how does homework improve critical thinking

Does Homework Really Help Students Learn?

A conversation with a Wheelock researcher, a BU student, and a fourth-grade teacher

“Quality homework is engaging and relevant to kids’ lives,” says Wheelock’s Janine Bempechat. “It gives them autonomy and engages them in the community and with their families. In some subjects, like math, worksheets can be very helpful. It has to do with the value of practicing over and over.” Photo by iStock/Glenn Cook Photography

Do your homework.

If only it were that simple.

Educators have debated the merits of homework since the late 19th century. In recent years, amid concerns of some parents and teachers that children are being stressed out by too much homework, things have only gotten more fraught.

“Homework is complicated,” says developmental psychologist Janine Bempechat, a Wheelock College of Education & Human Development clinical professor. The author of the essay “ The Case for (Quality) Homework—Why It Improves Learning and How Parents Can Help ” in the winter 2019 issue of Education Next , Bempechat has studied how the debate about homework is influencing teacher preparation, parent and student beliefs about learning, and school policies.

She worries especially about socioeconomically disadvantaged students from low-performing schools who, according to research by Bempechat and others, get little or no homework.

BU Today  sat down with Bempechat and Erin Bruce (Wheelock’17,’18), a new fourth-grade teacher at a suburban Boston school, and future teacher freshman Emma Ardizzone (Wheelock) to talk about what quality homework looks like, how it can help children learn, and how schools can equip teachers to design it, evaluate it, and facilitate parents’ role in it.

BU Today: Parents and educators who are against homework in elementary school say there is no research definitively linking it to academic performance for kids in the early grades. You’ve said that they’re missing the point.

Bempechat : I think teachers assign homework in elementary school as a way to help kids develop skills they’ll need when they’re older—to begin to instill a sense of responsibility and to learn planning and organizational skills. That’s what I think is the greatest value of homework—in cultivating beliefs about learning and skills associated with academic success. If we greatly reduce or eliminate homework in elementary school, we deprive kids and parents of opportunities to instill these important learning habits and skills.

We do know that beginning in late middle school, and continuing through high school, there is a strong and positive correlation between homework completion and academic success.

That’s what I think is the greatest value of homework—in cultivating beliefs about learning and skills associated with academic success.

You talk about the importance of quality homework. What is that?

Quality homework is engaging and relevant to kids’ lives. It gives them autonomy and engages them in the community and with their families. In some subjects, like math, worksheets can be very helpful. It has to do with the value of practicing over and over.

What are your concerns about homework and low-income children?

The argument that some people make—that homework “punishes the poor” because lower-income parents may not be as well-equipped as affluent parents to help their children with homework—is very troubling to me. There are no parents who don’t care about their children’s learning. Parents don’t actually have to help with homework completion in order for kids to do well. They can help in other ways—by helping children organize a study space, providing snacks, being there as a support, helping children work in groups with siblings or friends.

Isn’t the discussion about getting rid of homework happening mostly in affluent communities?

Yes, and the stories we hear of kids being stressed out from too much homework—four or five hours of homework a night—are real. That’s problematic for physical and mental health and overall well-being. But the research shows that higher-income students get a lot more homework than lower-income kids.

Teachers may not have as high expectations for lower-income children. Schools should bear responsibility for providing supports for kids to be able to get their homework done—after-school clubs, community support, peer group support. It does kids a disservice when our expectations are lower for them.

The conversation around homework is to some extent a social class and social justice issue. If we eliminate homework for all children because affluent children have too much, we’re really doing a disservice to low-income children. They need the challenge, and every student can rise to the challenge with enough supports in place.

What did you learn by studying how education schools are preparing future teachers to handle homework?

My colleague, Margarita Jimenez-Silva, at the University of California, Davis, School of Education, and I interviewed faculty members at education schools, as well as supervising teachers, to find out how students are being prepared. And it seemed that they weren’t. There didn’t seem to be any readings on the research, or conversations on what high-quality homework is and how to design it.

Erin, what kind of training did you get in handling homework?

Bruce : I had phenomenal professors at Wheelock, but homework just didn’t come up. I did lots of student teaching. I’ve been in classrooms where the teachers didn’t assign any homework, and I’ve been in rooms where they assigned hours of homework a night. But I never even considered homework as something that was my decision. I just thought it was something I’d pull out of a book and it’d be done.

I started giving homework on the first night of school this year. My first assignment was to go home and draw a picture of the room where you do your homework. I want to know if it’s at a table and if there are chairs around it and if mom’s cooking dinner while you’re doing homework.

The second night I asked them to talk to a grown-up about how are you going to be able to get your homework done during the week. The kids really enjoyed it. There’s a running joke that I’m teaching life skills.

Friday nights, I read all my kids’ responses to me on their homework from the week and it’s wonderful. They pour their hearts out. It’s like we’re having a conversation on my couch Friday night.

It matters to know that the teacher cares about you and that what you think matters to the teacher. Homework is a vehicle to connect home and school…for parents to know teachers are welcoming to them and their families.

Bempechat : I can’t imagine that most new teachers would have the intuition Erin had in designing homework the way she did.

Ardizzone : Conversations with kids about homework, feeling you’re being listened to—that’s such a big part of wanting to do homework….I grew up in Westchester County. It was a pretty demanding school district. My junior year English teacher—I loved her—she would give us feedback, have meetings with all of us. She’d say, “If you have any questions, if you have anything you want to talk about, you can talk to me, here are my office hours.” It felt like she actually cared.

Bempechat : It matters to know that the teacher cares about you and that what you think matters to the teacher. Homework is a vehicle to connect home and school…for parents to know teachers are welcoming to them and their families.

Ardizzone : But can’t it lead to parents being overbearing and too involved in their children’s lives as students?

Bempechat : There’s good help and there’s bad help. The bad help is what you’re describing—when parents hover inappropriately, when they micromanage, when they see their children confused and struggling and tell them what to do.

Good help is when parents recognize there’s a struggle going on and instead ask informative questions: “Where do you think you went wrong?” They give hints, or pointers, rather than saying, “You missed this,” or “You didn’t read that.”

Bruce : I hope something comes of this. I hope BU or Wheelock can think of some way to make this a more pressing issue. As a first-year teacher, it was not something I even thought about on the first day of school—until a kid raised his hand and said, “Do we have homework?” It would have been wonderful if I’d had a plan from day one.

Explore Related Topics:

• Share this story

Senior Contributing Editor

Sara Rimer A journalist for more than three decades, Sara Rimer worked at the Miami Herald , Washington Post and, for 26 years, the New York Times , where she was the New England bureau chief, and a national reporter covering education, aging, immigration, and other social justice issues. Her stories on the death penalty’s inequities were nominated for a Pulitzer Prize and cited in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision outlawing the execution of people with intellectual disabilities. Her journalism honors include Columbia University’s Meyer Berger award for in-depth human interest reporting. She holds a BA degree in American Studies from the University of Michigan. Profile

She can be reached at [email protected] .

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

There are 81 comments on Does Homework Really Help Students Learn?

Insightful! The values about homework in elementary schools are well aligned with my intuition as a parent.

when i finish my work i do my homework and i sometimes forget what to do because i did not get enough sleep

same omg it does not help me it is stressful and if I have it in more than one class I hate it.

Same I think my parent wants to help me but, she doesn’t care if I get bad grades so I just try my best and my grades are great.

I think that last question about Good help from parents is not know to all parents, we do as our parents did or how we best think it can be done, so maybe coaching parents or giving them resources on how to help with homework would be very beneficial for the parent on how to help and for the teacher to have consistency and improve homework results, and of course for the child. I do see how homework helps reaffirm the knowledge obtained in the classroom, I also have the ability to see progress and it is a time I share with my kids

The answer to the headline question is a no-brainer – a more pressing problem is why there is a difference in how students from different cultures succeed. Perfect example is the student population at BU – why is there a majority population of Asian students and only about 3% black students at BU? In fact at some universities there are law suits by Asians to stop discrimination and quotas against admitting Asian students because the real truth is that as a group they are demonstrating better qualifications for admittance, while at the same time there are quotas and reduced requirements for black students to boost their portion of the student population because as a group they do more poorly in meeting admissions standards – and it is not about the Benjamins. The real problem is that in our PC society no one has the gazuntas to explore this issue as it may reveal that all people are not created equal after all. Or is it just environmental cultural differences??????

I get you have a concern about the issue but that is not even what the point of this article is about. If you have an issue please take this to the site we have and only post your opinion about the actual topic

This is not at all what the article is talking about.

This literally has nothing to do with the article brought up. You should really take your opinions somewhere else before you speak about something that doesn’t make sense.

we have the same name

so they have the same name what of it?

lol you tell her

totally agree

What does that have to do with homework, that is not what the article talks about AT ALL.

Yes, I think homework plays an important role in the development of student life. Through homework, students have to face challenges on a daily basis and they try to solve them quickly.I am an intense online tutor at 24x7homeworkhelp and I give homework to my students at that level in which they handle it easily.

More than two-thirds of students said they used alcohol and drugs, primarily marijuana, to cope with stress.

You know what’s funny? I got this assignment to write an argument for homework about homework and this article was really helpful and understandable, and I also agree with this article’s point of view.

I also got the same task as you! I was looking for some good resources and I found this! I really found this article useful and easy to understand, just like you! ^^

i think that homework is the best thing that a child can have on the school because it help them with their thinking and memory.

I am a child myself and i think homework is a terrific pass time because i can’t play video games during the week. It also helps me set goals.

Homework is not harmful ,but it will if there is too much

I feel like, from a minors point of view that we shouldn’t get homework. Not only is the homework stressful, but it takes us away from relaxing and being social. For example, me and my friends was supposed to hang at the mall last week but we had to postpone it since we all had some sort of work to do. Our minds shouldn’t be focused on finishing an assignment that in realty, doesn’t matter. I completely understand that we should have homework. I have to write a paper on the unimportance of homework so thanks.

homework isn’t that bad

Are you a student? if not then i don’t really think you know how much and how severe todays homework really is

i am a student and i do not enjoy homework because i practice my sport 4 out of the five days we have school for 4 hours and that’s not even counting the commute time or the fact i still have to shower and eat dinner when i get home. its draining!

i totally agree with you. these people are such boomers

why just why

they do make a really good point, i think that there should be a limit though. hours and hours of homework can be really stressful, and the extra work isn’t making a difference to our learning, but i do believe homework should be optional and extra credit. that would make it for students to not have the leaning stress of a assignment and if you have a low grade you you can catch up.

Studies show that homework improves student achievement in terms of improved grades, test results, and the likelihood to attend college. Research published in the High School Journal indicates that students who spent between 31 and 90 minutes each day on homework “scored about 40 points higher on the SAT-Mathematics subtest than their peers, who reported spending no time on homework each day, on average.” On both standardized tests and grades, students in classes that were assigned homework outperformed 69% of students who didn’t have homework. A majority of studies on homework’s impact – 64% in one meta-study and 72% in another – showed that take home assignments were effective at improving academic achievement. Research by the Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) concluded that increased homework led to better GPAs and higher probability of college attendance for high school boys. In fact, boys who attended college did more than three hours of additional homework per week in high school.

So how are your measuring student achievement? That’s the real question. The argument that doing homework is simply a tool for teaching responsibility isn’t enough for me. We can teach responsibility in a number of ways. Also the poor argument that parents don’t need to help with homework, and that students can do it on their own, is wishful thinking at best. It completely ignores neurodiverse students. Students in poverty aren’t magically going to find a space to do homework, a friend’s or siblings to help them do it, and snacks to eat. I feel like the author of this piece has never set foot in a classroom of students.

THIS. This article is pathetic coming from a university. So intellectually dishonest, refusing to address the havoc of capitalism and poverty plays on academic success in life. How can they in one sentence use poor kids in an argument and never once address that poor children have access to damn near 0 of the resources affluent kids have? Draw me a picture and let’s talk about feelings lmao what a joke is that gonna put food in their belly so they can have the calories to burn in order to use their brain to study? What about quiet their 7 other siblings that they share a single bedroom with for hours? Is it gonna force the single mom to magically be at home and at work at the same time to cook food while you study and be there to throw an encouraging word?

Also the “parents don’t need to be a parent and be able to guide their kid at all academically they just need to exist in the next room” is wild. Its one thing if a parent straight up is not equipped but to say kids can just figured it out is…. wow coming from an educator What’s next the teacher doesn’t need to teach cause the kid can just follow the packet and figure it out?

Well then get a tutor right? Oh wait you are poor only affluent kids can afford a tutor for their hours of homework a day were they on average have none of the worries a poor child does. Does this address that poor children are more likely to also suffer abuse and mental illness? Like mentioned what about kids that can’t learn or comprehend the forced standardized way? Just let em fail? These children regularly are not in “special education”(some of those are a joke in their own and full of neglect and abuse) programs cause most aren’t even acknowledged as having disabilities or disorders.

But yes all and all those pesky poor kids just aren’t being worked hard enough lol pretty sure poor children’s existence just in childhood is more work, stress, and responsibility alone than an affluent child’s entire life cycle. Love they never once talked about the quality of education in the classroom being so bad between the poor and affluent it can qualify as segregation, just basically blamed poor people for being lazy, good job capitalism for failing us once again!

why the hell?

you should feel bad for saying this, this article can be helpful for people who has to write a essay about it

This is more of a political rant than it is about homework

I know a teacher who has told his students their homework is to find something they are interested in, pursue it and then come share what they learn. The student responses are quite compelling. One girl taught herself German so she could talk to her grandfather. One boy did a research project on Nelson Mandela because the teacher had mentioned him in class. Another boy, a both on the autism spectrum, fixed his family’s computer. The list goes on. This is fourth grade. I think students are highly motivated to learn, when we step aside and encourage them.

The whole point of homework is to give the students a chance to use the material that they have been presented with in class. If they never have the opportunity to use that information, and discover that it is actually useful, it will be in one ear and out the other. As a science teacher, it is critical that the students are challenged to use the material they have been presented with, which gives them the opportunity to actually think about it rather than regurgitate “facts”. Well designed homework forces the student to think conceptually, as opposed to regurgitation, which is never a pretty sight

Wonderful discussion. and yes, homework helps in learning and building skills in students.

not true it just causes kids to stress

Homework can be both beneficial and unuseful, if you will. There are students who are gifted in all subjects in school and ones with disabilities. Why should the students who are gifted get the lucky break, whereas the people who have disabilities suffer? The people who were born with this “gift” go through school with ease whereas people with disabilities struggle with the work given to them. I speak from experience because I am one of those students: the ones with disabilities. Homework doesn’t benefit “us”, it only tears us down and put us in an abyss of confusion and stress and hopelessness because we can’t learn as fast as others. Or we can’t handle the amount of work given whereas the gifted students go through it with ease. It just brings us down and makes us feel lost; because no mater what, it feels like we are destined to fail. It feels like we weren’t “cut out” for success.

homework does help

here is the thing though, if a child is shoved in the face with a whole ton of homework that isn’t really even considered homework it is assignments, it’s not helpful. the teacher should make homework more of a fun learning experience rather than something that is dreaded

This article was wonderful, I am going to ask my teachers about extra, or at all giving homework.

I agree. Especially when you have homework before an exam. Which is distasteful as you’ll need that time to study. It doesn’t make any sense, nor does us doing homework really matters as It’s just facts thrown at us.

Homework is too severe and is just too much for students, schools need to decrease the amount of homework. When teachers assign homework they forget that the students have other classes that give them the same amount of homework each day. Students need to work on social skills and life skills.

I disagree.

Beyond achievement, proponents of homework argue that it can have many other beneficial effects. They claim it can help students develop good study habits so they are ready to grow as their cognitive capacities mature. It can help students recognize that learning can occur at home as well as at school. Homework can foster independent learning and responsible character traits. And it can give parents an opportunity to see what’s going on at school and let them express positive attitudes toward achievement.

Homework is helpful because homework helps us by teaching us how to learn a specific topic.

As a student myself, I can say that I have almost never gotten the full 9 hours of recommended sleep time, because of homework. (Now I’m writing an essay on it in the middle of the night D=)

I am a 10 year old kid doing a report about “Is homework good or bad” for homework before i was going to do homework is bad but the sources from this site changed my mind!

Homeowkr is god for stusenrs

I agree with hunter because homework can be so stressful especially with this whole covid thing no one has time for homework and every one just wants to get back to there normal lives it is especially stressful when you go on a 2 week vaca 3 weeks into the new school year and and then less then a week after you come back from the vaca you are out for over a month because of covid and you have no way to get the assignment done and turned in

As great as homework is said to be in the is article, I feel like the viewpoint of the students was left out. Every where I go on the internet researching about this topic it almost always has interviews from teachers, professors, and the like. However isn’t that a little biased? Of course teachers are going to be for homework, they’re not the ones that have to stay up past midnight completing the homework from not just one class, but all of them. I just feel like this site is one-sided and you should include what the students of today think of spending four hours every night completing 6-8 classes worth of work.

Are we talking about homework or practice? Those are two very different things and can result in different outcomes.

Homework is a graded assignment. I do not know of research showing the benefits of graded assignments going home.

Practice; however, can be extremely beneficial, especially if there is some sort of feedback (not a grade but feedback). That feedback can come from the teacher, another student or even an automated grading program.

As a former band director, I assigned daily practice. I never once thought it would be appropriate for me to require the students to turn in a recording of their practice for me to grade. Instead, I had in-class assignments/assessments that were graded and directly related to the practice assigned.

I would really like to read articles on “homework” that truly distinguish between the two.

oof i feel bad good luck!

thank you guys for the artical because I have to finish an assingment. yes i did cite it but just thanks

thx for the article guys.

Homework is good

I think homework is helpful AND harmful. Sometimes u can’t get sleep bc of homework but it helps u practice for school too so idk.

I agree with this Article. And does anyone know when this was published. I would like to know.

It was published FEb 19, 2019.

Studies have shown that homework improved student achievement in terms of improved grades, test results, and the likelihood to attend college.

i think homework can help kids but at the same time not help kids

This article is so out of touch with majority of homes it would be laughable if it wasn’t so incredibly sad.

There is no value to homework all it does is add stress to already stressed homes. Parents or adults magically having the time or energy to shepherd kids through homework is dome sort of 1950’s fantasy.

What lala land do these teachers live in?

Homework gives noting to the kid

Homework is Bad

homework is bad.

why do kids even have homework?

Comments are closed.

Latest from Bostonia

Bu alum chompon boonnak runs mahaniyom, one of greater boston’s hottest thai restaurants, champion of indie films, china scholar merle goldman dies, cfa alum jonathan knight is head of games for the new york times, is our democracy at risk americans think so. bu experts talk about why—and the way forward, a commitment to early childhood education, reading list: alum bonnie hammer publishes 15 lies women are told at work —plus fiction, poetry, and short stories, one good deed: jason hurdich (cas’97) is uniting the deaf community, one cup at a time, space force general b. chance saltzman is a bu alum, alum’s new book recounts the battle for inclusion in boy scouts, feedback: readers weigh in on a bu superager, the passing of otto lerbinger, and alum’s book fat church, law alum steven m. wise, who fought for animal rights, dies, pups wearing custom-designed veterinary collars get star treatment in alum’s new coffee-table book, using glamour for good: alum’s nonprofit organization brings clothes and beauty products to those in need, gallery: shea justice (cfa’93), oscar-nominated actor hong chau (com’01) stars in new action-comedy the instigators, opening doors: ellice patterson (questrom’17), an alum’s new memoir recounts six decades of beatlemania, bu alum in paris keeping olympians’ minds sharp and healthy, erika jordan departs bu alumni engagement office to return to california.

The Cult of Homework

America’s devotion to the practice stems in part from the fact that it’s what today’s parents and teachers grew up with themselves.

America has long had a fickle relationship with homework. A century or so ago, progressive reformers argued that it made kids unduly stressed , which later led in some cases to district-level bans on it for all grades under seventh. This anti-homework sentiment faded, though, amid mid-century fears that the U.S. was falling behind the Soviet Union (which led to more homework), only to resurface in the 1960s and ’70s, when a more open culture came to see homework as stifling play and creativity (which led to less). But this didn’t last either: In the ’80s, government researchers blamed America’s schools for its economic troubles and recommended ramping homework up once more.

The 21st century has so far been a homework-heavy era, with American teenagers now averaging about twice as much time spent on homework each day as their predecessors did in the 1990s . Even little kids are asked to bring school home with them. A 2015 study , for instance, found that kindergarteners, who researchers tend to agree shouldn’t have any take-home work, were spending about 25 minutes a night on it.

But not without pushback. As many children, not to mention their parents and teachers, are drained by their daily workload, some schools and districts are rethinking how homework should work—and some teachers are doing away with it entirely. They’re reviewing the research on homework (which, it should be noted, is contested) and concluding that it’s time to revisit the subject.

Read: My daughter’s homework is killing me

Hillsborough, California, an affluent suburb of San Francisco, is one district that has changed its ways. The district, which includes three elementary schools and a middle school, worked with teachers and convened panels of parents in order to come up with a homework policy that would allow students more unscheduled time to spend with their families or to play. In August 2017, it rolled out an updated policy, which emphasized that homework should be “meaningful” and banned due dates that fell on the day after a weekend or a break.

