patient Rights Social Media Guidelines Notice of Nondiscrimination Other Policies

Balancing Homework and After-School Sports

Most afternoons my children come home from school with their backpacks loaded with homework assignments. They both play multiple sports, and it’s always an ongoing struggle to find a way to balance homework and after-school sports before bedtime.

More often than not, it’s a losing battle. As a result, the kids are up late into the night, trying to finish those last math equations or study their spelling words. In the morning they wake up tired, only to start the cycle all over again.

Many Kids Today Juggle Homework and Sports

Most other families we know are struggling with the same problem. As our kids get older, their homework increases, while at the same time their coaches often start demanding longer and more frequent practices and training sessions.

The Experts Weigh In on the Value Factor

To help my children better navigate the co-existing demands of school and sports, I recently decided to do some research on this issue. What I discovered surprised me. I found lots of articles and blogs written by psychologists and guidance counselors addressing this very topic. Although I expected that many experts would frown upon letting kids take on so many commitments, what I found was the reverse. Many of these experts saw real value in allowing children to apply themselves to athletics and other extracurricular activities.

In addition to the many health benefits of being active, there is also much to be learned on the golf course, football field, and gymnastics floor that supplements what happens in the classroom. For instance, young athletes can get a crash course in the importance of working as a team, training to master new skills, developing effective strategies, and setting goals. Better yet, all of these lessons can actually help improve kids’ grades and study habits.

Parents Also Play a Role

In order to get these benefits, your children need to be able to handle the pressure involved. That’s where parents can help. They can play an important role in helping children manage their athletic commitments and homework and keep a clear head throughout the process.

Here is a rundown of some of the best tips I found for parents of busy kids:

• Sit down with your child and make a schedule of all of your after-school commitments and figure out where homework will fit. Be creative. If time is short, it’s okay to have your child study in the car or bus on the way to a practice or to start homework during lunch or study hall. By planning ahead to fit it all in, your child won’t feel so overwhelmed.
• Keep in close contact with your child to be sure he is thriving in the situation. Ask him how he feels and what he is enjoying or not enjoying. By talking with your child, you’ll get a sense of when he is in control, or when he is in over his head and may need to pare things down.
• Stay on top of your child’s grades on homework and tests so you can be sure the quality of work isn’t suffering as a result of him being stretched too thin. If you find that grades are slipping, this can be a sign that it’s time to cut back for a bit.
• Be sure to allocate family time for everyone to come together and bond. If evenings are too busy, you can sneak in some time on the weekend or even in the mornings. There is no rule about when you need to come together, but it’s important that school and sports don’t replace your family’s connection.
• When life feels too rushed, figure out other activities your child can pass on to free up his schedule a little. Maybe he won’t be able to make it to a weekend party or special event; it’s a good lesson to learn that it’s okay not to do everything. By leaving some free time, he’ll be able to spend more quality time with family or friends and he’ll approach his sports and homework feeling refreshed.

The Need to Prioritize School Over Sports

While these tips can help you to find that precious balance between doing enough and doing too much, always keep in mind that you have to look at your individual situation. If despite your efforts your child seems to be struggling with homework and after-school sports, don’t feel compelled to have it do it all. Your children are more likely to go on to college than they are to become a professional athlete, so if you need to make some choices of where your child should focus his attention, remember that school should always be the priority.

RECENT POSTS

ACT and SAT Score Comparison: Score Conversions and Chart

ACT Test Dates 2024: Upcoming Test Dates & Deadlines for the ACT Exam

How To Check Your SAT Score: A Step-By-Step Guide

Sign Up For the Latest News

• 60 Chelsea Piers Ste 6020, New York, NY 10011
• [email protected]
• 844 663 9484