“The first year was a bit bumpy,” says Louann Carlomagno, the district’s superintendent. She says the adjustment was at times hard for the teachers, some of whom had been doing their job in a similar fashion for a quarter of a century. Parents’ expectations were also an issue. Carlomagno says they took some time to “realize that it was okay not to have an hour of homework for a second grader—that was new.”

Most of the way through year two, though, the policy appears to be working more smoothly. “The students do seem to be less stressed based on conversations I’ve had with parents,” Carlomagno says. It also helps that the students performed just as well on the state standardized test last year as they have in the past.

Earlier this year, the district of Somerville, Massachusetts, also rewrote its homework policy, reducing the amount of homework its elementary and middle schoolers may receive. In grades six through eight, for example, homework is capped at an hour a night and can only be assigned two to three nights a week.

Jack Schneider, an education professor at the University of Massachusetts at Lowell whose daughter attends school in Somerville, is generally pleased with the new policy. But, he says, it’s part of a bigger, worrisome pattern. “The origin for this was general parental dissatisfaction, which not surprisingly was coming from a particular demographic,” Schneider says. “Middle-class white parents tend to be more vocal about concerns about homework … They feel entitled enough to voice their opinions.”

Schneider is all for revisiting taken-for-granted practices like homework, but thinks districts need to take care to be inclusive in that process. “I hear approximately zero middle-class white parents talking about how homework done best in grades K through two actually strengthens the connection between home and school for young people and their families,” he says. Because many of these parents already feel connected to their school community, this benefit of homework can seem redundant. “They don’t need it,” Schneider says, “so they’re not advocating for it.”

That doesn’t mean, necessarily, that homework is more vital in low-income districts. In fact, there are different, but just as compelling, reasons it can be burdensome in these communities as well. Allison Wienhold, who teaches high-school Spanish in the small town of Dunkerton, Iowa, has phased out homework assignments over the past three years. Her thinking: Some of her students, she says, have little time for homework because they’re working 30 hours a week or responsible for looking after younger siblings.

As educators reduce or eliminate the homework they assign, it’s worth asking what amount and what kind of homework is best for students. It turns out that there’s some disagreement about this among researchers, who tend to fall in one of two camps.

In the first camp is Harris Cooper, a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Duke University. Cooper conducted a review of the existing research on homework in the mid-2000s , and found that, up to a point, the amount of homework students reported doing correlates with their performance on in-class tests. This correlation, the review found, was stronger for older students than for younger ones.

This conclusion is generally accepted among educators, in part because it’s compatible with “the 10-minute rule,” a rule of thumb popular among teachers suggesting that the proper amount of homework is approximately 10 minutes per night, per grade level—that is, 10 minutes a night for first graders, 20 minutes a night for second graders, and so on, up to two hours a night for high schoolers.

In Cooper’s eyes, homework isn’t overly burdensome for the typical American kid. He points to a 2014 Brookings Institution report that found “little evidence that the homework load has increased for the average student”; onerous amounts of homework, it determined, are indeed out there, but relatively rare. Moreover, the report noted that most parents think their children get the right amount of homework, and that parents who are worried about under-assigning outnumber those who are worried about over-assigning. Cooper says that those latter worries tend to come from a small number of communities with “concerns about being competitive for the most selective colleges and universities.”

According to Alfie Kohn, squarely in camp two, most of the conclusions listed in the previous three paragraphs are questionable. Kohn, the author of The Homework Myth: Why Our Kids Get Too Much of a Bad Thing , considers homework to be a “reliable extinguisher of curiosity,” and has several complaints with the evidence that Cooper and others cite in favor of it. Kohn notes, among other things, that Cooper’s 2006 meta-analysis doesn’t establish causation, and that its central correlation is based on children’s (potentially unreliable) self-reporting of how much time they spend doing homework. (Kohn’s prolific writing on the subject alleges numerous other methodological faults.)

In fact, other correlations make a compelling case that homework doesn’t help. Some countries whose students regularly outperform American kids on standardized tests, such as Japan and Denmark, send their kids home with less schoolwork , while students from some countries with higher homework loads than the U.S., such as Thailand and Greece, fare worse on tests. (Of course, international comparisons can be fraught because so many factors, in education systems and in societies at large, might shape students’ success.)

Kohn also takes issue with the way achievement is commonly assessed. “If all you want is to cram kids’ heads with facts for tomorrow’s tests that they’re going to forget by next week, yeah, if you give them more time and make them do the cramming at night, that could raise the scores,” he says. “But if you’re interested in kids who know how to think or enjoy learning, then homework isn’t merely ineffective, but counterproductive.”

His concern is, in a way, a philosophical one. “The practice of homework assumes that only academic growth matters, to the point that having kids work on that most of the school day isn’t enough,” Kohn says. What about homework’s effect on quality time spent with family? On long-term information retention? On critical-thinking skills? On social development? On success later in life? On happiness? The research is quiet on these questions.

Another problem is that research tends to focus on homework’s quantity rather than its quality, because the former is much easier to measure than the latter. While experts generally agree that the substance of an assignment matters greatly (and that a lot of homework is uninspiring busywork), there isn’t a catchall rule for what’s best—the answer is often specific to a certain curriculum or even an individual student.

Given that homework’s benefits are so narrowly defined (and even then, contested), it’s a bit surprising that assigning so much of it is often a classroom default, and that more isn’t done to make the homework that is assigned more enriching. A number of things are preserving this state of affairs—things that have little to do with whether homework helps students learn.

Jack Schneider, the Massachusetts parent and professor, thinks it’s important to consider the generational inertia of the practice. “The vast majority of parents of public-school students themselves are graduates of the public education system,” he says. “Therefore, their views of what is legitimate have been shaped already by the system that they would ostensibly be critiquing.” In other words, many parents’ own history with homework might lead them to expect the same for their children, and anything less is often taken as an indicator that a school or a teacher isn’t rigorous enough. (This dovetails with—and complicates—the finding that most parents think their children have the right amount of homework.)

Barbara Stengel, an education professor at Vanderbilt University’s Peabody College, brought up two developments in the educational system that might be keeping homework rote and unexciting. The first is the importance placed in the past few decades on standardized testing, which looms over many public-school classroom decisions and frequently discourages teachers from trying out more creative homework assignments. “They could do it, but they’re afraid to do it, because they’re getting pressure every day about test scores,” Stengel says.

Second, she notes that the profession of teaching, with its relatively low wages and lack of autonomy, struggles to attract and support some of the people who might reimagine homework, as well as other aspects of education. “Part of why we get less interesting homework is because some of the people who would really have pushed the limits of that are no longer in teaching,” she says.

“In general, we have no imagination when it comes to homework,” Stengel says. She wishes teachers had the time and resources to remake homework into something that actually engages students. “If we had kids reading—anything, the sports page, anything that they’re able to read—that’s the best single thing. If we had kids going to the zoo, if we had kids going to parks after school, if we had them doing all of those things, their test scores would improve. But they’re not. They’re going home and doing homework that is not expanding what they think about.”

“Exploratory” is one word Mike Simpson used when describing the types of homework he’d like his students to undertake. Simpson is the head of the Stone Independent School, a tiny private high school in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, that opened in 2017. “We were lucky to start a school a year and a half ago,” Simpson says, “so it’s been easy to say we aren’t going to assign worksheets, we aren’t going assign regurgitative problem sets.” For instance, a half-dozen students recently built a 25-foot trebuchet on campus.

Simpson says he thinks it’s a shame that the things students have to do at home are often the least fulfilling parts of schooling: “When our students can’t make the connection between the work they’re doing at 11 o’clock at night on a Tuesday to the way they want their lives to be, I think we begin to lose the plot.”

When I talked with other teachers who did homework makeovers in their classrooms, I heard few regrets. Brandy Young, a second-grade teacher in Joshua, Texas, stopped assigning take-home packets of worksheets three years ago, and instead started asking her students to do 20 minutes of pleasure reading a night. She says she’s pleased with the results, but she’s noticed something funny. “Some kids,” she says, “really do like homework.” She’s started putting out a bucket of it for students to draw from voluntarily—whether because they want an additional challenge or something to pass the time at home.

Chris Bronke, a high-school English teacher in the Chicago suburb of Downers Grove, told me something similar. This school year, he eliminated homework for his class of freshmen, and now mostly lets students study on their own or in small groups during class time. It’s usually up to them what they work on each day, and Bronke has been impressed by how they’ve managed their time.

In fact, some of them willingly spend time on assignments at home, whether because they’re particularly engaged, because they prefer to do some deeper thinking outside school, or because they needed to spend time in class that day preparing for, say, a biology test the following period. “They’re making meaningful decisions about their time that I don’t think education really ever gives students the experience, nor the practice, of doing,” Bronke said.

The typical prescription offered by those overwhelmed with homework is to assign less of it—to subtract. But perhaps a more useful approach, for many classrooms, would be to create homework only when teachers and students believe it’s actually needed to further the learning that takes place in class—to start with nothing, and add as necessary.

About the Author

More Stories

Reporting on Parenthood Has Made Me Nervous About Having Kids

The Economic Principle That Helps Me Order at Restaurants

• Our Mission

Rethinking Homework for This Year—and Beyond

A schoolwide effort to reduce homework has led to a renewed focus on ensuring that all work assigned really aids students’ learning.

I used to pride myself on my high expectations, including my firm commitment to accountability for regular homework completion among my students. But the trauma of Covid-19 has prompted me to both reflect and adapt. Now when I think about the purpose and practice of homework, two key concepts guide me: depth over breadth, and student well-being.

Homework has long been the subject of intense debate, and there’s no easy answer with respect to its value. Teachers assign homework for any number of reasons: It’s traditional to do so, it makes students practice their skills and solidify learning, it offers the opportunity for formative assessment, and it creates good study habits and discipline. Then there’s the issue of pace. Throughout my career, I’ve assigned homework largely because there just isn’t enough time to get everything done in class.

A Different Approach

Since classes have gone online, the school where I teach has made a conscious effort as a teaching community to reduce, refine, and distill our curriculum. We have applied guiding questions like: What is most important? What is most transferable? What is most relevant? Refocusing on what matters most has inevitably made us rethink homework.

We have approached both asking and answering these questions through a science of learning lens. In Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning , the authors maintain that deep learning is slow learning. Deep learning requires time for retrieval, practice, feedback, reflection, and revisiting content; ultimately it requires struggle, and there is no struggle without time.

As someone who has mastered the curriculum mapping style of “get it done to move on to get that next thing done,” using an approach of “slow down and reduce” has been quite a shift for me. However, the shift has been necessary: What matters most is what’s best for my students, as opposed to my own plans or mandates imposed by others.

Listening to Students

To implement this shift, my high school English department has reduced content and texts both in terms of the amount of units and the content within each unit. We’re more flexible with dates and deadlines. We spend our energy planning the current unit instead of the year’s units. In true partnership with my students, I’m constantly checking in with them via Google forms, Zoom chats, conferences, and Padlet activities. In these check-ins, I specifically ask students how they’re managing the workload for my class and their other classes. I ask them how much homework they’re doing. And I adjust what I do and expect based on what they tell me. For example, when I find out a week is heavy with work in other classes, I make sure to allot more time during class for my tasks. At times I have even delayed or altered one of my assignments.

To be completely transparent, the “old” me is sheepish in admitting that I’ve so dramatically changed my thinking with respect to homework. However, both my students and I have reaped numerous benefits. I’m now laser-focused when designing every minute of my lessons to maximize teaching and learning. Every decision I make is now scrutinized through the lens of absolute worth for my students’ growth: If it doesn’t make the cut, it’s cut. I also take into account what is most relevant to my students.

For example, our 10th-grade English team has redesigned a unit that explores current manifestations of systemic oppression. This unit is new in approach and longer in duration than it was pre-Covid, and it has resulted in some of the deepest and hardest learning, as well as the richest conversations, that I have seen among students in my career. Part of this improved quality comes from the frequent and intentional pauses that I instruct students to take in order to reflect on the content and on the arc of their own learning. The reduction in content that we need to get through in online learning has given me more time to assign reflective prompts, and to let students process their thoughts, whether that’s at the end of a lesson as an exit slip or as an assignment.

Joining Forces to Be Consistent

There’s no doubt this reduction in homework has been a team effort. Within the English department, we have all agreed to allot reading time during class; across each grade level, we’re monitoring the amount of homework our students have collectively; and across the whole high school, we have adopted a framework to help us think through assigning homework.

Within that framework, teachers at the school agree that the best option is for students to complete all work during class. The next best option is for students to finish uncompleted class work at home as a homework assignment of less than 30 minutes. The last option—the one we try to avoid as much as possible—is for students to be assigned and complete new work at home (still less than 30 minutes). I set a maximum time limit for students’ homework tasks (e.g., 30 minutes) and make that clear at the top of every assignment.

This schoolwide approach has increased my humility as a teacher. In the past, I tended to think my subject was more important than everyone else’s, which gave me license to assign more homework. But now I view my students’ experience more holistically: All of their classes and the associated work must be considered, and respected.

As always, I ground this new pedagogical approach not just in what’s best for students’ academic learning, but also what’s best for them socially and emotionally. 2020 has been traumatic for educators, parents, and students. There is no doubt the level of trauma varies greatly ; however, one can’t argue with the fact that homework typically means more screen time when students are already spending most of the day on their devices. They need to rest their eyes. They need to not be sitting at their desks. They need physical activity. They need time to do nothing at all.

Eliminating or reducing homework is a social and emotional intervention, which brings me to the greatest benefit of reducing the homework load: Students are more invested in their relationship with me now that they have less homework. When students trust me to take their time seriously, when they trust me to listen to them and adjust accordingly, when they trust me to care for them... they trust more in general.

And what a beautiful world of learning can be built on trust.

How it works

Transform your enterprise with the scalable mindsets, skills, & behavior change that drive performance.

Explore how BetterUp connects to your core business systems.

We pair AI with the latest in human-centered coaching to drive powerful, lasting learning and behavior change.

Build leaders that accelerate team performance and engagement.

Unlock performance potential at scale with AI-powered curated growth journeys.

Build resilience, well-being and agility to drive performance across your entire enterprise.

Transform your business, starting with your sales leaders.

Unlock business impact from the top with executive coaching.

Foster a culture of inclusion and belonging.

Accelerate the performance and potential of your agencies and employees.

See how innovative organizations use BetterUp to build a thriving workforce.

Discover how BetterUp measurably impacts key business outcomes for organizations like yours.

Daring Leadership Institute: a groundbreaking partnership that amplifies Brené Brown's empirically based, courage-building curriculum with BetterUp’s human transformation platform.

• What is coaching?

Learn how 1:1 coaching works, who its for, and if it's right for you.

Accelerate your personal and professional growth with the expert guidance of a BetterUp Coach.

Types of Coaching

Navigate career transitions, accelerate your professional growth, and achieve your career goals with expert coaching.

Enhance your communication skills for better personal and professional relationships, with tailored coaching that focuses on your needs.

Find balance, resilience, and well-being in all areas of your life with holistic coaching designed to empower you.

Discover your perfect match : Take our 5-minute assessment and let us pair you with one of our top Coaches tailored just for you.

Find your coach

Research, expert insights, and resources to develop courageous leaders within your organization.

Best practices, research, and tools to fuel individual and business growth.

View on-demand BetterUp events and learn about upcoming live discussions.

The latest insights and ideas for building a high-performing workplace.

• BetterUp Briefing

The online magazine that helps you understand tomorrow's workforce trends, today.

Innovative research featured in peer-reviewed journals, press, and more.

Founded in 2022 to deepen the understanding of the intersection of well-being, purpose, and performance

We're on a mission to help everyone live with clarity, purpose, and passion.

Join us and create impactful change.

Read the buzz about BetterUp.

Meet the leadership that's passionate about empowering your workforce.

For Business

For Individuals

How to develop critical thinking skills

Jump to section

What are critical thinking skills?

How to develop critical thinking skills: 12 tips, how to practice critical thinking skills at work, become your own best critic.

A client requests a tight deadline on an intense project. Your childcare provider calls in sick on a day full of meetings. Payment from a contract gig is a month behind. 

Your day-to-day will always have challenges, big and small. And no matter the size and urgency, they all ask you to use critical thinking to analyze the situation and arrive at the right solution. 

Critical thinking includes a wide set of soft skills that encourage continuous learning, resilience , and self-reflection. The more you add to your professional toolbelt, the more equipped you’ll be to tackle whatever challenge presents itself. Here’s how to develop critical thinking, with examples explaining how to use it.

Critical thinking skills are the skills you use to analyze information, imagine scenarios holistically, and create rational solutions. It’s a type of emotional intelligence that stimulates effective problem-solving and decision-making . 

When you fine-tune your critical thinking skills, you seek beyond face-value observations and knee-jerk reactions. Instead, you harvest deeper insights and string together ideas and concepts in logical, sometimes out-of-the-box , ways. 

Imagine a team working on a marketing strategy for a new set of services. That team might use critical thinking to balance goals and key performance indicators , like new customer acquisition costs, average monthly sales, and net profit margins. They understand the connections between overlapping factors to build a strategy that stays within budget and attracts new sales. 

Looking for ways to improve critical thinking skills? Start by brushing up on the following soft skills that fall under this umbrella: 

• Analytical thinking: Approaching problems with an analytical eye includes breaking down complex issues into small chunks and examining their significance. An example could be organizing customer feedback to identify trends and improve your product offerings. 
• Open-mindedness: Push past cognitive biases and be receptive to different points of view and constructive feedback . Managers and team members who keep an open mind position themselves to hear new ideas that foster innovation . 
• Creative thinking: With creative thinking , you can develop several ideas to address a single problem, like brainstorming more efficient workflow best practices to boost productivity and employee morale . 
• Self-reflection: Self-reflection lets you examine your thinking and assumptions to stimulate healthier collaboration and thought processes. Maybe a bad first impression created a negative anchoring bias with a new coworker. Reflecting on your own behavior stirs up empathy and improves the relationship. 
• Evaluation: With evaluation skills, you tackle the pros and cons of a situation based on logic rather than emotion. When prioritizing tasks , you might be tempted to do the fun or easy ones first, but evaluating their urgency and importance can help you make better decisions. 

There’s no magic method to change your thinking processes. Improvement happens with small, intentional changes to your everyday habits until a more critical approach to thinking is automatic. 

Here are 12 tips for building stronger self-awareness and learning how to improve critical thinking: 

1. Be cautious

There’s nothing wrong with a little bit of skepticism. One of the core principles of critical thinking is asking questions and dissecting the available information. You might surprise yourself at what you find when you stop to think before taking action. 

Before making a decision, use evidence, logic, and deductive reasoning to support your own opinions or challenge ideas. It helps you and your team avoid falling prey to bad information or resistance to change .

2. Ask open-ended questions

“Yes” or “no” questions invite agreement rather than reflection. Instead, ask open-ended questions that force you to engage in analysis and rumination. Digging deeper can help you identify potential biases, uncover assumptions, and arrive at new hypotheses and possible solutions. 

3. Do your research

No matter your proficiency, you can always learn more. Turning to different points of view and information is a great way to develop a comprehensive understanding of a topic and make informed decisions. You’ll prioritize reliable information rather than fall into emotional or automatic decision-making. 

4. Consider several opinions

You might spend so much time on your work that it’s easy to get stuck in your own perspective, especially if you work independently on a remote team . Make an effort to reach out to colleagues to hear different ideas and thought patterns. Their input might surprise you.

If or when you disagree, remember that you and your team share a common goal. Divergent opinions are constructive, so shift the focus to finding solutions rather than defending disagreements. 

5. Learn to be quiet

Active listening is the intentional practice of concentrating on a conversation partner instead of your own thoughts. It’s about paying attention to detail and letting people know you value their opinions, which can open your mind to new perspectives and thought processes.

If you’re brainstorming with your team or having a 1:1 with a coworker , listen, ask clarifying questions, and work to understand other peoples’ viewpoints. Listening to your team will help you find fallacies in arguments to improve possible solutions.

6. Schedule reflection

Whether waking up at 5 am or using a procrastination hack, scheduling time to think puts you in a growth mindset . Your mind has natural cognitive biases to help you simplify decision-making, but squashing them is key to thinking critically and finding new solutions besides the ones you might gravitate toward. Creating time and calm space in your day gives you the chance to step back and visualize the biases that impact your decision-making. 

7. Cultivate curiosity

With so many demands and job responsibilities, it’s easy to seek solace in routine. But getting out of your comfort zone helps spark critical thinking and find more solutions than you usually might.

If curiosity doesn’t come naturally to you, cultivate a thirst for knowledge by reskilling and upskilling . Not only will you add a new skill to your resume , but expanding the limits of your professional knowledge might motivate you to ask more questions. 

You don’t have to develop critical thinking skills exclusively in the office. Whether on your break or finding a hobby to do after work, playing strategic games or filling out crosswords can prime your brain for problem-solving. 

9. Write it down

Recording your thoughts with pen and paper can lead to stronger brain activity than typing them out on a keyboard. If you’re stuck and want to think more critically about a problem, writing your ideas can help you process information more deeply.

The act of recording ideas on paper can also improve your memory . Ideas are more likely to linger in the background of your mind, leading to deeper thinking that informs your decision-making process. 

10. Speak up

Take opportunities to share your opinion, even if it intimidates you. Whether at a networking event with new people or a meeting with close colleagues, try to engage with people who challenge or help you develop your ideas. Having conversations that force you to support your position encourages you to refine your argument and think critically. 

11. Stay humble

Ideas and concepts aren’t the same as real-life actions. There may be such a thing as negative outcomes, but there’s no such thing as a bad idea. At the brainstorming stage , don’t be afraid to make mistakes.

Sometimes the best solutions come from off-the-wall, unorthodox decisions. Sit in your creativity , let ideas flow, and don’t be afraid to share them with your colleagues. Putting yourself in a creative mindset helps you see situations from new perspectives and arrive at innovative conclusions. 

12. Embrace discomfort

Get comfortable feeling uncomfortable . It isn’t easy when others challenge your ideas, but sometimes, it’s the only way to see new perspectives and think critically.

By willingly stepping into unfamiliar territory, you foster the resilience and flexibility you need to become a better thinker. You’ll learn how to pick yourself up from failure and approach problems from fresh angles. 

Thinking critically is easier said than done. To help you understand its impact (and how to use it), here are two scenarios that require critical thinking skills and provide teachable moments. 

Scenario #1: Unexpected delays and budget

Imagine your team is working on producing an event. Unexpectedly, a vendor explains they’ll be a week behind on delivering materials. Then another vendor sends a quote that’s more than you can afford. Unless you develop a creative solution, the team will have to push back deadlines and go over budget, potentially costing the client’s trust. 

Here’s how you could approach the situation with creative thinking:

• Analyze the situation holistically: Determine how the delayed materials and over-budget quote will impact the rest of your timeline and financial resources . That way, you can identify whether you need to build an entirely new plan with new vendors, or if it’s worth it to readjust time and resources. 
• Identify your alternative options: With careful assessment, your team decides that another vendor can’t provide the same materials in a quicker time frame. You’ll need to rearrange assignment schedules to complete everything on time. 
• Collaborate and adapt: Your team has an emergency meeting to rearrange your project schedule. You write down each deliverable and determine which ones you can and can’t complete by the deadline. To compensate for lost time, you rearrange your task schedule to complete everything that doesn’t need the delayed materials first, then advance as far as you can on the tasks that do. 
• Check different resources: In the meantime, you scour through your contact sheet to find alternative vendors that fit your budget. Accounting helps by providing old invoices to determine which vendors have quoted less for previous jobs. After pulling all your sources, you find a vendor that fits your budget. 
• Maintain open communication: You create a special Slack channel to keep everyone up to date on changes, challenges, and additional delays. Keeping an open line encourages transparency on the team’s progress and boosts everyone’s confidence. 

Scenario #2: Differing opinions 

A conflict arises between two team members on the best approach for a new strategy for a gaming app. One believes that small tweaks to the current content are necessary to maintain user engagement and stay within budget. The other believes a bold revamp is needed to encourage new followers and stronger sales revenue. 

Here’s how critical thinking could help this conflict:

• Listen actively: Give both team members the opportunity to present their ideas free of interruption. Encourage the entire team to ask open-ended questions to more fully understand and develop each argument. 
• Flex your analytical skills: After learning more about both ideas, everyone should objectively assess the benefits and drawbacks of each approach. Analyze each idea's risk, merits, and feasibility based on available data and the app’s goals and objectives. 
• Identify common ground: The team discusses similarities between each approach and brainstorms ways to integrate both idea s, like making small but eye-catching modifications to existing content or using the same visual design in new media formats. 
• Test new strategy: To test out the potential of a bolder strategy, the team decides to A/B test both approaches. You create a set of criteria to evenly distribute users by different demographics to analyze engagement, revenue, and customer turnover. 
• Monitor and adapt: After implementing the A/B test, the team closely monitors the results of each strategy. You regroup and optimize the changes that provide stronger results after the testing. That way, all team members understand why you’re making the changes you decide to make.

You can’t think your problems away. But you can equip yourself with skills that help you move through your biggest challenges and find innovative solutions. Learning how to develop critical thinking is the start of honing an adaptable growth mindset. 

Now that you have resources to increase critical thinking skills in your professional development, you can identify whether you embrace change or routine, are open or resistant to feedback, or turn to research or emotion will build self-awareness. From there, tweak and incorporate techniques to be a critical thinker when life presents you with a problem.

Understand Yourself Better:

Big 5 Personality Test

Elizabeth Perry, ACC

Elizabeth Perry is a Coach Community Manager at BetterUp. She uses strategic engagement strategies to cultivate a learning community across a global network of Coaches through in-person and virtual experiences, technology-enabled platforms, and strategic coaching industry partnerships. With over 3 years of coaching experience and a certification in transformative leadership and life coaching from Sofia University, Elizabeth leverages transpersonal psychology expertise to help coaches and clients gain awareness of their behavioral and thought patterns, discover their purpose and passions, and elevate their potential. She is a lifelong student of psychology, personal growth, and human potential as well as an ICF-certified ACC transpersonal life and leadership Coach.

How divergent thinking can drive your creativity

What’s convergent thinking how to be a better problem-solver, 8 creative solutions to your most challenging problems, critical thinking is the one skillset you can't afford not to master, 17 memorization techniques to sharpen your memory & recall, can dreams help you solve problems 6 ways to try, how emotions affect learning: the impact of emotions, what is lateral thinking 7 techniques to encourage creative ideas, how different learning styles make a difference at work, betterup named a 2019 “cool vendor” in human capital management: enhancing employee experience by gartnerup your game: a new model for leadership, 7 critical teamwork skills and how to develop them, what is creative thinking and how can i improve, 6 big picture thinking strategies that you'll actually use, what are analytical skills examples and how to level up, stay connected with betterup, get our newsletter, event invites, plus product insights and research..

3100 E 5th Street, Suite 350 Austin, TX 78702

• Platform Overview
• Integrations
• Powered by AI
• BetterUp Lead™
• BetterUp Manage™
• BetterUp Care®
• Sales Performance
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Case Studies
• Why BetterUp?
• About Coaching
• Find your Coach
• Career Coaching
• Communication Coaching
• Personal Coaching
• News and Press
• Leadership Team
• Become a BetterUp Coach
• BetterUp Labs
• Center for Purpose & Performance
• Leadership Training
• Business Coaching
• Contact Support
• Contact Sales
• Privacy Policy
• Acceptable Use Policy
• Trust & Security
• Cookie Preferences

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

In this EdWeek blog, an experiment in knowledge-gathering, Ferlazzo will address readers’ questions on classroom management, ELL instruction, lesson planning, and other issues facing teachers. Send your questions to [email protected]. Read more from this blog.

Eight Instructional Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking

• Share article

(This is the first post in a three-part series.)

The new question-of-the-week is:

What is critical thinking and how can we integrate it into the classroom?

This three-part series will explore what critical thinking is, if it can be specifically taught and, if so, how can teachers do so in their classrooms.

Today’s guests are Dara Laws Savage, Patrick Brown, Meg Riordan, Ph.D., and Dr. PJ Caposey. Dara, Patrick, and Meg were also guests on my 10-minute BAM! Radio Show . You can also find a list of, and links to, previous shows here.

You might also be interested in The Best Resources On Teaching & Learning Critical Thinking In The Classroom .

Current Events

Dara Laws Savage is an English teacher at the Early College High School at Delaware State University, where she serves as a teacher and instructional coach and lead mentor. Dara has been teaching for 25 years (career preparation, English, photography, yearbook, newspaper, and graphic design) and has presented nationally on project-based learning and technology integration:

There is so much going on right now and there is an overload of information for us to process. Did you ever stop to think how our students are processing current events? They see news feeds, hear news reports, and scan photos and posts, but are they truly thinking about what they are hearing and seeing?

I tell my students that my job is not to give them answers but to teach them how to think about what they read and hear. So what is critical thinking and how can we integrate it into the classroom? There are just as many definitions of critical thinking as there are people trying to define it. However, the Critical Think Consortium focuses on the tools to create a thinking-based classroom rather than a definition: “Shape the climate to support thinking, create opportunities for thinking, build capacity to think, provide guidance to inform thinking.” Using these four criteria and pairing them with current events, teachers easily create learning spaces that thrive on thinking and keep students engaged.

One successful technique I use is the FIRE Write. Students are given a quote, a paragraph, an excerpt, or a photo from the headlines. Students are asked to F ocus and respond to the selection for three minutes. Next, students are asked to I dentify a phrase or section of the photo and write for two minutes. Third, students are asked to R eframe their response around a specific word, phrase, or section within their previous selection. Finally, students E xchange their thoughts with a classmate. Within the exchange, students also talk about how the selection connects to what we are covering in class.

There was a controversial Pepsi ad in 2017 involving Kylie Jenner and a protest with a police presence. The imagery in the photo was strikingly similar to a photo that went viral with a young lady standing opposite a police line. Using that image from a current event engaged my students and gave them the opportunity to critically think about events of the time.

Here are the two photos and a student response:

F - Focus on both photos and respond for three minutes

In the first picture, you see a strong and courageous black female, bravely standing in front of two officers in protest. She is risking her life to do so. Iesha Evans is simply proving to the world she does NOT mean less because she is black … and yet officers are there to stop her. She did not step down. In the picture below, you see Kendall Jenner handing a police officer a Pepsi. Maybe this wouldn’t be a big deal, except this was Pepsi’s weak, pathetic, and outrageous excuse of a commercial that belittles the whole movement of people fighting for their lives.

I - Identify a word or phrase, underline it, then write about it for two minutes

A white, privileged female in place of a fighting black woman was asking for trouble. A struggle we are continuously fighting every day, and they make a mockery of it. “I know what will work! Here Mr. Police Officer! Drink some Pepsi!” As if. Pepsi made a fool of themselves, and now their already dwindling fan base continues to ever shrink smaller.

R - Reframe your thoughts by choosing a different word, then write about that for one minute

You don’t know privilege until it’s gone. You don’t know privilege while it’s there—but you can and will be made accountable and aware. Don’t use it for evil. You are not stupid. Use it to do something. Kendall could’ve NOT done the commercial. Kendall could’ve released another commercial standing behind a black woman. Anything!

Exchange - Remember to discuss how this connects to our school song project and our previous discussions?

This connects two ways - 1) We want to convey a strong message. Be powerful. Show who we are. And Pepsi definitely tried. … Which leads to the second connection. 2) Not mess up and offend anyone, as had the one alma mater had been linked to black minstrels. We want to be amazing, but we have to be smart and careful and make sure we include everyone who goes to our school and everyone who may go to our school.

As a final step, students read and annotate the full article and compare it to their initial response.

Using current events and critical-thinking strategies like FIRE writing helps create a learning space where thinking is the goal rather than a score on a multiple-choice assessment. Critical-thinking skills can cross over to any of students’ other courses and into life outside the classroom. After all, we as teachers want to help the whole student be successful, and critical thinking is an important part of navigating life after they leave our classrooms.

‘Before-Explore-Explain’

Patrick Brown is the executive director of STEM and CTE for the Fort Zumwalt school district in Missouri and an experienced educator and author :

Planning for critical thinking focuses on teaching the most crucial science concepts, practices, and logical-thinking skills as well as the best use of instructional time. One way to ensure that lessons maintain a focus on critical thinking is to focus on the instructional sequence used to teach.

Explore-before-explain teaching is all about promoting critical thinking for learners to better prepare students for the reality of their world. What having an explore-before-explain mindset means is that in our planning, we prioritize giving students firsthand experiences with data, allow students to construct evidence-based claims that focus on conceptual understanding, and challenge students to discuss and think about the why behind phenomena.

Just think of the critical thinking that has to occur for students to construct a scientific claim. 1) They need the opportunity to collect data, analyze it, and determine how to make sense of what the data may mean. 2) With data in hand, students can begin thinking about the validity and reliability of their experience and information collected. 3) They can consider what differences, if any, they might have if they completed the investigation again. 4) They can scrutinize outlying data points for they may be an artifact of a true difference that merits further exploration of a misstep in the procedure, measuring device, or measurement. All of these intellectual activities help them form more robust understanding and are evidence of their critical thinking.

In explore-before-explain teaching, all of these hard critical-thinking tasks come before teacher explanations of content. Whether we use discovery experiences, problem-based learning, and or inquiry-based activities, strategies that are geared toward helping students construct understanding promote critical thinking because students learn content by doing the practices valued in the field to generate knowledge.

An Issue of Equity

Meg Riordan, Ph.D., is the chief learning officer at The Possible Project, an out-of-school program that collaborates with youth to build entrepreneurial skills and mindsets and provides pathways to careers and long-term economic prosperity. She has been in the field of education for over 25 years as a middle and high school teacher, school coach, college professor, regional director of N.Y.C. Outward Bound Schools, and director of external research with EL Education:

Although critical thinking often defies straightforward definition, most in the education field agree it consists of several components: reasoning, problem-solving, and decisionmaking, plus analysis and evaluation of information, such that multiple sides of an issue can be explored. It also includes dispositions and “the willingness to apply critical-thinking principles, rather than fall back on existing unexamined beliefs, or simply believe what you’re told by authority figures.”

Despite variation in definitions, critical thinking is nonetheless promoted as an essential outcome of students’ learning—we want to see students and adults demonstrate it across all fields, professions, and in their personal lives. Yet there is simultaneously a rationing of opportunities in schools for students of color, students from under-resourced communities, and other historically marginalized groups to deeply learn and practice critical thinking.

For example, many of our most underserved students often spend class time filling out worksheets, promoting high compliance but low engagement, inquiry, critical thinking, or creation of new ideas. At a time in our world when college and careers are critical for participation in society and the global, knowledge-based economy, far too many students struggle within classrooms and schools that reinforce low-expectations and inequity.

If educators aim to prepare all students for an ever-evolving marketplace and develop skills that will be valued no matter what tomorrow’s jobs are, then we must move critical thinking to the forefront of classroom experiences. And educators must design learning to cultivate it.

So, what does that really look like?

Unpack and define critical thinking

To understand critical thinking, educators need to first unpack and define its components. What exactly are we looking for when we speak about reasoning or exploring multiple perspectives on an issue? How does problem-solving show up in English, math, science, art, or other disciplines—and how is it assessed? At Two Rivers, an EL Education school, the faculty identified five constructs of critical thinking, defined each, and created rubrics to generate a shared picture of quality for teachers and students. The rubrics were then adapted across grade levels to indicate students’ learning progressions.

At Avenues World School, critical thinking is one of the Avenues World Elements and is an enduring outcome embedded in students’ early experiences through 12th grade. For instance, a kindergarten student may be expected to “identify cause and effect in familiar contexts,” while an 8th grader should demonstrate the ability to “seek out sufficient evidence before accepting a claim as true,” “identify bias in claims and evidence,” and “reconsider strongly held points of view in light of new evidence.”

When faculty and students embrace a common vision of what critical thinking looks and sounds like and how it is assessed, educators can then explicitly design learning experiences that call for students to employ critical-thinking skills. This kind of work must occur across all schools and programs, especially those serving large numbers of students of color. As Linda Darling-Hammond asserts , “Schools that serve large numbers of students of color are least likely to offer the kind of curriculum needed to ... help students attain the [critical-thinking] skills needed in a knowledge work economy. ”

So, what can it look like to create those kinds of learning experiences?

Designing experiences for critical thinking

After defining a shared understanding of “what” critical thinking is and “how” it shows up across multiple disciplines and grade levels, it is essential to create learning experiences that impel students to cultivate, practice, and apply these skills. There are several levers that offer pathways for teachers to promote critical thinking in lessons:

1.Choose Compelling Topics: Keep it relevant

A key Common Core State Standard asks for students to “write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.” That might not sound exciting or culturally relevant. But a learning experience designed for a 12th grade humanities class engaged learners in a compelling topic— policing in America —to analyze and evaluate multiple texts (including primary sources) and share the reasoning for their perspectives through discussion and writing. Students grappled with ideas and their beliefs and employed deep critical-thinking skills to develop arguments for their claims. Embedding critical-thinking skills in curriculum that students care about and connect with can ignite powerful learning experiences.

2. Make Local Connections: Keep it real

At The Possible Project , an out-of-school-time program designed to promote entrepreneurial skills and mindsets, students in a recent summer online program (modified from in-person due to COVID-19) explored the impact of COVID-19 on their communities and local BIPOC-owned businesses. They learned interviewing skills through a partnership with Everyday Boston , conducted virtual interviews with entrepreneurs, evaluated information from their interviews and local data, and examined their previously held beliefs. They created blog posts and videos to reflect on their learning and consider how their mindsets had changed as a result of the experience. In this way, we can design powerful community-based learning and invite students into productive struggle with multiple perspectives.

3. Create Authentic Projects: Keep it rigorous

At Big Picture Learning schools, students engage in internship-based learning experiences as a central part of their schooling. Their school-based adviser and internship-based mentor support them in developing real-world projects that promote deeper learning and critical-thinking skills. Such authentic experiences teach “young people to be thinkers, to be curious, to get from curiosity to creation … and it helps students design a learning experience that answers their questions, [providing an] opportunity to communicate it to a larger audience—a major indicator of postsecondary success.” Even in a remote environment, we can design projects that ask more of students than rote memorization and that spark critical thinking.

Our call to action is this: As educators, we need to make opportunities for critical thinking available not only to the affluent or those fortunate enough to be placed in advanced courses. The tools are available, let’s use them. Let’s interrogate our current curriculum and design learning experiences that engage all students in real, relevant, and rigorous experiences that require critical thinking and prepare them for promising postsecondary pathways.

Critical Thinking & Student Engagement

Dr. PJ Caposey is an award-winning educator, keynote speaker, consultant, and author of seven books who currently serves as the superintendent of schools for the award-winning Meridian CUSD 223 in northwest Illinois. You can find PJ on most social-media platforms as MCUSDSupe:

When I start my keynote on student engagement, I invite two people up on stage and give them each five paper balls to shoot at a garbage can also conveniently placed on stage. Contestant One shoots their shot, and the audience gives approval. Four out of 5 is a heckuva score. Then just before Contestant Two shoots, I blindfold them and start moving the garbage can back and forth. I usually try to ensure that they can at least make one of their shots. Nobody is successful in this unfair environment.

I thank them and send them back to their seats and then explain that this little activity was akin to student engagement. While we all know we want student engagement, we are shooting at different targets. More importantly, for teachers, it is near impossible for them to hit a target that is moving and that they cannot see.

Within the world of education and particularly as educational leaders, we have failed to simplify what student engagement looks like, and it is impossible to define or articulate what student engagement looks like if we cannot clearly articulate what critical thinking is and looks like in a classroom. Because, simply, without critical thought, there is no engagement.

The good news here is that critical thought has been defined and placed into taxonomies for decades already. This is not something new and not something that needs to be redefined. I am a Bloom’s person, but there is nothing wrong with DOK or some of the other taxonomies, either. To be precise, I am a huge fan of Daggett’s Rigor and Relevance Framework. I have used that as a core element of my practice for years, and it has shaped who I am as an instructional leader.

So, in order to explain critical thought, a teacher or a leader must familiarize themselves with these tried and true taxonomies. Easy, right? Yes, sort of. The issue is not understanding what critical thought is; it is the ability to integrate it into the classrooms. In order to do so, there are a four key steps every educator must take.

• Integrating critical thought/rigor into a lesson does not happen by chance, it happens by design. Planning for critical thought and engagement is much different from planning for a traditional lesson. In order to plan for kids to think critically, you have to provide a base of knowledge and excellent prompts to allow them to explore their own thinking in order to analyze, evaluate, or synthesize information.
• SIDE NOTE – Bloom’s verbs are a great way to start when writing objectives, but true planning will take you deeper than this.

QUESTIONING

• If the questions and prompts given in a classroom have correct answers or if the teacher ends up answering their own questions, the lesson will lack critical thought and rigor.
• Script five questions forcing higher-order thought prior to every lesson. Experienced teachers may not feel they need this, but it helps to create an effective habit.
• If lessons are rigorous and assessments are not, students will do well on their assessments, and that may not be an accurate representation of the knowledge and skills they have mastered. If lessons are easy and assessments are rigorous, the exact opposite will happen. When deciding to increase critical thought, it must happen in all three phases of the game: planning, instruction, and assessment.

TALK TIME / CONTROL

• To increase rigor, the teacher must DO LESS. This feels counterintuitive but is accurate. Rigorous lessons involving tons of critical thought must allow for students to work on their own, collaborate with peers, and connect their ideas. This cannot happen in a silent room except for the teacher talking. In order to increase rigor, decrease talk time and become comfortable with less control. Asking questions and giving prompts that lead to no true correct answer also means less control. This is a tough ask for some teachers. Explained differently, if you assign one assignment and get 30 very similar products, you have most likely assigned a low-rigor recipe. If you assign one assignment and get multiple varied products, then the students have had a chance to think deeply, and you have successfully integrated critical thought into your classroom.

Thanks to Dara, Patrick, Meg, and PJ for their contributions!

Please feel free to leave a comment with your reactions to the topic or directly to anything that has been said in this post.

Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at [email protected] . When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it’s selected or if you’d prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

Education Week has published a collection of posts from this blog, along with new material, in an e-book form. It’s titled Classroom Management Q&As: Expert Strategies for Teaching .

Just a reminder; you can subscribe and receive updates from this blog via email (The RSS feed for this blog, and for all Ed Week articles, has been changed by the new redesign—new ones won’t be available until February). And if you missed any of the highlights from the first nine years of this blog, you can see a categorized list below.

• This Year’s Most Popular Q&A Posts
• Race & Racism in Schools
• School Closures & the Coronavirus Crisis
• Classroom-Management Advice
• Best Ways to Begin the School Year
• Best Ways to End the School Year
• Student Motivation & Social-Emotional Learning
• Implementing the Common Core
• Facing Gender Challenges in Education
• Teaching Social Studies
• Cooperative & Collaborative Learning
• Using Tech in the Classroom
• Student Voices
• Parent Engagement in Schools
• Teaching English-Language Learners
• Reading Instruction
• Writing Instruction
• Education Policy Issues
• Differentiating Instruction
• Math Instruction
• Science Instruction
• Advice for New Teachers
• Author Interviews
• Entering the Teaching Profession
• The Inclusive Classroom
• Learning & the Brain
• Administrator Leadership
• Teacher Leadership
• Relationships in Schools
• Professional Development
• Instructional Strategies
• Best of Classroom Q&A
• Professional Collaboration
• Classroom Organization
• Mistakes in Education
• Project-Based Learning

I am also creating a Twitter list including all contributors to this column .

The opinions expressed in Classroom Q&A With Larry Ferlazzo are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

20 Reasons Why Homework is Good: Unlocking the Benefits

• Post author By admin
• October 26, 2023

Explore the compelling 20 reasons why homework is good, fostering skills and knowledge that extend beyond the classroom

Ah, homework – a topic that has fueled countless debates in the world of education. Is it a valuable learning tool or a relentless academic burden?

In this article, we’re going to shift the spotlight onto the often-overlooked positive side of homework. We’ll unveil not one or two, but a whopping 20 compelling reasons why homework is genuinely good for students.

From solidifying classroom knowledge to honing critical thinking skills, homework is far more than just an academic chore. It’s an essential building block of learning. 

So, whether you’ve questioned the purpose of homework or are simply curious about its merits, join us on this journey as we explore the myriad ways homework benefits students of all ages.

Get ready to discover why homework is a treasure trove of learning opportunities!

Table of Contents

20 Reasons Why Homework is Good

Check out 20 reasons why homework is good:-

1. Reinforcement of Classroom Learning

Homework isn’t just a mundane task; it’s your secret weapon for becoming a true subject matter aficionado. It’s the place where classroom theories transform into real-world skills. 

Homework, in all its wisdom, lets you roll up your sleeves and practice what you’ve learned in class, turning those lightbulb moments into permanent knowledge fixtures.

Just like a musician perfecting a melody or an artist refining their masterpiece, homework is your training ground for excellence. So, embrace it, for every assignment is a stepping stone on your path to mastery.

2. Development of Responsibility 

Homework isn’t just about books and assignments; it’s a grooming ground for something equally important – responsibility.

It’s like a trusty mentor, teaching students to take charge, manage their time, and complete tasks independently.

It’s that early taste of adulthood, where you learn that success often depends on your own commitment and effort.

So, think of homework as your guide on the journey to becoming a responsible, self-reliant individual, armed with skills that will serve you well in all walks of life.

3. Improved Time Management Skills 

Homework is more than just assignments; it’s a boot camp for one of life’s essential skills – time management. Think of it as a mini dress rehearsal for adulthood.

Homework teaches students to allocate their time wisely, ensuring they meet deadlines and complete tasks efficiently. It’s like learning to juggle multiple balls, a skill that will serve them well in their adult lives. So, embrace homework as your friendly time-management coach, preparing you for the real world’s challenges.

4. Enhanced Critical Thinking

Homework is not just about finding answers; it’s your secret laboratory for unleashing the power of critical thinking.

It’s the arena where you get to be the detective, dissect problems, and engineer ingenious solutions. Think of it as mental gymnastics, where your cognitive muscles get a thorough workout.

The more you dive into those homework challenges, the sharper your critical thinking skills become. So, consider homework your daily brain boot camp, molding you into a savvy problem-solver with talents that extend way beyond the classroom.

5. Preparation for the Future

Homework isn’t just about cracking textbooks; it’s your sneak peek into the future. Think of it as your personal time machine, where you’re not just solving equations but honing skills that will propel you to success in higher education and the professional arena.

It’s like laying the stepping stones to your dream career. From mastering time management to sharpening critical thinking, homework is your trusted mentor, preparing you for the exciting journey ahead.

So, when you’re poring over those assignments, remember – you’re not just studying, you’re shaping a future filled with possibilities.

6. Encouragement of Self-Discipline 

Homework isn’t just about filling out worksheets; it’s the canvas on which students paint their self-discipline and self-motivation masterpieces.

It’s like training for life’s grand adventure. With homework, you’re the captain, setting sail on a sea of assignments.

Completing homework isn’t merely about meeting deadlines; it’s about cultivating skills that become your secret weapons in the real world.

So, think of homework as your personal training ground for self-discipline, sculpting you into a resilient and motivated individual who’s ready to conquer life’s challenges.

7. Review of Material

Homework isn’t just an additional task; it’s your golden opportunity to revisit and cement what you’ve learned in class.

Think of it as your personal review session, where you go through the key points and solidify your understanding. Just as an artist refines their masterpiece or a musician practices their chords, homework is your tool for perfection.

The more you review and consolidate, the stronger your grasp on the subject matter becomes. So, embrace homework as your trusted ally in mastering the art of revision, making you a confident and knowledgeable learner.

8. Practice Makes Perfect

Homework isn’t a chore; it’s your backstage pass to perfection. It’s like the endless rehearsals of a musician or the tireless drills of an athlete.

Homework is your playground for practice, where you can fine-tune your skills, ensuring you become a true master in various subjects. Just as a chef perfects a recipe through repetition, your homework is the recipe for excellence.

So, when you’re diving into those assignments, think of them as your chance to practice, practice, and practice some more, turning you into a subject maestro.

9. Teacher-Student Interaction

Homework isn’t just about cracking the books; it’s your backstage pass to building strong connections with your teachers.

It’s like sending an open invitation to ask questions and seek guidance. Homework transforms the student-teacher relationship from a formal handshake into a hearty conversation.

When you embrace homework, you’re not just solving problems; you’re forging connections that can last a lifetime.

So, think of homework as your golden opportunity for dialogue, where you can foster positive relationships with your teachers and make your educational journey all the more engaging and rewarding.

10. Parental Involvement

Homework isn’t just a student’s duty; it’s a chance for families to bond over learning. It’s like the thread that weaves the classroom and home together, allowing parents to actively participate in their child’s education.

Homework transforms the learning experience into a shared adventure where everyone can join in the fun. When parents dive into homework with their kids, it’s not just about helping with math problems.

It’s about creating moments of connection, offering support, and sharing in the educational journey. So, think of homework as the gateway to family engagement in education, making learning a joyful family affair.

11. Real-Life Application

Homework isn’t just about hitting the books; it’s your backstage pass to making knowledge practical. It’s like a secret bridge that connects the world of theory with the realm of real-life application.

Homework transforms you from a passive learner into an active doer. It’s where you take those classroom ideas and put them into action, just like a scientist testing a hypothesis or an engineer building a bridge.

So, consider homework your personal laboratory for bringing theories to life, where you turn bookish knowledge into real-world magic, making your education a thrilling adventure.

12. Different Learning Styles 

Homework isn’t a one-size-fits-all deal; it’s more like a treasure map that caters to diverse learning styles. Imagine it as a chameleon, changing its colors to suit both visual and kinesthetic learners.

Homework knows that we’re all unique, with our own special ways of learning. For those who thrive on visuals, it serves up graphs and illustrations, while the hands-on learners get to dive into practical tasks.

It’s a bit like having a tailor-made suit for education. So, consider homework your personal guide, offering a learning experience that’s as unique as you are, making education a captivating and natural journey.

13. Time for Creativity 

Homework isn’t a creativity crusher; it’s your chance to let your imagination soar. Think of it as a blank canvas waiting for your ideas to paint it with vibrant colors.

Homework isn’t about rules and conformity; it’s about independent thinking and the freedom to express yourself. Whether you’re crafting an essay, brainstorming a unique solution, or designing a project, homework is your invitation to let your creativity shine.

So, consider homework your personal creative playground, where you can set your ideas free, turning learning into an exciting and imaginative adventure.

14. Enhancement of Research Skills

Homework isn’t just about checking off tasks; it’s your secret lair for honing research skills, those superpowers that will supercharge your success in both academics and the real world.

Think of it as your personal training ground where you become a detective of knowledge, learning to explore, dig deep, and unearth answers.

Whether you’re delving into the depths of the library, surfing the web, or conducting surveys, research-based homework transforms you into a skilled investigator.

So, consider homework your gateway to the world of research, where you unlock skills that will not only power your academic journey but also your lifelong adventures.

15. Test Preparation

Homework isn’t just a mundane task; it’s your secret weapon for conquering exams. Think of it as your personal exam prep coach, crafting a roadmap for success.

Homework lets you revisit, revise, and sharpen your skills, so when test day arrives, you’re ready to shine. It’s not just about finishing assignments; it’s about building your confidence for those crucial exams.

So, consider homework your trusty sidekick on the path to acing tests, making your educational journey an exciting adventure.

16. Increased Engagement

Homework isn’t a homework. It’s more like an after-class adventure that keeps the excitement of learning alive. Think of it as your personal quest, where you get to explore the subjects that genuinely pique your interest.

Homework isn’t about killing time; it’s your ticket to stay engaged with your learning journey, even when the school day ends.

So, when you’re tackling your assignments, remember you’re not just checking off tasks; you’re stoking the flames of curiosity, making education an exhilarating and never-ending journey.

17. Achievement of Learning Objectives 

Homework isn’t just a jumble of tasks; it’s your trusted guide leading you to specific educational victories. Picture it as your personal GPS, keeping you on track to reach those learning milestones.

Homework is where you make the connections, reinforce classroom knowledge, and make your education rock-solid. It’s not just about answering questions; it’s about ensuring you hit those educational bullseyes.

So, when you’re diving into your assignments, remember you’re not just ticking off tasks; you’re on a journey to academic success, turning each homework into a stepping stone toward your goals.

18. Inclusivity 

Homework isn’t a one-size-fits-all deal; it’s your versatile tool to celebrate the uniqueness of every student. Imagine it as a buffet, serving up options for both fast learners and those who want some extra practice.

Homework understands that every student is as unique as a fingerprint, each with their own pace and learning style.

For the quick learners, it offers challenges and exciting extensions, while those who prefer more practice can dive into additional exercises.

It’s like a school that dances to your rhythm, ensuring every student has a path to success. So, think of homework as your personal learning adventure, offering choices that fit your taste, making education an exciting and inclusive journey.

19. Fosters Independence

Homework isn’t about spoon-feeding answers; it’s your nurturing ground for independent thinking and decision-making.

Think of it as a playground where you get to flex your decision muscles and spread your intellectual wings. Homework is your training camp for self-reliance, where you take charge of your learning adventure.

20. Overall Academic Improvement

Homework isn’t just a stack of assignments; it’s the secret ingredient for overall academic improvement. Think of it as the magic wand that, when waved effectively, leads to better grades and educational triumphs.

Homework isn’t a mere task list; it’s your strategic ally in the journey of learning. When used wisely, it’s your key to success, a bridge to better understanding and superior educational outcomes.

So, when you’re tackling your homework, remember you’re not just ticking off tasks; you’re paving the way for academic excellence, turning each assignment into a step towards achieving your educational goals.

What are 5 benefits of homework?

Homework is more than just a list of tasks; it’s a powerhouse of benefits that can transform a student’s learning journey. Here are the top five advantages:

1. Supercharging Learning

Homework isn’t about mindless repetition; it’s your secret weapon to reinforce what you’ve learned in class. It’s like a memory boost that makes sure you remember the important stuff for the long haul.

2. Mastering Time and Study Skills

Homework teaches you real-world skills that go way beyond the textbook. It’s your personal coach for time management and setting priorities.

Plus, it’s your go-to guide for developing top-notch study habits like staying organized, taking killer notes, and acing those tests.

3. Fueling Grit and Responsibility

Homework is your training ground for building self-discipline and a sense of responsibility. It’s where you learn to motivate yourself and tackle challenges head-on, no matter how tough they seem.

4. Sparking Creativity and Critical Thinking

Homework isn’t a one-way street. It’s your canvas for thinking outside the box and analyzing what you’re learning from all angles. It’s your chance to bring your unique ideas to the table.

5. Strengthening Home-School Bonds

Homework isn’t just about you; it’s a connection point for your parents and teachers. It’s where they get a front-row seat to your education and can lend a hand when you need it.

But, remember, like any tool, homework works best when used wisely. Too much of a good thing can lead to stress, so strike that balance, and make homework your learning ally.

Who invented homework 😡?

The roots of homework can be traced back to a frustrated Italian educator, Roberto Nevilis, who lived in the 17th century.

He was perplexed by his students’ struggles to retain their classroom lessons, and so, he devised a novel solution – homework.

By assigning tasks that required students to practice and reinforce what they’d learned in class, Nevilis hoped to bridge the knowledge gap. His ingenious idea didn’t stop at the classroom door; it spread like wildfire, first across Europe and eventually finding its way to the United States.

While Nevilis is often credited with inventing homework, history leaves some room for debate. Some scholars argue that homework may have had earlier incarnations in ancient Greece and Rome, although concrete evidence is scarce.

What’s more likely is that Nevilis was among the first to formalize the concept of homework as we understand it today.

No matter its true origin, homework has become an integral part of education worldwide. It spans across the spectrum, from the youngest elementary students to those pursuing higher education.

The purpose of homework has also evolved over time. While Nevilis initially introduced homework to help students retain information, today, its role is multifaceted. It serves as a training ground for critical thinking, problem-solving, and nurturing creativity.

Whether you view homework as a boon or a bane, one thing is certain – it has a rich and varied history, and it’s likely to continue shaping the educational landscape for the foreseeable future.

Why is homework good for your brain?

Homework isn’t just about completing assignments; it’s a brain-boosting wizard. Let’s delve into the captivating reasons why homework is a mind-enhancing elixir:

Fortifying Neural Pathways

Imagine your brain as a labyrinth of pathways. When you learn something new, it’s like carving a fresh trail. Homework? It’s your trusty path-paver, helping you practice and reinforce what you’ve learned. This makes recalling information a breeze down the road.

Mastering Executive Function Skills

Executive function skills are like your brain’s personal assistants. They help you plan, organize, and manage your time effectively.

Homework transforms you into the CEO of your tasks, requiring you to set goals, juggle priorities, and work independently.

Cultivating Cognitive Flexibility

Ever wished you could tackle problems from various angles? That’s cognitive flexibility, a superpower for your brain. Homework serves as the playground where you can flex your mental muscles, applying your knowledge to novel challenges.

Boosting Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is your belief in your own success. Homework is your arena for personal victories. Achieving your homework goals and witnessing your growth over time? That’s a confidence booster like no other.

Stress Alleviation

While homework might occasionally seem like a stress-inducing monster, it’s also your coach for the stress-relief Olympics. How?

It equips you with the skills to tackle challenges and manage your time wisely, ultimately reducing stress in the long run.

But, here’s the catch: balance is key. Too much homework can tip the scales. To maximize the magical benefits, you need to find harmony between homework and other essential activities like sleep, exercise, and hanging out with friends.

In a nutshell, homework isn’t just about completing assignments; it’s your secret weapon for unlocking your brain’s potential. It boosts learning and memory, nurtures executive function skills, hones cognitive flexibility, elevates self-efficacy, and even helps you conquer stress.

As we draw the curtain on our exploration of the twenty compelling reasons that make homework a valuable asset, it’s evident that homework is more than just a to-do list. It’s a treasure trove of advantages that students can unearth on their academic journey.

From fortifying those neural pathways to nurturing independence, and from honing research skills to prepping for the challenges that await in the future, homework is a versatile tool. It’s the canvas where creativity flourishes, bridging the gap between theory and practice, and inviting parents into their child’s scholastic odyssey.

Homework doesn’t just aid in academic mastery; it’s a comprehensive roadmap for personal growth and development. It nudges you towards self-discipline, sprinkles in a dash of responsibility, and offers a slice of the sweet taste of accomplishment.

However, as in any art, balance is key. The right amount of homework, harmonized with other life activities, is the secret recipe for success.

So, as you tackle your next homework assignment, remember this: you’re not just completing tasks; you’re shaping a brighter future, one thought at a time.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is homework always beneficial for students.

Homework can be beneficial when thoughtfully assigned, but excessive or irrelevant homework may have negative effects.

How can parents support their child’s homework routine?

Parents can provide a quiet, organized workspace, offer assistance when needed, and encourage good study habits.

How much homework is too much?

The right amount of homework varies by grade level and individual needs. It should challenge without overwhelming students.

What can teachers do to make homework more effective?

Teachers should assign purposeful, relevant homework, provide clear instructions, and offer support when necessary.

How does homework help prepare students for the future?

Homework instills responsibility, time management, and critical thinking skills, all of which are valuable in higher education and the workforce.

• australia (2)
• duolingo (13)
• Education (284)
• General (78)
• How To (18)
• IELTS (127)
• Latest Updates (162)
• Malta Visa (6)
• Permanent residency (1)
• Programming (31)
• Scholarship (1)
• Sponsored (4)
• Study Abroad (187)
• Technology (12)
• work permit (8)

Recent Posts

Change Password

Your password must have 8 characters or more and contain 3 of the following:.

• a lower case character, 
• an upper case character, 
• a special character 

Password Changed Successfully

Your password has been changed

• Sign in / Register

Request Username

Can't sign in? Forgot your username?

Enter your email address below and we will send you your username

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username

Learning to Improve: Using Writing to Increase Critical Thinking Performance in General Education Biology

• Ian J. Quitadamo
• Martha J. Kurtz

*Department of Biological Sciences, Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA 98926-7537; and

Search for more papers by this author

Department of Chemistry, Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA 98926-7539

Increasingly, national stakeholders express concern that U.S. college graduates cannot adequately solve problems and think critically. As a set of cognitive abilities, critical thinking skills provide students with tangible academic, personal, and professional benefits that may ultimately address these concerns. As an instructional method, writing has long been perceived as a way to improve critical thinking. In the current study, the researchers compared critical thinking performance of students who experienced a laboratory writing treatment with those who experienced traditional quiz-based laboratory in a general education biology course. The effects of writing were determined within the context of multiple covariables. Results indicated that the writing group significantly improved critical thinking skills whereas the nonwriting group did not. Specifically, analysis and inference skills increased significantly in the writing group but not the nonwriting group. Writing students also showed greater gains in evaluation skills; however, these were not significant. In addition to writing, prior critical thinking skill and instructor significantly affected critical thinking performance, whereas other covariables such as gender, ethnicity, and age were not significant. With improved critical thinking skill, general education biology students will be better prepared to solve problems as engaged and productive citizens.

INTRODUCTION

A national call to improve critical thinking in science.

In the past several years, an increasing number of national reports indicate a growing concern over the effectiveness of higher education teaching practices and the decreased science (and math) performance of U.S. students relative to other industrialized countries ( Project Kaleidoscope, 2006 ). A variety of national stakeholders, including business and educational leaders, politicians, parents, and public agencies, have called for long-term transformation of the K–20 educational system to produce graduates who are well trained in science, can engage intelligently in global issues that require local action, and in general are better able to solve problems and think critically. Specifically, business leaders are calling for graduates who possess advanced analysis and communication skills, for instructional methods that improve lifelong learning, and ultimately for an educational system that builds a nation of innovative and effective thinkers ( Business-Higher Education Forum and American Council on Education, 2003 ). Education leaders are similarly calling for institutions of higher education to produce graduates who think critically, communicate effectively, and who employ lifelong learning skills to address important scientific and civic issues ( Association of American Colleges and Universities, [AACU] 2005 ).

Many college faculty consider critical thinking to be one of the most important indicators of student learning quality. In its 2005 national report, the AACU indicated that 93% of higher education faculty perceived analytical and critical thinking to be an essential learning outcome (AACU, 2005) whereas 87% of undergraduate students indicated that college experiences contributed to their ability to think analytically and creatively. This same AACU report showed that only 6% of undergraduate seniors demonstrated critical thinking proficiency based on Educational Testing Services standardized assessments from 2003 to 2004. During the same time frame, data from the ACT Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency test showed a similar trend, with undergraduates improving their critical thinking less than 1 SD from freshman to senior year. Thus, it appears a discrepancy exists between faculty expectations of critical thinking and students' ability to perceive and demonstrate critical thinking proficiency using standardized assessments (AACU, 2005).

Teaching that supports the development of critical thinking skills has become a cornerstone of nearly every major educational objective since the Department of Education released its six goals for the nation's schools in 1990. In particular, goal three of the National Goals for Education stated that more students should be able to reason, solve problems, and apply knowledge. Goal six specifically stated that college graduates must be able to think critically ( Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 1991 ). Since 1990, American education has tried—with some success—to make a fundamental shift from traditional teacher-focused instruction to more student-centered constructivist learning that encourages discovery, reflection, and in general is thought to improve student critical thinking skill. National science organizations have supported this trend with recommendations to improve the advanced thinking skills that support scientific literacy ( American Association for Higher Education, 1989 ; National Research Council, 1995 ; National Science Foundation, 1996 ).

More recent reports describe the need for improved biological literacy as well as international competitiveness ( Bybee and Fuchs, 2006 ; Klymkowsky, 2006 ). Despite the collective call for enhanced problem solving and critical thinking, educators, researchers, and policymakers are discovering a lack of evidence in existing literature for methods that measurably improve critical thinking skills ( Tsui, 1998 , 2002 ). As more reports call for improved K–20 student performance, it is essential that research-supported teaching and learning practices be used to better help students develop the cognitive skills that underlie effective science learning ( Malcom et al., 2005 ; Bybee and Fuchs, 2006 ).

Critical Thinking

Although they are not always transparent to many college students, the academic and personal benefits of critical thinking are well established; students who can think critically tend to get better grades, are often better able to use reasoning in daily decisions ( U.S. Department of Education, 1990 ), and are generally more employable ( Carnevale and American Society for Training and Development, 1990 ; Holmes and Clizbe, 1997 ; National Academy of Sciences, 2005 ). By focusing on instructional efforts that develop critical thinking skills, it may be possible to increase student performance while satisfying national stakeholder calls for educational improvement and increased ability to solve problems as engaged and productive citizens.

Although academics and business professionals consider critical thinking skill to be a crucial outcome of higher education, many would have difficulty defining exactly what critical thinking is. Historically, there has been little agreement on how to conceptualize critical thinking. Of the literally dozens of definitions that exist, one of the most organized efforts to define (and measure) critical thinking emerged from research done by Peter Facione and others in the early 1990s. Their consensus work, referred to as the Delphi report, was accomplished by a group of 46 leading theorists, teachers, and critical thinking assessment specialists from a variety of academic and business disciplines ( Facione and American Philosophical Association, 1990 ). Initial results from the Delphi report were later confirmed in a national survey and replication study ( Jones et al., 1995 ). In short, the Delphi panel expert consensus describes critical thinking as a “process of purposeful self-regulatory judgment that drives problem-solving and decision-making” ( Facione and American Philosophical Association, 1990 ). This definition implies that critical thinking is an intentional, self-regulated process that provides a mechanism for solving problems and making decisions based on reasoning and logic, which is particularly useful when dealing with issues of national and global significance.

The Delphi conceptualization of critical thinking encompasses several cognitive skills that include: 1) analysis (the ability to break a concept or idea into component pieces in order to understand its structure and inherent relationships), 2) inference (the skills used to arrive at a conclusion by reconciling what is known with what is unknown), and 3) evaluation (the ability to weigh and consider evidence and make reasoned judgments within a given context). Other critical thinking skills that are similarly relevant to science include interpretation, explanation, and self-regulation ( Facione and American Philosophical Association, 1990 ). The concept of critical thinking includes behavioral tendencies or dispositions as well as cognitive skills ( Ennis, 1985 ); these include the tendency to seek truth, to be open-minded, to be analytical, to be orderly and systematic, and to be inquisitive ( Facione and American Philosophical Association, 1990 ). These behavioral tendencies also align closely with behaviors considered to be important in science. Thus, an increased focus on teaching critical thinking may directly benefit students who are engaged in science.

Prior research on critical thinking indicates that students' behavioral dispositions do not change in the short term ( Giancarlo and Facione, 2001 ), but cognitive skills can be developed over a relatively short period of time (Quitadamo, Brahler, and Crouch, unpublished results). In their longitudinal study of behavioral disposition toward critical thinking, Giancarlo and Facione (2001) discovered that undergraduate critical thinking disposition changed significantly after two years. Specifically, significant changes in student tendency to seek truth and confidence in thinking critically occurred during the junior and senior years. Also, females tended to be more open-minded and have more mature judgment than males ( Giancarlo and Facione, 2001 ). Although additional studies are necessary to confirm results from the Giancarlo study, existing research seems to indicate that changes in undergraduate critical thinking disposition are measured in years, not weeks.

In contrast to behavioral disposition, prior research indicates that critical thinking skills can be measurably changed in weeks. In their study of undergraduate critical thinking skill in university science and math courses, Quitadamo, Brahler, and Crouch (unpublished results) showed that critical thinking skills changed within 15 wk in response to Peer Led Team Learning (a national best practice for small group learning). This preliminary study provided some evidence that undergraduate critical thinking skills could be measurably improved within an academic semester, but provided no information about whether critical thinking skills could be changed during a shorter academic quarter. It was also unclear whether the development of critical thinking skills was a function of chronological time or whether it was related to instructional time.

Numerous studies provide anecdotal evidence for pedagogies that improve critical thinking, but much of existing research relies on student self-report, which limits the scope of interpretation. From the literature it is clear that, although critical thinking skills are some of the most valued outcomes of a quality education, additional research investigating the effects of instructional factors on critical thinking performance is necessary ( Tsui, 1998 , 2002 ).

Writing and Critical Thinking

Writing has been widely used as a tool for communicating ideas, but less is known about how writing can improve the thinking process itself ( Rivard, 1994 ; Klein, 2004 ). Writing is thought to be a vehicle for improving student learning ( Champagne and Kouba, 1999 ; Kelly and Chen, 1999 ; Keys, 1999 ; Hand and Prain, 2002 ), but too often is used as a means to regurgitate content knowledge and derive prescribed outcomes ( Keys, 1999 ; Keys et al., 1999 ). Historically, writing is thought to contribute to the development of critical thinking skills ( Kurfiss, and Association for the Study of Higher Education, 1988 ). Applebee (1984) suggested that writing improves thinking because it requires an individual to make his or her ideas explicit and to evaluate and choose among tools necessary for effective discourse. Resnick (1987) stressed that writing should provide an opportunity to think through arguments and that, if used in such a way, could serve as a “cultivator and an enabler of higher order thinking.” Marzano (1991) suggested that writing used as a means to restructure knowledge improves higher-order thinking. In this context, writing may provide opportunity for students to think through arguments and use higher-order thinking skills to respond to complex problems ( Marzano, 1991 ).

Writing has also been used as a strategy to improve conceptual learning. Initial work focused on how the recursive and reflective nature of the writing process contributes to student learning ( Applebee, 1984 ; Langer and Applebee, 1985 , 1987 ; Ackerman, 1993 ). However, conclusions from early writing to learn studies were limited by confounding research designs and mismatches between writing activities and measures of student learning ( Ackerman, 1993 ). Subsequent work has focused on how writing within disciplines helps students to learn content and how to think. Specifically, writing within disciplines is thought to require deeper analytical thinking ( Langer and Applebee, 1987 ), which is closely aligned with critical thinking.

The influence of writing on critical thinking is less defined in science. Researchers have repeatedly called for more empirical investigations of writing in science; however, few provide such evidence ( Rivard, 1994 ; Tsui, 1998 ; Daempfle, 2002 ; Klein, 2004 ). In his extensive review of writing research, Rivard (1994) indicated that gaps in writing research limit its inferential scope, particularly within the sciences. Specifically, Rivard and others indicate that, despite the volume of writing students are asked to produce during their education, they are not learning to use writing to improve their awareness of thinking processes ( Resnick, 1987 ; Howard, 1990 ). Existing studies are limited because writing has been used either in isolation or outside authentic classroom contexts. Factors like gender, ethnicity, and academic ability that are not directly associated with writing but may nonetheless influence its effectiveness have also not been sufficiently accounted for in previous work ( Rivard, 1994 ).

A more recent review by Daempfle (2002) similarly indicates the need for additional research to clarify relationships between writing and critical thinking in science. In his review, Daempfle identified nine empirical studies that generally support the hypothesis that students who experience writing (and other nontraditional teaching methods) have higher reasoning skills than students who experience traditional science instruction. Of the relatively few noninstructional variables identified in those studies, gender and major did not affect critical thinking performance; however, the amount of time spent on and the explicitness of instruction to teach reasoning skills did affect overall critical thinking performance. Furthermore, the use of writing and other nontraditional teaching methods did not appear to negatively affect content knowledge acquisition ( Daempfle, 2002 ). Daempfle justified his conclusions by systematically describing the methodological inconsistencies for each study. Specifically, incomplete sample descriptions, the use of instruments with insufficient validity and reliability, the absence of suitable comparison groups, and the lack of statistical covariate analyses limit the scope and generalizability of existing studies of writing and critical thinking ( Daempfle, 2002 ).

Writing in the Biological Sciences

The conceptual nature and reliance on the scientific method as a means of understanding make the field of biology a natural place to teach critical thinking through writing. Some work has been done in this area, with literature describing various approaches to writing in the biological sciences that range from linked biology and English courses, writing across the biology curriculum, and directed use of writing to improve reasoning in biology courses ( Ebert-May et al., 1997 ; Holyoak, 1998 ; Taylor and Sobota, 1998 ; Steglich, 2000 ; Lawson, 2001 ; Kokkala and Gessell, 2003 ; Tessier, 2006 ). In their work on integrated biology and English, Taylor and Sobota (1998) discussed several problem areas that affected both biology and English students, including anxiety and frustration associated with writing, difficulty expressing thoughts clearly and succinctly, and a tendency to have strong negative responses to writing critique. Although the authors delineate the usefulness of several composition strategies for writing in biology ( Taylor and Sobota, 1998 ), it was unclear whether student data were used to support their recommendations. Kokkala and Gessell (2003) used English students to evaluate articles written by biology students. Biology students first reflected on initial editorial comments made by English students, and then resubmitted their work for an improved grade. In turn, English students had to justify their editorial comments with written work of their own. Qualitative results generated from a list of reflective questions at the end of the writing experience seemed to indicate that both groups of students improved editorial skills and writing logic. However, no formal measures of student editorial skill were collected before biology-English student collaboration, so no definitive conclusions on the usefulness of this strategy could be made.

Taking a slightly different tack, Steglich (2000) informally assessed student attitudes in nonmajors biology courses, and noted that writing produced positive changes in student attitudes toward biology. However, the author acknowledged that this work was not a research study. Finally, Tessier (2006) showed that students enrolled in a nonmajors ecology course significantly improved writing technical skills and committed fewer errors of fact regarding environmental issues in response to a writing treatment. Attitudes toward environmental issues also improved ( Tessier, 2006 ). Although this study surveyed students at the beginning and the end of the academic term and also tracked student progress during the quarter, instrument validity and reliability were not provided. The generalizability of results was further limited because of an overreliance on student self-reports and small sample size.

Each of the studies described above peripherally supports a relationship between writing and critical thinking. Although not explicitly an investigation of critical thinking, results from a relatively recent study support a stronger connection between writing and reasoning ability ( Daempfle, 2002 ). Ebert-May et al. (1997) used a modified learning cycle instructional method and small group collaboration to increase reasoning ability in general education biology students. A quasi-experimental pretest/posttest control group design was used on a comparatively large sample of students, and considerable thought was given to controlling extraneous variables across the treatment and comparison groups. A multifaceted assessment strategy based on writing, standardized tests, and student interviews was used to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate student content knowledge and thinking skill. Results indicated that students in the treatment group significantly outperformed control group students on reasoning and process skills as indicated by the National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT) content exam. Coincidentally, student content knowledge did not differ significantly between the treatment and control sections, indicating that development of thinking skill did not occur at the expense of content knowledge ( Ebert-May et al., 1997 ). Interview data indicated that students experiencing the writing and collaboration-based instruction changed how they perceived the construction of biological knowledge and how they applied their reasoning skills. Although the Ebert-May study is one of the more complete investigations of writing and critical thinking to date, several questions remain. Supporting validity and reliability data for the NABT test was not included in the study, making interpretation of results somewhat less certain. In addition, the NABT exam is designed to assess high school biology performance, not college performance ( Daempfle, 2002 ). Perhaps more importantly, the NABT exam does not explicitly measure critical thinking skills.

Collectively, it appears that additional research is necessary to establish a more defined relationship between writing and critical thinking in science ( Rivard, 1994 ; Tsui, 1998 , 2002 ; Daempfle, 2002 ). The current study addresses some of the gaps in previous work by evaluating the effects of writing on critical thinking performance using relatively large numbers of students, suitable comparison groups, valid and reliable instruments, a sizable cadre of covariables, and statistical analyses of covariance. This study uses an experimental design similar to that of the Ebert-May et al. (1997) study but incorporates valid and reliable test measures of critical thinking that can be used both within and across different science disciplines.

Purpose of the Study

Currently there is much national discussion about increasing the numbers of students majoring in various science fields ( National Research Council, 2003 ; National Academy of Sciences, 2005 ). Although this is a necessary and worthwhile goal, attention should also be focused on improving student performance in general education science because these students will far outnumber science majors for the foreseeable future. If college instructors want general education students to think critically about science, they will need to use teaching methods that improve student critical thinking performance. In many traditional general education biology courses, students are not expected to work collaboratively, to think about concepts as much as memorize facts, or to develop and support a written thesis or argument. This presents a large problem when one considers the societal role that general education students will play as voters, community members, and global citizens. By improving their critical thinking skills in science, general education students will be better able to deal with the broad scientific, economic, social, and political issues they will face in the future.

Does writing in laboratory affect critical thinking performance in general education biology?

Does the development of analysis, inference, and evaluation skills differ between students who experience writing versus those who experience traditional laboratory instruction?

What measurable effect do factors like gender, ethnicity, and prior thinking skill have on changes in critical thinking in general education biology?

If critical thinking skills change during an academic quarter, when does that take place?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study context.

The study took place at a state-funded regional comprehensive university in the Pacific Northwest. All participants were nonmajor undergraduates who were taking biology to satisfy their general education science requirement. Ten total sections of general education biology offered over three academic quarters (one academic year) were included in the study. Four of the 10 sections implemented a writing component during weekly laboratory meetings (N = 158); six traditional quiz-based laboratory sections served as a nonwriting control group (N = 152). Only scores from students who had completed both the initial (pretest) and end-of-quarter (posttest) critical thinking assessments were included in the data analysis. A breakdown of participant demographics for the writing and nonwriting groups is provided in Table 1 .

Demographics profile for the study sample. n values in parentheses.

a Other includes the ″choose not to answer″ response.

Each course section included a lecture component offered four times per week for 50 min and a laboratory component that met once a week for 2 h. Course lecture sections were limited to a maximum enrollment of 48 students, with two concurrent lab sections of 24 students. Two different instructors taught five writing sections and five other instructors taught 11 traditional sections over three consecutive quarters. Each course instructor materially participated in teaching laboratory with the help of one graduate assistant per lab section (two graduate students per course section). None of the instructors from treatment sections had implemented writing in the laboratory before the start of this study. Writing instructors were chosen on the basis of personal dissatisfaction with traditional laboratory teaching methods and willingness to try something new.

Strong efforts were made to establish equivalency between writing and nonwriting course sections a priori. Course elements that were highly similar included common lecture rooms, the use of similar (in most cases identical) textbooks, and a lab facility coordinated by a single faculty member. More specifically, three similarly appointed lecture rooms outfitted with contemporary instructional technology including dry erase boards, media cabinets, a networked computer, and digital projection were used to teach the nonmajors biology courses. The same nonmajors biology textbook was used across the writing and most of the nonwriting sections. All laboratory sections used a common lab facility and were taught on the same day of the week. Although the order in which specific labs were taught differed among sections, a common laboratory manual containing prescriptive exercises covering the main themes of biology (scientific method, cellular biology and genetics, natural selection and evolution, kingdoms of life, and a mammalian dissection) was used across all writing and nonwriting lab sections.

Primary course differences included a writing component in the laboratory, and how much time was devoted to laboratory activities. Those sections that experienced the writing treatment completed the prescriptive lab exercises in the first hour and engaged in writing during the second hour of the lab. Nonwriting sections allocated 2 h for the prescriptive lab exercises and included a traditional laboratory quiz rather than a writing assignment. The degree to which the writing and nonwriting sections included small group collaboration in laboratory varied and all course sections differed with regards to individual instructor teaching style. Although all course sections used traditional lecture exams during the quarter to assess content knowledge, the degree to which rote memorization-based exam questions were used to evaluate student learning varied.

Description of the Writing Treatment

On the first day of lecture, students in the writing treatment group were told that their laboratory performance would be evaluated using collaborative essays instead of traditional quizzes. A brief overview of the writing assignments was included in associated course syllabi. During the first laboratory session of the quarter, students were grouped into teams of three or four individuals, and the criteria for completing weekly writing assignments were further explained.

The decision to use collaborative groups to support writing in the laboratory was partly based on existing literature ( Collier, 1980 ; Bruffee, 1984 ; Tobin et al., 1994 ; Jones and Carter, 1998 ; Springer et al., 1999 ) and prior research by Quitadamo, Brahler, and Crouch (unpublished results), who showed that Peer Led Team Learning (one form of collaborative learning) helped to measurably improve undergraduate critical thinking skills. Small group learning was also used in the nonwriting treatment groups to a greater or lesser extent depending on individual instructor preference.

Baseline critical thinking performance was established in the academic quarters preceding the writing experiment to more specifically attribute changes in critical thinking to the writing treatment. Concurrent nonwriting course sections were also used as comparison groups. The historical baseline provided a way to determine what student performance had been before experiencing the writing treatment, whereas the concurrent nonwriting groups allowed for a direct comparison of critical thinking performance during the writing treatment. Pretest scores indicating prior critical thinking skill were also used to further establish comparability between the writing and nonwriting groups.

Laboratory activities were coordinated for all sections by a single faculty member who taught in the nonwriting group. All faculty and graduate assistants met regularly to discuss course progress, laboratory procedure, and coordinate resources. Nonwriting faculty drafted quizzes that addressed laboratory content knowledge. Writing faculty collaboratively crafted a consensus essay, or thought question, designed to elicit student critical thinking and ability to apply content knowledge. Each thought question was designed so that students had to apply lecture concepts and build on their conceptual understanding by integrating actual laboratory experiences (see Supplemental Appendix 1 , available online) for thought question examples). Weekly thought questions became progressively more difficult as the term progressed. Initial planning meetings took place just before the beginning of the academic quarter and included graduate assistant training to help them learn to consistently evaluate student writing using a modified thesis-based essay rubric (see Supplemental Appendix 2 ; Beers et al., 1994 ). A range of sample essays from poor to high quality was used to calibrate graduate assistant scoring and ensure consistency between assistants from different laboratory sections within the writing group. All graduate assistants and course instructors applied the thesis-based rubric to sample essays and worked toward consensus. Initial training ended when all graduate assistants scored within 0.5 points of each other on at least two sample essays.

Students were given weekly thought questions before beginning laboratory to help them frame their efforts during laboratory exercises. Students completed the prescriptive lab activities during the first hour, and then each student group relocated to an assigned computer lab in the same building and worked around a common computer terminal to draft a collective response to the weekly thought question. Students were allowed to use any suitable information or materials (laboratory observations, laboratory manuals, lecture notes, textbooks, the Internet, etc.) to help them address their thought question. Internal group discussions allowed students to argue individual viewpoints as they worked toward group agreement on each thought question. Essay responses to thought questions were answered using a standard five-paragraph format. Each essay included an introduction with a group-generated thesis statement, two to three body paragraphs that provided sufficient detail to support the thesis statement, and a summary paragraph that concluded the essay. Students were not allowed to work on essays outside of the laboratory environment.

Initial essay drafts were composed in Microsoft Word and submitted to the graduate assistant by the end of the laboratory period using the campus e-mail system. Graduate assistants evaluated each group's essay (typically six per lab section) and assigned an initial grade based on the thesis-based essay rubric. Graduate assistants made comments and suggestions electronically using Microsoft Word revising and track changes tools. Evaluated essays were e-mailed back to each student group, which addressed comments and suggestions during the subsequent week's laboratory writing time. Each student group submitted a final draft that was re-evaluated and assigned a final grade. During the second week, students both revised their essay from the previous week and then generated an initial draft for the current week's thought question, all within the lab writing hour. This was done to help students become more proficient writers within a short period of time. Overall, students in the writing group completed eight essays that, along with lab book scores, constituted 25% of their overall course grade. An identical percentage was used to calculate traditional quiz and lab book scores in all nonwriting course sections.

At the end of the quarter, each writing group member completed a peer evaluation for all group members, including themselves (see Supplemental Appendix 3 ). This was done to help students reflect on and evaluate their own performance, maximize individual accountability within the group, and make sure students received credit proportional to their contributions. The average peer evaluation score for each student was included as 5% of the final course grade.

Collectively, this approach to writing and evaluation was used to 1) help students reflect on and discuss deficiencies in their collective and written work, 2) provide an opportunity for students to explicitly address deficiencies in thesis development and general writing skill, 3) provide a suitable reward for student efforts to revise their work relative to established performance benchmarks, 4) improve individual accountability within each group, and 5) help students develop more efficient and effective writing skills that collectively might lead to improved critical thinking skill.

Assessment of Critical Thinking

Using critical thinking to indicate student learning performance is particularly useful because it can be measured within and across disciplines. Various instruments are available to assess critical thinking ( Watson and Glaser, 1980 ; Ennis and Weir, 1985 ; Facione, 1990b ; Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique, 1996 ); however, only the CCTST measures cognitive and meta-cognitive skills associated with critical thinking, is based on a consensus definition of critical thinking, and has been evaluated for validity and reliability for measuring critical thinking at the college level ( Facione, 1990a ; Facione et al., 1992 , 2004 ). The CCTST measures cognitive skills of analysis, inference, evaluation, induction, and deduction, with results expressed as raw scores or national percentile equivalents based on a national norming sample of students from 4-yr colleges and universities. Construct validity for the CCTST is high as indicated by greater than 95% consensus of the Delphi panel experts on the component skills of critical thinking. Test reliability (calculated using the KR–20 internal consistency method) is 0.78–0.84 for the form used in this study, a value considered to be within the recommended range for tests that measure a wide range of critical thinking skills ( Facione, 1991 ). The CCTST norming sample for 4-yr colleges and universities is based on a stratified sample of 2000 students from various disciplines, with approximately 30% of the norming sample comprised of science and math students. Approximately 20,000 college students complete the CCTST each year ( Insight Assessment and Blohm, 2005 ).

The CCTST contains 34 questions and is a 45-min timed assessment of critical thinking. An online version of the CCTST was administered in this study, which allowed the researchers to collect student demographics data including gender, ethnicity, age, and several others at the same time critical thinking skill was measured. Total critical thinking skill as well as analysis, inference, and evaluation component critical thinking skills ( Facione, 1990c ) were determined for each CCTST administration and compared across the writing and nonwriting groups.

Research Design

A quasi-experimental pretest/posttest control group design was used for this study to determine whether critical thinking performance in the writing group differed significantly from the nonwriting group. This design was chosen in order to compare critical thinking performance between intact groups, and because it was not feasible to randomly assign students from one course section to another within the sample. Frequency distributions of pretest/posttest changes in total critical thinking skill and analysis, inference, and evaluation component critical thinking skills were constructed to provide some indication of sample randomness and to inform assumptions for subsequent statistical analyses of covariance (see Figure 1 , A–D).

The pretest/posttest control group design was also used in order to minimize internal validity threats that could potentially compete with the effects of the writing treatment on student critical thinking performance. This design is widely used in educational research, and generally controls for most threats to internal validity ( Campbell and Stanley, 1963 ). Internal threats that remain a concern include history, maturation, pretest sensitization, selection, and statistical regression toward the mean. In the current study, history and maturation threats were minimized to the extent that the CCTST pretest and posttest were administered only 9 wk apart, and class standing and age covariables that indicate maturation were included in the statistical analysis. Pretest sensitization and selection are larger concerns for this design. Pretest sensitization was minimized in several ways: 1) prior critical thinking skill indicated by the CCTST pretest was used as a covariable in statistical analyses, 2) pretest/posttest to posttest only comparison studies conducted by Insight Assessment indicate CCTST pretest sensitization is minimized ( Facione, 1990a ), and 3) neither the students, instructors, nor the test administrators have access to the correct answers on the CCTST, so repeat performance on the posttest is less likely. Selection threats were also reduced by using CCTST pretest scores in the statistical analyses, thereby making it more difficult to detect statistically significant differences in critical thinking performance between the writing and nonwriting groups. Statistical regression toward the mean, which was observed to some extent in this study, was minimized because this study used a valid and reliable instrument to assess critical thinking ( Facione, 1990a ). Regression threats were also minimized to the extent that students with higher initial scores regressed much less than students with lower initial scores.

The generalizability of study results is limited because all data were collected at a single university. Specific threats to external validity include selection-treatment interaction and treatment diffusion. These threats were minimized because writing was mandatory for all treatment group participants, thereby minimizing volunteer effects. Because the writing also took considerable student effort, it is less likely that treatment diffusion occurred. In summary, the pretest/posttest control group design was used to minimize internal and external validity threats and maximize the ability to determine the effects of writing on student critical thinking performance.

Study Variables and Data Analysis

Effect of writing on critical thinking performance..

General education biology students were divided into writing and nonwriting groups (independent variable). Changes in CCTST pretest/posttest scores (dependent variable) were determined to discover whether writing influenced student critical thinking performance. Two CCTST outcome measures were used to statistically test for writing effect: 1) raw scores for total critical thinking skill, and 2) raw scores for analysis, inference, and evaluation component skills. Results were reported using raw scores and corresponding national percentile rank so that critical thinking performance outcomes would be more meaningful and intuitive. Conversion of CCTST raw scores to national percentile ranking was done using SPSS (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL) statistical software and a linear estimation conversion script based on an equivalency scale from Insight Assessment (Millbrae, CA).

Several covariables were included in the analysis to increase statistical accuracy and precision, and to more specifically isolate the effects of writing on critical thinking performance. CCTST pretest scores were used to indicate initial critical thinking skill. Gender and ethnicity helped to account for male/female or race-specific changes in critical thinking performance and were also used to identify potential sources of performance bias. Academic term and time of day were used to account for critical thinking differences due to the time of year each course was offered and the time of day each student took the course, respectively. Class standing and age were used to indicate maturation related to time in college and chronological age, respectively. Finally, the instructor covariable was used to account for performance differences due to individual teaching styles.

Statistical Analysis of Effect of Writing.

Several statistical analyses were conducted to determine the effects of writing on critical thinking performance in general education biology. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) test provided insight regarding differences in overall critical thinking performance between the writing and nonwriting groups. Change in CCTST total raw scores and national percentile ranking was used as composite measures of critical thinking ( Facione, 1990c ) in this initial analysis. Second, changes in particular component critical thinking skills (analysis, inference, and evaluation) were evaluated using a multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) test because of the three dependent variables. The ANCOVA and MANCOVA tests also provided some insight into the effect the covariables had on critical thinking performance in general education biology. Collectively, these statistical tests allowed for a more accurate and precise analysis because variance associated with the covariables could be more specifically isolated from the writing treatment. Mean, SE, and effect size were also compared between the writing and nonwriting groups. Effect size, represented in standard units, was used to compare the magnitude of writing effect in the study.

Analysis of Thought Question Performance.

Performance on weekly thought questions was analyzed to discover specifically when and how much student critical thinking skills changed during the academic term. This analysis also provided context for CCTST critical thinking performance measures. Specifically, average scores from a representative sample of writing course sections (approximately 100 students) were used to compare initial essay drafts across the weeks of the term to discover when students began to show changes in their first attempt at each essay. Weekly performance on final revised essays was also compared to determine how student final submissions changed over time. Finally, the weekly difference between each initial essay and each final essay was compared to determine how much the revision process changed during the term. These calculations collectively helped to provide a profile of critical thinking performance over time.

Participant Demographics

Student demographics provided in Table 1 indicated an overall distribution of approximately 49% freshmen, 31% sophomores, 11% juniors, and 9% seniors. Approximately 74% of the writing group students were freshmen and sophomores, whereas 82% of the nonwriting group was underclassmen. Overall, 61% of the sample was female and 39% male, with near identical gender distribution across the writing and nonwriting groups. The predominant ethnicity in the sample was Caucasian (>83%), with Asian American (5%), Latino/Hispanic (3%), African American (2%), and Native American (1%) students comprising the remainder of the sample. About 6% of the sample classified themselves as having some other ethnicity or chose not to identify their ethnic heritage.

Statistical Assumptions

Analysis of covariance and multivariate analysis of covariance tests were used to compare critical thinking performance between the writing and nonwriting groups. The evaluated assumptions for the ANCOVA and MANCOVA tests were homogeneity of slopes, homogeneity of covariances, and normality. An analysis evaluating the homogeneity of slopes assumption indicated that the relationship between the covariables and the critical thinking performance dependent variable did not differ significantly by the writing/nonwriting independent variable for the ANCOVA test, F(2, 307) = 1.642, p = 0.195, power = 0.346, partial η 2 = 0.011, or the MANCOVA test, F(6, 610) = 1.685, p = 0.122, power = 0.645, partial η 2 = 0.016. These results confirmed that both analyses of covariance met the homogeneity of slopes assumption. The homogeneity of covariance assumption was tested using Levene's and Box's tests. Levene's test results for the ANCOVA indicated that error variances were not equal across writing and nonwriting groups, F(1,308) = 7.139, p = 0.008. Similarly, Box's test results indicated that covariance was not equal for the writing and nonwriting groups, F(6, 684,530) = 4.628, p = 0.000. These results indicated that the ANCOVA/MANCOVA tests did not meet the homogeneity of covariance assumption. To more fully evaluate this assumption, distributions of total and component critical thinking skill were constructed (see Figure 1 , A–D). Furthermore, the writing and nonwriting groups were highly similar in size and no post hoc tests were conducted. On the basis of these data, it was determined that the ANCOVA and MANCOVA tests were the best statistical measures to answer the research questions. Finally, the normality assumption was evaluated using the previously constructed frequency distributions for total change in critical thinking ( Figure 1 A) as well as change in analysis ( Figure 1 B), inference ( Figure 1 C), and evaluation ( Figure 1 D) critical thinking skills. Frequency distributions of total and component critical thinking dependent variables indicated that each approximated a standard normal curve.

Figure 1. (A–D) Frequency distribution of change in critical thinking skills. Distribution of change in critical thinking skill for the experimental sample. Changes are indicated using raw scores from CCTST pre- and posttests for total critical thinking skill (A) as well as analysis (B), inference (C), and evaluation (D) component critical thinking skills.

Effect of Writing on Total Critical Thinking Performance

The ANCOVA test of total critical thinking performance showed that writing and nonwriting groups differed significantly, F(1, 300) = 19.357, p < 0.0001, power = 0.992, partial η 2 = 0.061 (see Table 2 ). The strength of the relationship between the writing/nonwriting groups and critical thinking performance was modest but significant, accounting for more than 6% of the variance in critical thinking performance.

Analysis of covariance for the writing and nonwriting groups. Tested covariables included gender, ethnicity, class standing, age, prior critical thinking skill (CCTST pre-test), academic term, time of day, and instructor.

a Significance tested at 0.05 level.

Descriptive statistics of total critical thinking performance in the writing and nonwriting groups were also calculated (see Table 3 ). The writing group showed an average CCTST raw score change of 1.18 compared with the nonwriting group, which showed an average raw score change of −0.51. These critical thinking raw scores equated to gains in national percentile rank of 7.47 (45th to 53rd percentile) for the writing group and −2.09 (42nd to 40th percentile) for the nonwriting group. Critical thinking improvement in the writing group was approximately nine times greater than the nonwriting group (see Figure 2 ).

Comparison of writing and nonwriting group performance based on CCTST raw scores. CCTST raw score range was 0–34; n values in parentheses.

Figure 2. Effect of writing on total critical thinking national percentile rank. Comparison of total critical thinking national percentile gains between writing and nonwriting groups. Percentile ranking was computed using CCTST raw scores, an equivalency scale from Insight Assessment, and a linear conversion script in SPSS.

The ANCOVA test of total critical thinking skill indicated that gender, ethnicity, age, class standing, and academic term did not significantly affect critical thinking performance (see Table 2 ). Covariables that significantly affected total critical thinking performance included 1) CCTST pretest score, F(1, 300) = 19.713, p < 0.0001, power = 0.993, partial η 2 = 0.062, 2) instructor, F(1, 300) = 7.745, p < 0.006, power = 0.792, partial η 2 = 0.025, and 3) time of day, F(1300) = 6.291, p < 0.013, power = 0.705, partial η 2 = 0.021. The effect of prior critical thinking skill (CCTST pretest) was moderately strong, accounting for more than 6% of the variance in total critical thinking performance. The effect of instructor and time of day were smaller, accounting for 2.5 and 2%, respectively, of total critical thinking performance variance. Critical thinking improvement associated with CCTST pretest score was approximately 2.5 times greater than for instructor and nearly three times greater than for time of day.

Effect of Writing on Component Critical Thinking Performance

The MANCOVA test indicated that analysis, inference, and evaluation critical thinking skills differed significantly between the writing and nonwriting groups, Wilks λ = 0.919, F(3, 296) = 8.746, p < 0.0001, power = 0.995, partial η 2 = 0.081 (see Table 4 ). The strength of the relationship between writing and component critical thinking performance was modest but significant, accounting for more than 8% of the variance in critical thinking performance.

Multivariate analysis of covariance for the writing and nonwriting groups. Tested covariables included gender, ethnicity, class standing, age, prior critical thinking skill (CCTST pretest), academic term, time of day, and instructor.

Specifically, significant gains in analysis and inference skills were observed in the writing group but not the nonwriting group. No statistically significant gains in evaluation skill were observed in either group (see Table 5 ). National percentile rank equivalents for CCTST component raw scores indicated the writing group gained 10.51 percentile in analysis skill (42nd to 52nd percentile), 6.05 percentile in inference skill (45th to 52nd percentile), and 5.16 percentile in evaluation skill (46th to 52nd percentile). The nonwriting group showed a national percentile rank change of −4.43 percentile in analysis skill (47th to 42nd percentile), −2.23 percentile in inference skill (42nd to 40th percentile), and 1.37 percentile in evaluation (44th to 45th percentile; see Figure 3 ). Critical thinking performance for the writing group was 15 times greater for analysis and 8 times greater for inference skills than for the nonwriting group. Although neither the writing nor the nonwriting group showed significant gains in evaluation skill, the writing group showed more than 3 times greater improvement than did the nonwriting group.

Comparison of writing and nonwriting group performance based on critical thinking component skill raw scores (CCTST subscales). Score range was 0–7 (analysis), 0–16 (inference), and 0–11 (evaluation).

Figure 3. Effect of writing on component critical thinking national percentile rank. Comparison of component critical thinking national percentile gains between writing and nonwriting groups. Percentile ranking was computed using CCTST raw scores, an equivalency scale from Insight Assessment, and a linear conversion script in SPSS.

The MANCOVA test of analysis, inference, and evaluation skills indicated that gender, ethnicity, age, class standing, academic term, and time of day did not significantly affect critical thinking performance. Critical thinking performance was affected by prior analysis, inference, and evaluation skill (CCTST component pretest scores) and instructor (see Table 4 ). Specifically, component pretest scores had a large effect on critical thinking, accounting for 38% (analysis), 32% (inference), and 39% (evaluation) of critical thinking performance variance. The effect of instructor was smaller, accounting for 4.4% of variation in critical thinking skill. The effect of prior component critical thinking skill was approximately 4.5 times greater than the effect of writing, and nearly 9 times greater than the effect of instructor.

Student Thought Question Performance

Critical thinking performance on student essays was evaluated by applying a thesis-based essay rubric (see Supplemental Appendix 2 ) on initial submissions and final revised essays. Average weekly performance during the academic term is shown in Figure 4 . A comparison of initial essays indicated that students improved 53.3% from week 1 (average score of 27.9%) to week 7 (average score of 81.2%). A similar comparison of final essays showed that students improved 32.5% from week 1 (average score of 54.1%) to week 7 (average score of 86.6%). The largest changes between initial and final essays occurred in week 1 (change of 26.2%), and decreased each week thereafter (24.8, 23.9, 18.8, 8, 7.8, and 5.4% for weeks 2 through 7, respectively). These results showed that students produced little evidence of critical thinking skill in their writing early in the term, but improved dramatically on both initial and revised essay submissions by the end of the term.

Figure 4. Profile of change in critical thinking performance in writing group. Comparison of student writing performance on weekly initial and revised essays. Essay scores were derived using a thesis-based critical thinking rubric (see Supplemental Appendix 2 ). Average essay scores were computed across writing sections.

The purpose of this study was to discover whether writing could measurably influence critical thinking performance in general education biology. Results indicated that students from the writing group significantly outperformed their nonwriting peers in both total critical thinking skill and the component critical thinking skills of analysis and inference. The writing and nonwriting groups were highly similar initially and began the academic term with comparable critical thinking ability (45th and 42nd national percentile for writing and nonwriting, respectively). By the end of the term, writing students had improved their critical thinking skill to above the 52nd percentile whereas nonwriting students decreased to below the 40th percentile. In addition to writing, prior critical thinking skill and course instructor significantly affected critical thinking performance, with prior critical thinking skill having the largest effect on critical thinking gains of any variable tested. Further analysis of the writing group showed that the largest gains in critical thinking occurred during the first few weeks of the term, with graduated improvement during the remainder of the term. A comparison of average critical thinking performance on initial essays and revised essays showed that thinking skills improvement was greater on initial essays (53%) than on final essays (33%). Collectively, the results of this study indicated that students who experienced writing in general education biology significantly improved their critical thinking skills.

The covariance analysis that was conducted provided a partial means to separate out the effects of writing, prior critical thinking skill, instructor, and multiple covariables from total and component critical thinking gains. The analysis of total critical thinking skill indicated that writing students changed their critical thinking skill from below the national average to above the national average within an academic quarter, whereas nonwriting students remained below the national average. This observation is important because it shows that students can develop critical thinking skills within a fairly short 9-wk period of time, and that writing can play a role in that process. A similar study showed critical thinking skills improve over 15 wk (Quitadamo, Brahler, and Crouch, unpublished results); however, this study provided no insight into whether critical thinking skills could be changed over a shorter period of time, in a different academic setting, or in response to instructional variables such as writing.

Although critical thinking gains were influenced by writing, they did not appear to be affected by gender, ethnicity, class standing, or age. In fact, statistical results indicated that these variables collectively had a very small effect on critical thinking performance. Gender distribution was nearly identical across the writing and nonwriting groups, and was predominantly female (nearly 62%). Ethnic distribution was also highly similar across the writing and nonwriting groups, but the sampling was largely Caucasian (>84%). Class standing varied a little more across the writing and nonwriting groups, with the sample largely comprised of underclassmen (70%). Although nearly three-quarters of the sample was between 18 and 21 years of age, nearly 10% was over 21, with a fair number of older nontraditional students represented. It is possible that a more diverse sample would have produced different results, or it may be that the individuals participating in this study responded particularly well to writing. Although further investigation of these variables is necessary and important, it was beyond the scope of the current study.

The analysis of component skills provided greater insight into the particular critical thinking skills that students changed in response to writing. Specifically, writing students significantly improved their analysis and inference skills whereas nonwriting students did not. Writing students also improved their evaluation skills much more than nonwriting students, although not significantly. These results indicate that the process of writing helps students develop improved analytical and inference skills. Prior research indicates that the writing to learn strategy is effective because students must conceptually organize and structure their thoughts as well as their awareness of thinking processes ( Langer and Applebee, 1987 ; Ackerman, 1993 ; Holliday, 1994 ; Rivard, 1994 ). More specifically, as students begin to shape their thoughts at the point of construction and continually analyze, review, and clarify meaning through the processes of drafting and revision, they necessarily engage and apply analysis and inference skills ( Klein, 1999 ; Hand and Prain, 2002 ). In this study, the process of writing appears to have influenced critical thinking gains. It also seems likely that writing students experienced a greater cognitive demand than nonwriting students simply because the writing act required them to hypothesize, debate, and persuade ( Rivard, 1994 ; Hand and Prain, 2002 ) rather than memorize as was the case in nonwriting control courses.

Conversely, the lack of any significant change in analysis, inference, or evaluation skills in the nonwriting group indicated that the traditional lab instruction used in the general education biology control courses did not help students develop critical thinking skills. Based on the results of this study, it could be argued that traditional lab instruction actually prevents the development of critical thinking skills, which presents a rather large problem when one considers how frequently these traditional methods are used in general education biology courses. One also has to consider that the critical thinking gains seen in the writing group might also have resulted from the relative absence of traditional lab instruction rather than writing alone. Additional research will be necessary to gain further insight into this question. Either way, changes to the traditional model of lab instruction will be necessary if the goal is to enhance the critical thinking abilities of general education biology students.

The variable that had the largest impact on critical thinking performance gains was prior critical thinking skill. This phenomenon was previously observed by Quitadamo, Brahler, and Crouch (unpublished results) in a related study that investigated the effect of Peer Led Team Learning on critical thinking performance. That study focused on science and math major undergraduate critical thinking performance at a major research university, and found that, in addition to Peer Led Team Learning, prior critical thinking skill significantly influenced critical thinking performance (Quitadamo, Brahler, and Crouch, unpublished results). Specifically, students with the highest prior critical thinking skill showed the largest performance gains, whereas students with low initial skill were at a comparative disadvantage. The fact that prior critical thinking skill also had a large effect on critical thinking performance in this study increases the generalizability of the observation and underscores its importance. Simply put, students who have not been explicitly taught how to think critically may not reach the same potential as peers who have been taught these skills, not because they lack the cognitive hard-wiring to perform but because they lack the tools to build their knowledge. Is it reasonable or just to expect otherwise comparable students to perform at similar levels when only some of them have the keys for success? If we hope to improve the perception of science in this country, we need to educate people on how to think about important scientific issues, and not simply argue a position based on one school of thought. By helping general education students to develop critical thinking skills, it is hoped that they will be better able to think rationally about science.

The observation that students who come to general education biology with greater critical thinking skills leave with the largest skill gains has important implications for the K–12 school system as well. If a high proportion of students are coming to institutions of higher education lacking critical thinking skills, why are these skills not being explicitly taught in the K–12 system? Ideally, students would learn the foundational tenets of critical thinking at an earlier age, and be able to refine and hone these skills as they progress through the K–20 education system. The results of this study reinforce the idea that students should be explicitly taught critical thinking skills and be expected to practice them as early and often as possible.

Although its effect was smaller than writing or prior critical thinking skill, the instructor variable also played a significant role in student critical thinking performance, accounting for 2.5% of the total variance in critical thinking gains. Determining the particular qualities of each instructor that contributed to student critical thinking success and further separating instructor and writing effects will require additional research. Previous research indicates that teaching style positively influences certain aspects of student learning ( Grasha, 1994 ; Hativa et al., 2001 ; Bain, 2004 ), but the qualities that specifically influence student critical thinking gains have not been sufficiently investigated. Additional research in this area is necessary.

Faculty considering whether to use writing in the laboratory may wonder about how much time and energy it takes to implement, if efforts to change will translate into improved student learning, and how these changes affect disciplinary content. From a practical perspective, implementing writing did not take more time and effort per se; rather, it required faculty to reconceptualize how they spent their instructional time. Instead of individually developing course materials, writing faculty collaborated to a greater extent than nonwriting faculty on course design and assessments that required students to demonstrate their critical thinking skill. Interviews of faculty from the writing and nonwriting groups indicated that writing faculty felt the course was less work because they collaborated with colleagues and because students demonstrated improved thinking skill. Writing faculty generally became more comfortable with the new model after ∼2–3 wk when students began to show observable changes in writing proficiency and critical thinking. Together, collaboration with colleagues and observed gains in critical thinking tended to create a positive feedback loop that helped to sustain writing faculty efforts. In contrast, nonwriting faculty similarly wanted their students to think better but were convinced that traditional methods would be more effective, and so remained closed to change. There were some logistical challenges with writing, like scheduling computer labs where students could draft and revise their weekly essay responses under instructor and teaching assistant supervision. Teaching assistants (and faculty) also needed to be trained on how to evaluate writing using a rubric. Finally, with regards to content coverage, no lecture or laboratory content was killed in order to implement writing because writing and nonwriting students both performed the same lab activities. Collectively, the benefits of using writing in laboratory should encourage faculty who want their students to learn to think critically to give it a try.

Future Directions

This study showed that writing affects student critical thinking skill in a nonmajors biology course, but the results have generated more questions than have been answered. How does writing specifically produce gains in critical thinking performance? What factors influence student prior critical thinking skill? How do instructors specifically influence student gains in critical thinking? Future studies that analyze student essays in more detail would provide greater insight into how writing influences critical thinking skill. Using writing in other nonmajor science courses such as chemistry, geology, or physics could also be done to determine the transferability of this method. Additional studies that investigate student prior critical thinking skill and instructor variables are also necessary. These future studies would further contribute to the knowledge base in this area, and also address some of its identified limitations ( Ebert-May et al., 1997 ; Daempfle, 2002 ). Results from these studies would also increase the generalizability of the results from this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Building on existing research and on the basis of several lines of evidence presented in this study, we conclude that writing positively influences critical thinking performance for general education biology students. Those students with prior critical thinking skill may have a comparative advantage over other general education biology students who have not developed these same skills. To rectify that inequity critical thinking skills should be explicitly taught early and used often during the K–20 academic process. As it appears that particular instructors improve student critical thinking skills more than others, students should be discerning in their choice of instructors if they want to improve their critical thinking skills. Whether writing as a method to improve critical thinking skills will prove useful in other general education science courses will likely depend on a host of factors, but it has potential. Further study of writing in general education science will be necessary to verify these results and discover the breadth and depth of how writing affects critical thinking skill.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Drs. Holly Pinkart, Roberta Soltz, Phil Mattocks, and James Johnson and undergraduate researchers Matthew Brewer, Dayrk Flaugh, Adam Wallace, Colette Watson, Kelly Vincent, and Christine Weller for their valuable contributions to this study. The authors also acknowledge the generous financial support provided by the Central Washington University Office of the Provost and the Office of the Associate Vice President for Undergraduate Studies.

• Ackerman J. M. ( 1993 ). The promise of writing to learn . Writ. Commun. 10 , (3), 334-370. Google Scholar
• American Association for the Advancement of Science ( 1989 ). Science for All Americans. A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology In: Washington, DC. Google Scholar
• Applebee A. N. ( 1984 ). Writing and reasoning . Rev. Educ. Res. 54 , (4), 577-596. Google Scholar
• Association of American Colleges Universities ( 2005 ). Liberal Education Outcomes: A Preliminary Report on Student Achievement in College In: Washington, DC. Google Scholar
• Bain K. ( 2004 ). What the Best College Teachers Do In: Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
• Beers T., McIssac C., Henderson B., Gainen J. ( 1994 ). Writing: thesis and support scoring guide accessed 25 August 2006 http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/RUB_WTHS.PDF . Google Scholar
• Bruffee K. A. ( 1984 ). Collaborative learning and the “conversation of mankind.” Coll . Engl. 46 , (7), 635-653. Google Scholar
• Business-Higher Education Forum, and American Council on Education ( 2003 ). Building a Nation of Learners: The Need for Changes in Teaching and Learning To Meet Global Challenges In: Washington, DC. Google Scholar
• Bybee R. W., Fuchs B. ( 2006 ). Preparing the 21st century workforce: a new reform in science and technology education . J. Res. Sci. Teach. 43 , (4), 349-352. Google Scholar
• Campbell D. T., Stanley J. C. ( 1963 ). Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research In: Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Google Scholar
• American Society for Training Development ( 1990 ). Carnevale A. P Workplace Basics: The Essential Skills Employers Want In: San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar
• Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique ( 1996 ). ICAT Critical Thinking Essay Test In: Rohnert Park, CA: Sonoma State University. Google Scholar
• Champagne A., Kouba V., Mintzes J., Wandersee J., Novak J. ( 1999 ). Written product as performance measures In: Assessing Science Understanding: A Human Constructivist View , New York: Academic Press, 224-248. Google Scholar
• Collier K. G. ( 1980 ). Peer-group learning in higher education: the development of higher order skills . Stud. High. Educ. 5 , (1), 55-61. Google Scholar
• Daempfle P. A. ( 2002 ). Instructional Approaches for the Improvement of Reasoning in Introductory College Biology Courses: A Review of the Research In: New York: U.S. Department of Education. Google Scholar
• Ebert-May D., Brewer C., Allred S. ( 1997 ). Innovation in large lectures—teaching for active learning . Bioscience 47 , (9), 601-607. Google Scholar
• Ennis R. H. ( 1985 ). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills . Educ. Leadership 43 , (2), 44-48. Google Scholar
• Ennis R. H., Weir E. ( 1985 ). The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test In: Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications. Google Scholar
• Facione P. A. ( 1990a ). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test—College Level. Technical Report 1. Experimental Validation and Content Validity In: Millbrae, CA: Insight Assessment. Google Scholar
• Facione P. A. ( 1990b ). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test—College Level. Technical Report 3. Gender, Ethnicity, Major, CT Self-Esteem, and the CCTST In: Millbrae, CA: Insight Assessment. Google Scholar
• Facione P. A. ( 1990c ). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test—College Level. Technical Report 4. Interpreting the CCTST, Group Norms, and Sub-Scores In: Millbrae, CA: Insight Assessment. Google Scholar
• Facione P. A. ( 1991 ). Using the California Critical Thinking Skills Test in Research, Evaluation, and Assessment In: Millbrae, CA: Insight Assessment. Google Scholar
• American Philosophical Association ( 1990 ). Facione P. A Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction. Research Findings and Recommendations In: Millbrae, CA: Insight Assessment. Google Scholar
• Facione P. A., Facione N. C., Giancarlo C. A. ( 1992 ). Test Manual: The California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory In: Millbrae, CA: Insight Assessment. Google Scholar
• Insight Assessment ( 2004 ). Facione P. A, Facione N. C Test of everyday reasoning In: accessed 30 June 2006 http://www.insightassessment.com/test-ter.html . Google Scholar
• Giancarlo C. A., Facione P. A. ( 2001 ). A look across four years at the disposition toward critical thinking among undergraduate students . J. Gen. Educ. 50 , (1), 29-55. Google Scholar
• Grasha A. F. ( 1994 ). A matter of style: the teacher as expert, formal authority, personal model, facilitator, and delegator . Coll. Teach. 42 , (4), 142-149. Google Scholar
• Hand B., Prain V. ( 2002 ). Teachers implementing writing-to-learn strategies in junior secondary science: a case study . Sci. Educ. 86 , (6), 737-755. Google Scholar
• Hativa N., Barak R., Simhi E. ( 2001 ). Exemplary university teachers: knowledge and beliefs regarding effective teaching dimensions and strategies . J. High. Educ. 72 , (6), 699-729. Google Scholar
• Holliday W. G. ( 1994 ). The reading-science learning-writing connection: breakthroughs, barriers, and promises . J. Res. Sci. Teach. 31 , (9), 877-893. Google Scholar
• Holmes J., Clizbe E. ( 1997 ). Facing the 21st century . Bus. Educ. Forum. 52 , (1), 33-35. Google Scholar
• Holyoak A. R. ( 1998 ). A plan for writing throughout (not just across) the biology curriculum . Am. Biol. Teach. 60 , (3), 186-190. Google Scholar
• Howard V. A. ( 1990 , Ed. V. A. Howard , Thinking on paper: a philosopher's look at writing In: Varieties of Thinking: Essays from Harvard's Philosophy of Education Research Center , New York: Routledge, 84-92. Google Scholar
• Insight Assessment ( 2005 ). Blohm S. Annual number of users for the CCTST form 2000 . accessed 8 December 2006 . Google Scholar
• Jones E. A., Hoffman S., Moore L. M., Ratcliff G., Tibbets S., Click B. ( 1995 ). National Assessment of College Student Learning: Identifying College Graduates' Essential Skills in Writing, Speech and Listening, and Critical Thinking. Final project report In: Report no. NCES-95-001 , University Park, PA: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.. Google Scholar
• Jones G. M, Carter G ( 1998 , Ed. J. J. MintzesJ. H. WanderseeJ. D. Novak , Small groups and shared constructions In: Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist View , San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 261-279. Google Scholar
• Kelly G. J., Chen C. ( 1999 ). The sound of music: constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse . J. Res. Sci. Teach. 36 , (8), 883-915. Google Scholar
• Keys C. W. ( 1999 ). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science . Sci. Educ. 83 , (2), 115-130. Google Scholar
• Keys C. W., Hand B., Prain V., Collins S. ( 1999 ). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science . J. Res. Sci. Teach. 36 , (10), 1065-1084. Google Scholar
• Klein P. ( 1999 ). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn . Ed. Psychol. Rev. 11 , (3), 203-270. Google Scholar
• Klein P. D. ( 2004 ). Constructing scientific explanations through writing . Instr. Sci. 32 , (3), 191-231. Google Scholar
• Klymkowsky M. W. ( 2006 ). Can nonmajors courses lead to biological literacy? Do majors courses do any better? . Cell. Biol. Educ. 4 , 42-44. Google Scholar
• Kokkala I., Gessell D. A. ( 2003 ). Writing science effectively: biology and English students in an author-editor relationship . J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 32 , (4), 252-257. Google Scholar
• Association for the Study of Higher Education ( 1988 ). Kurfiss J. G Critical Thinking: Theory, Research, Practice, and Possibilities In: Washington, DC: George Washington University. Google Scholar
• Langer J. A., Applebee A. N. ( 1985 ). Learning to write: learning to think . Educ. Horizons 64 , (1), 36-38. Google Scholar
• Langer J. A., Applebee A. N. ( 1987 ). How Writing Shapes Thinking: A Study of Teaching and Learning. NCTE research report no. 22 In: Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Google Scholar
• Lawson A. E. ( 2001 ). Using the learning cycle to teach biology concepts and reasoning patterns . J. Biol. Educ. 35 , (4), 165-169. Google Scholar
• Malcom S. M., Abdallah J., Chubin D. E., Grogan K. ( 2005 ). A System of Solutions: Every School, Every Student , Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. Google Scholar
• Marzano R. J. ( 1991 ). Fostering thinking across the curriculum through knowledge restructuring . J. Reading 34 , (7), 518-525. Google Scholar
• National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine ( 2005 ). Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future In: Washington, DC: Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century. Google Scholar
• National Research Council ( 1995 ). National Science Education Standards In: Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Google Scholar
• National Research Council ( 2003 ). Bio 2010, Transforming Undergraduate Education for Future Research Biologists In: Washington, DC: Committee on Undergraduate Biology Education to Prepare Research Scientists for the 21st Century. Google Scholar
• National Science Foundation ( 1996 ). Shaping the Future: New Expectations for Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology In: Washington, DC: Directorate for Education and Human Resources. Google Scholar
• Office of Educational Research Improvement ( 1991 ). Striving for excellence: The National Education Goals In: Washington, DC. Google Scholar
• Project Kaleidoscope. ( 2006 ). Transforming America's Scientific and Technological Infrastructure: Recommendations for Urgent Action In: Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. Google Scholar
• Resnick L. B. ( 1987 ). Education and Learning To Think , Washington DC: National Academy Press. Google Scholar
• Rivard L. P. ( 1994 ). A review of writing to learn in science: implications for practice and research . J. Res. Sci. Teach. 31 , (9), 969-983. Google Scholar
• Springer L., Donovan S. S., Stanne M. E. ( 1999 ). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: a meta-analysis . Rev. Educ. Res. 69 , (1), 21-51. Google Scholar
• Steglich C. S. ( 2000 ). A writing assignment that changes attitudes in biology classes . Am. Biol. Teach. 62 , (2), 98-101. Google Scholar
• Taylor K. L., Sobota S. J. ( 1998 ). Writing in biology: an integration of disciplines . Am. Biol. Teach. 60 , (5), 350-353. Google Scholar
• Tessier J. ( 2006 ). Writing assignment in a nonmajor introductory ecology class . J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 35 , (4), 25-29. Google Scholar
• Tobin K. G., Tippins D. J., Gallard A. J. ( 1994 , Ed. D. L. Gabel , Research on instructional strategies for teaching science In: Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning , New York: Macmillan, 45-93. Google Scholar
• Tsui L. ( 1998 ). A review of research on critical thinking In: ASHE annual meeting paper , Miami, FL 1998 November5-8. Google Scholar
• Tsui L. ( 2002 ). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: evidence from four institutional case studies . J. High. Educ. 73 , (6), 740-763. Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education ( 1990 ). National Goals for Education In: Washington, DC. Google Scholar
• Watson G., Glaser E. M. ( 1980 ). Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal , Cleveland, OH: The Psychological Corporation (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich). Google Scholar
• Students’ approaches to developing scientific communication skills 1 Sep 2024 | Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 48, No. 3
• Brave New Words: A Framework and Process for Developing Technology-Use Guidelines for Student Writing 4 March 2024 | Pedagogy in Health Promotion, Vol. 10, No. 3
• Investigating the impact of critical thinking instruction on writing performance: A multilevel modelling analysis of relative gain data in the Australian national assessment program 1 Sep 2024 | Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 53
• Constructing analogies: Developing critical thinking through a collaborative task 8 June 2024 | Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, Vol. 33
• Time to Degree, Identity, and Grant Writing: Lessons Learned From a Mixed-Methods Longitudinal Case Study of Biosciences PhD Students 22 May 2024 | Sage Open, Vol. 14, No. 2
• Sounding the Alarm on Public Health Education: A Need for Equity-Focused Teaching 28 March 2024 | Pedagogy in Health Promotion, Vol. 18
• Ten simple rules to leverage large language models for getting grants 1 March 2024 | PLOS Computational Biology, Vol. 20, No. 3
• “If we can do it, anyone can!”: Evaluating a virtual “Paper Chase” collaborative writing model for rapid research dissemination 3 June 2022 | Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 25, No. 1
• The Online Forum Impact on Student Engagement and Critical Thinking Disposition in General Education 23 Feb 2024
• Exploring Best Practices for New Climate Change Policy and Law Program 1 Feb 2024 | IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol. 1304, No. 1
• Enhancing Employability Skills of Biology Graduates through an Interdisciplinary Project-Based Service Learning Experience with Engineering and Translation Undergraduate Students 16 January 2024 | Education Sciences, Vol. 14, No. 1
• Exploring Instructors’ Beliefs about and Practices in Promoting Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Writing Classes 30 December 2023 | GIST – Education and Learning Research Journal, Vol. 26
• Evaluation of an 8-week high school science communication course designed to read, write, and present scientific research 1 Dec 2023 | Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 47, No. 4
• How to coach student professional development during times of challenges and uncertainties 22 August 2023 | BMC Medical Education, Vol. 23, No. 1
• Critical thinking skills and science achievement: A latent profile analysis 1 Sep 2023 | Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 49
• Students Need More than Content Knowledge To Counter Vaccine Hesitancy 22 Aug 2023 | Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, Vol. 24, No. 2
• Comparing study features is easy but identifying next steps is hard: Evaluating critical thinking through the Biology Lab Inventory of Critical Thinking in Ecology 10 May 2023 | Ecology and Evolution, Vol. 13, No. 5
• Teaching Psychopharmacology for Undergraduates 17 December 2022
• EFL Students’ Perceptions and Challenges of Computer-Mediated Collaborative Writing in Academic Writing Courses at Van Lang University 7 April 2023
• Julia Gouvea ,
• Lara Appleby ,
• Liren Fu , and
• Vicente Talanquer, Monitoring Editor
• Effectiveness of a manuscript writing workshop on writing confidence amongst nursing and health disciplines clinicians 1 Dec 2022 | Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Vol. 53, No. 4
• Evaluation of Creative Writing Products of Primary School Students According to Some Variables 26 September 2022 | Pamukkale University Journal of Education
• Writing goals in U.S. undergraduate data science course outlines: A textual analysis 1 August 2022 | Teaching Statistics, Vol. 44, No. 3
• Writing Is Thinking: Implementation and Evaluation of an Internal Medicine Residency Clinical Reasoning and Documentation Curriculum 13 June 2022 | Medical Science Educator, Vol. 32, No. 4
• Promoting Computational Thinking Skills in Non-Computer-Science Students: Gamifying Computational Notebooks to Increase Student Engagement 1 Jun 2022 | IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, Vol. 15, No. 3
• Effects of group awareness tools on students' engagement, performance, and perceptions in online collaborative writing: Intergroup information matters 1 Apr 2022 | The Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 53
• Exploring the structure of students’ scientific higher order thinking in science education 1 Mar 2022 | Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 43
• Students’ perceptions of mathematics writing and its impact on their enjoyment and self-confidence 11 June 2021 | Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, Vol. 41, No. 1
• Teaching Psychopharmacology for Undergraduates 14 December 2021
• Dennis Lee ,
• Mallory Wright ,
• Courtney Faber ,
• Cazembe Kennedy , and
• Dylan Dittrich-Reed
• Stanley M. Lo, Monitoring Editor
• Establishing a baseline of science communication skills in an undergraduate environmental science course 23 July 2021 | International Journal of STEM Education, Vol. 8, No. 1
• Diedra M. Wrighting ,
• Jamie Dombach ,
• Mike Walker ,
• Jenene Cook ,
• Marlina Duncan ,
• Gisselle Velez Ruiz ,
• Adán Colón-Carmona , and
• Bruce Birren
• James Hewlett, Monitoring Editor
• Analysis of university student responses to the pandemic in a formal microbiology assessment 7 July 2021 | FEMS Microbiology Letters, Vol. 368, No. 14
• A challenge in teaching scientific communication: academic experience does not improve undergraduates’ ability to assess their or their peers’ writing 7 September 2020 | Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 46, No. 5
• The effect of practices based on argumentation-based inquiry approach on teacher candidates’ critical thinking 25 August 2019 | Educational Studies, Vol. 47, No. 1
• Biosciences Proposal Bootcamp: Structured peer and faculty feedback improves trainees’ proposals and grantsmanship self-efficacy 28 December 2020 | PLOS ONE, Vol. 15, No. 12
• Mini-Review - Teaching Writing in the Undergraduate Neuroscience Curriculum: Its Importance and Best Practices 1 Oct 2020 | Neuroscience Letters, Vol. 737
• A Search for a Method to Improve Critical Thinking Skills in Social Studies Teaching: Writing-to-Learn 31 August 2020 | Review of International Geographical Education Online
• Using Poetry in the Undergraduate Biology Classroom 1 Aug 2020 | The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 82, No. 6
• Assessing Pharmacy Students’ Scientific Reasoning After Completing a Physics Course Taught Using Active-Learning Methods 1 Aug 2020 | American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, Vol. 84, No. 8
• Kritikal at inferensyal na kakayahan sa pagbasa ng mga mag-aaral sa larangan ng Filipino ng Visayas State University 14 July 2020 | International Journal of Research Studies in Education, Vol. 9, No. 3
• Concept map and problem-based learning 1 Jun 2020 | Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 1567, No. 2
• What I know Best: Assessing Indonesian Student’s Structural Knowledge through Student-Generated Topics 15 April 2020 | European Journal of Educational Research, Vol. volume-9-2020, No. volume-9-issue-2-april-2020
• Use of a competency framework to explore the benefits of student-generated multiple-choice questions (MCQs) on student engagement 18 November 2019 | Pedagogies: An International Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2
• Peculiarities of using of the Moodle test tools in philosophy teaching 20 March 2020 | CTE Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 7
• Challenging endocrinology students with a critical-thinking workbook 1 Mar 2020 | Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 44, No. 1
• Utility value interventions in a college biology lab: The impact on motivation 21 August 2019 | Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 57, No. 2
• Teaching Psychopharmacology for Undergraduates 1 June 2020
• Writing Assignments in Epidemiology Courses: How Many and How Good? 21 May 2019 | Public Health Reports, Vol. 134, No. 4
• Jason E. Dowd ,
• Robert J. Thompson ,
• Leslie Schiff ,
• Kelaine Haas ,
• Christine Hohmann ,
• Chris Roy ,
• Warren Meck ,
• John Bruno , and
• Julie A. Reynolds
• Rebecca Price, Monitoring Editor
• Impact of Peer-Led Team Learning and the Science Writing and Workshop Template on the Critical Thinking Skills of First-Year Chemistry Students 28 March 2019 | Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 96, No. 5
• The Power of Practice: Adjusting Curriculum to Include Emphasis on Skills 1 September 2023 | Journal of College Science Teaching, Vol. 48, No. 5
• Exploring the effects of emotional design and emotional intelligence in multimedia-based learning: an engineering educational perspective 26 March 2019 | New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, Vol. 25, No. 1-2
• Boosting Engagement and Intercultural Competence Through Technology 1 Jan 2019
• Melanie L. Styers ,
• Peter A. Van Zandt ,, and
• Katherine L. Hayden
• Erin L. Dolan, Monitoring Editor
• Ana Maria Barral ,
• Veronica C. Ardi-Pastores , and
• Rachel E. Simmons
• Jennifer Knight, Monitoring Editor
• Using writing assignments to promote critical thinking, learning and professional identity: The Epidemiology Workplace Writing Repository 30 January 2018 | Journal of Public Health, Vol. 40, No. 3
• Writing in the STEM classroom: Faculty conceptions of writing and its role in the undergraduate classroom 7 June 2018 | Science Education, Vol. 102, No. 5
• Leslie A. Schiff , and
• John Coley, Monitoring Editor
• Learning to Write Like a Scientist: A Writing-Intensive Course for Microbiology/Health Science Students 1 Mar 2018 | Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, Vol. 19, No. 1
• Stepwise Approach To Writing Journal-Style Lab Reports in the Organic Chemistry Course Sequence 20 November 2017 | Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 95, No. 1
• Using Scaffolding and Deliberate Practice to Improve Abstract Writing in an Introductory Biology Laboratory Course 1 Jan 2018 | Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, Vol. 19, No. 2
• A Systematic Approach to Teaching Case Studies and Solving Novel Problems 1 Jan 2018 | Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, Vol. 19, No. 3
• WEB based technical problem solving for enhancing writing skills of secondary vocational students 22 July 2016 | Education and Information Technologies, Vol. 22, No. 4
• Childhood predictors of written expression in late adolescents with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome: a longitudinal study 8 March 2017 | Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, Vol. 61, No. 5
• Effects of shoe heel height on the end-point and joint kinematics of the locomotor system when crossing obstacles of different heights 6 May 2016 | Ergonomics, Vol. 60, No. 3
• The use of writing assignments to help students synthesize content in upper-level undergraduate biology courses 1 February 2017 | FEMS Microbiology Letters, Vol. 364, No. 3
• K. F. Weaver ,
• V. Morales ,
• M. Nelson ,
• P. F. Weaver ,
• A. Toledo , and
• Kathryn E. Perez, Monitoring Editor
• Gili Marbach-Ad ,
• Carly Rietschel , and
• Katerina V. Thompson
• A programme-wide training framework to facilitate scientific communication skills development amongst biological sciences Masters students 19 February 2015 | Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 40, No. 4
• Incorporation of an Explicit Critical-Thinking Curriculum to Improve Pharmacy Students’ Critical-Thinking Skills 1 Apr 2016 | American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, Vol. 80, No. 3
• An Assessment of Student Perceptions and Responses to Frequent Low-stakes Testing in Introductory Sociology Classes 26 January 2016 | Teaching Sociology, Vol. 44, No. 2
• Developing critical thinking skills using the Science Writing Heuristic in the chemistry laboratory 1 January 2016 | Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 17, No. 1
• The effect of inference-making, deduction, and self-monitoring on EFL learners' language achievement, reading, and writing ability 18 November 2015 | International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, Vol. 5, No. 4
• Community-Based Inquiry in Allied Health Biochemistry Promotes Equity by Improving Critical Thinking for Women and Showing Promise for Increasing Content Gains for Ethnic Minority Students 27 January 2015 | Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92, No. 5
• How do learners experience joint writing: University students' conceptions of online collaborative writing tasks and environments 1 Mar 2015 | Computers & Education, Vol. 82
• Critical Thinking and Character 1 Jan 2015
• Oborové didaktiky: vývoj – stav – perspektivy 1 Jan 2015
• A Modern Twist on the Beaumont and St. Martin Case: Encouraging Analysis and Discussion in the Bioethics Classroom with Reflective Writing and Concept Mapping 1 Dec 2014 | Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, Vol. 15, No. 2
• Michelle Mynlieff ,
• Anita L. Manogaran ,
• Martin St. Maurice , and
• Thomas J. Eddinger
• Mary Pat Wenderoth, Monitoring Editor
• Evaluating Biological Claims to Enhance Critical Thinking through Position Statements 1 May 2014 | Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, Vol. 15, No. 1
• Jessica Middlemis Maher ,
• Jonathan C. Markey , and
• Diane Ebert-May
• Career-Oriented Performance Tasks in Chemistry: Effects on Students' Critical Thinking Skills 1 Jan 2013 | Education Research International, Vol. 2013
• The Critical Thinking Analytic Rubric (CTAR): Investigating intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of a scoring mechanism for critical thinking performance assessments 1 Oct 2012 | Assessing Writing, Vol. 17, No. 4
• Ethics, Politics and Protests: Using Contentious Issues in Reproductive Sciences as Educational Opportunities 25 July 2012 | Reproduction in Domestic Animals, Vol. 47, No. s4
• Julie Libarkin , and
• Gabriel Ording
• Vivian Siegel, Monitoring Editor
• Meaning Check Questions as an Active Learning Tool in the University Biology Laboratory Assists International Students 1 Jan 2012 | Creative Education, Vol. 03, No. 06
• The value of writing-to-learn when using question prompts to support web-based learning in ill-structured domains 16 September 2010 | Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 59, No. 1
• Learning surface anatomy: Which learning approach is effective in an integrated PBL curriculum? 23 December 2010 | Medical Teacher, Vol. 33, No. 1
• Learning with Online Activities 1 Jan 2011
• An analysis of narratives to identify critical thinking contexts in psychiatric clinical practice 27 January 2010 | International Journal of Nursing Practice, Vol. 16, No. 1
• Spacing and Testing Effects 1 Jan 2010
• Interactions Between Students and Tutor in Problem‐Based Learning: The Significance of Deep Learning 25 June 2009 | The Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 5
• Prompting students’ context-generating cognitive activity in ill-structured domains: does the prompting mode affect learning? 8 November 2008 | Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 57, No. 2
• The Impact of Prompting in Technology-Enhanced Learning as Moderated by Students’ Motivation and Metacognitive Skills 1 Jan 2009
• Ian J. Quitadamo ,
• Celia L. Faiola ,
• James E. Johnson , and
• Deborah Allen, Monitoring Editor
• Use of Portfolios by Medical Students: Significance of Critical Thinking 20 October 2008 | The Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences, Vol. 24, No. 7
• Robert Yuan , and
• Eric Chudler, Monitoring Editor

Submitted: 27 November 2006 Revised: 16 February 2007 Accepted: 19 February 2007

© 2007 by The American Society for Cell Biology

9+ Key & Proven Importance of Homework For Students

Homework has been a long-standing practice in education, and its importance cannot be understated. For students, it is a valuable tool for reinforcing learning, developing essential skills, and fostering a sense of responsibility. 

While some may argue against the necessity of homework, numerous studies and real-life examples have proven its key role in enhancing academic performance and overall student success.

In this blog, we will delve into the proven importance of homework for students. We will explore how homework cultivates discipline, critical thinking abilities, time management skills, and independent learning. 

Additionally, we will discuss the positive impact it has on knowledge retention and academic achievement. Join us as we unravel the significance of homework in shaping students’ educational journey and equipping them with the necessary tools for future success. 

Let’s dive into the compelling evidence supporting homework’s undeniable benefits for students.

What Research Says about Homework?

Table of Contents

Research consistently underscores the positive impact of homework on student achievement. Studies show that homework promotes skill development, reinforces classroom learning, and fosters a sense of responsibility. 

It enhances time management, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills, contributing to long-term academic success. While the optimal amount of homework may vary, research supports its role in reinforcing concepts and deepening understanding. 

However, our blog delves into the compelling findings of these studies, shedding light on what research says about the pivotal role of homework in shaping a well-rounded and successful student experience.

“Empower Minds, Ignite Success: Embrace the Homework Journey for Lifelong Learning and Achievement!”

Who invented homework?

The invention of homework cannot be attributed to a single individual or a specific point in history. The practice has evolved over centuries and has roots in various educational traditions.

While some sources inaccurately credit Roberto Nevelis of Venice, Italy, in 1095, this claim lacks credible historical evidence. Homework, in its modern sense, gradually developed during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, influenced by educational philosophies and changing perspectives on learning. 

Ancient civilizations like Rome and Greece had early forms of out-of-class assignments, but the concept evolved over time. 

Homework’s invention is more accurately described as a collective and organic development shaped by the changing needs and philosophies of education throughout history rather than the result of a specific individual’s creation in a particular year.

What is the Real Purpose of Homework?

The real purpose of homework extends beyond mere academic tasks; it serves as a multifaceted educational tool with several objectives.

• Reinforcement of Learning: Homework allows students to reinforce and practice what they have learned in class, helping solidify concepts and skills.
• Independent Learning Skills: It fosters the development of independent learning skills, encouraging students to take responsibility for their education by working on assignments outside of the classroom.
• Preparation for Assessments: Homework is a valuable tool for preparing students for exams and assessments, allowing them to apply their knowledge and identify areas that may need further study.
• Time Management: Assignments teach students to manage their time effectively, a crucial skill for academic success and future endeavors.
• Parental Involvement: Homework can facilitate communication between students, teachers, and parents, providing insights into a student’s progress and areas that may need additional support.

In essence, homework is a multifaceted tool that contributes to the overall educational experience by reinforcing learning, fostering independence, and preparing students for assessments.

A Closer Look at the Importance of Homework For Students

Homework plays a crucial role in a student’s academic journey, offering various benefits that contribute to their overall development. Here is a list of the importance of homework for students:

1. Reinforcement of Classroom Learning

Homework serves as a crucial tool for reinforcing concepts taught in the classroom. Through independent practice, students solidify their understanding of academic material. It allows them to apply what they have learned, fostering a deeper comprehension of the subject matter.

2. Skill Development

Beyond knowledge acquisition, homework plays a pivotal role in honing essential skills. Whether it’s problem-solving, critical thinking, or time management, the assigned assignments contribute to students’ holistic development, preparing them for the challenges they’ll encounter in their academic and professional journeys.

3. Independence and Responsibility

Homework cultivates a sense of independence and responsibility. Students learn to manage their time effectively, juggling multiple tasks and deadlines. This fosters a work ethic that extends beyond the academic realm, laying the foundation for success in various aspects of life.

4. Preparation for Real-world Challenges

The tasks assigned in homework simulate real-world challenges, allowing students to apply theoretical knowledge to practical situations. This preparation is invaluable, equipping them with the skills needed to navigate complex scenarios in their future careers.

5. Deepening Understanding

Homework provides an opportunity for students to delve deeper into topics. It encourages them to explore beyond the surface, conduct research, and gain a more comprehensive understanding of the subject matter.

6. Feedback and Improvement

Homework is a diagnostic tool for educators, offering insights into students’ strengths and weaknesses. Educators can tailor their teaching methods through feedback on assignments and provide targeted support to enhance student learning outcomes.

7. Communication Between Home and School

Assignments creates a bridge between the home and school environments. Parents gain visibility into their child’s academic progress, fostering a collaborative relationship between educators and families to support the student’s learning journey.

8. Consolidation of Learning

The act of revisiting and practicing learned material through homework aids in consolidating knowledge. Repetition reinforces memory, ensuring that key concepts are retained over the long term.

9. Preparation for Assessments

Homework is a preparatory tool for assessments and examinations. It allows students to familiarize themselves with the questions they may encounter, enhancing their confidence and performance during formal evaluations.

10. Lifelong Learning Habits

Engaging in regular homework assignments instills lifelong learning habits. Students develop a sense of curiosity, a thirst for knowledge, and the ability to take initiative in their educational pursuits, setting the stage for continuous self-improvement.

Does Homework Help Students Do Better in School?

The impact of homework on students’ academic performance is a subject of ongoing debate, with studies presenting varying results. 

While some research suggests a positive correlation between homework and academic success, it is essential to consider the quality and quantity of assignments. Well-designed homework that reinforces classroom learning, encourages critical thinking, and provides timely feedback can contribute to improved academic performance.

Homework is a valuable tool for practice and application, helping students solidify their understanding of concepts. Additionally, it fosters independent learning, time management skills, and a sense of responsibility. 

However, an excessive workload or assignments that lack relevance may lead to stress and diminish the potential benefits. Successful implementation of homework involves considering individual student needs, offering support when necessary, and maintaining a balance to avoid overwhelming students. 

Ultimately, the effectiveness of homework in enhancing academic performance depends on its thoughtful design and alignment with educational goals.

Final Thoughts

In concluding our exploration of the importance of homework for students, it’s evident that this practice transcends mere academic tasks. 

Homework is a cornerstone for skill development , independence, and preparation for future challenges. It fosters a sense of responsibility and reinforces classroom learning, cultivating knowledge and essential life skills. 

As students engage in meaningful assignments, they embark on a journey of self-discovery and mastery. Let us champion the enduring value of homework as a vital catalyst for holistic student development, laying the foundation for a future generation of confident, capable, and lifelong learners.

1. Can homework improve your grades?

Yes, homework can improve grades by reinforcing classroom learning, deepening understanding, and preparing students for assessments. Consistent completion of meaningful assignments contributes to academic success and overall performance.

2. What kind of homework is most beneficial to students?

The most beneficial homework for students is meaningful, relevant, and aligned with learning objectives. Assignments that encourage critical thinking, problem-solving, and application of knowledge tend to have the greatest positive impact on learning outcomes.

3. How much time should my child spend on homework each night?

The recommended time for homework varies by grade level. Generally, experts suggest around 10 minutes per grade level. For example, a third-grader might spend about 30 minutes, while a high school senior could allocate around two hours. 

However, individual needs and circumstances should also be considered, ensuring a balance that promotes learning without causing undue stress.

Related Posts

How to Hire someone to do my Statistics Homework for Me?

Students ask to do my statistics homework for me. Although there are many online tutors or statistics homework service providing websites available to help you…

How to Get Good Grades in Exams Tips by Experts

Here in this blog, Codeavail professional experts will help you to understand how to get good grades in Exams. Notice that not all the material…

• Conscious and Unconscious Motivations
• Effective Motivation Techniques
• Extrinsic Motivation
• Inspirational Motivational Stories
• Intrinsic Motivation
• Learning and Motivation
• Motivation and Desire
• Motivation and Discipline
• Motivation and Emotions
• Motivation and Goal Setting
• Motivation and Instinct
• Motivation and Willpower
• Motivational Theories
• Procrastination and Motivation
• Understanding Motivation
• Motivation and Lifestyle
• Motivation and Mental Health
• Motivation in Education
• Motivation in Sports
• Motivation in the Workplace
• Practical Applications of Motivation
• Productivity

How does homework enhance understanding and retention of lessons?

Homework has long been a fundamental component of formal education, aiming to reinforce learning through independent study outside of the classroom. Its purpose is to extend the learning process beyond the limited timeframe of a classroom setting, allowing students to engage further with the subject matter. One significant aspect of homework is its role in enhancing understanding and retention of lessons. By requiring students to review and practice what they have learned, homework provides invaluable opportunities to solidify new knowledge, develop essential skills, and deepen comprehension. In this discussion, we will explore the various ways in which homework positively contributes to enhancing students’ understanding and long-term retention of lessons.

Table of Contents

The Importance of Homework in Education

Homework has long been a staple in education, serving as a means to reinforce and extend learning beyond the classroom. While its effectiveness has been debated among educators and parents, there is compelling evidence to suggest that homework can indeed enhance understanding and retention of lessons . In this article, we will delve into the various ways in which homework contributes to the learning process and why it should be considered an integral part of education.

1. Reinforcing Concepts

One of the primary purposes of homework is to reinforce the concepts taught in class. Through practice and application, students can solidify their understanding of the material covered. When they engage with homework assignments, they are given the opportunity to revisit key concepts, apply problem-solving skills, and consolidate their learning. This repetition plays a crucial role in strengthening their knowledge and ensuring that it is retained for the long term.

2. Deepening Understanding

Homework provides students with the chance to delve deeper into a subject and explore it beyond the surface level. In a classroom setting, time constraints often limit the extent to which topics can be explored. However, homework allows students to engage with the material at their own pace, conduct additional research, and gain a more comprehensive understanding of the subject matter. By delving deeper into the material, students can develop critical thinking skills and form connections that enhance their overall comprehension.

3. Independent Learning

Another benefit of homework is that it promotes independent learning. By completing assignments outside of the classroom, students are encouraged to take responsibility for their own learning and develop self-discipline. They learn to manage their time effectively, set goals, and seek out resources to aid their understanding. This sense of autonomy and self-direction fosters a lifelong love for learning and equips students with valuable skills that extend far beyond their academic journey.

4. Retention of Knowledge

Research suggests that the act of retrieving information from memory strengthens the neural pathways associated with that knowledge. Homework provides the perfect opportunity for students to engage in active recall, as they are required to retrieve information and apply it to solve problems or complete tasks. This process of retrieval enhances long-term retention, ensuring that the lessons learned in the classroom are firmly embedded in the students’ minds.

5. Application of Skills

Homework allows students to apply the skills and knowledge they have acquired in real-world contexts. By tackling authentic problems or engaging in practical tasks, students can see the relevance and applicability of what they have learned. This application of skills not only reinforces understanding but also helps students develop transferable skills that can be utilized beyond the classroom. Whether it is analyzing data, writing essays, or solving mathematical equations, homework provides a platform for students to put their knowledge into action.

In conclusion, homework serves as a valuable tool in enhancing understanding and retention of lessons. By reinforcing concepts, deepening understanding, promoting independent learning, facilitating retention, and encouraging the application of skills, homework plays a vital role in the learning process. However, it is important for educators to strike a balance and ensure that homework assignments are purposeful, meaningful, and manageable. When implemented effectively, homework can truly empower students and contribute to their overall academic success.

6. Feedback and Reflection

Homework provides an avenue for students to receive feedback on their progress and identify areas for improvement. When teachers review and provide feedback on homework assignments, students gain valuable insights into their strengths and weaknesses. This feedback loop allows them to reflect on their learning, make necessary adjustments, and seek further clarification if needed. By actively engaging with feedback, students can enhance their understanding and make strides towards mastery of the subject matter.

7. Preparation for Assessments

Homework plays a crucial role in preparing students for assessments such as quizzes, tests, and exams. By regularly practicing concepts through homework assignments, students become familiar with the types of questions and problems they may encounter in assessments. This familiarity reduces anxiety and helps students feel more confident when approaching exams. Homework also serves as a diagnostic tool for teachers, allowing them to gauge students’ understanding and tailor their instruction accordingly.

8. Parental Involvement

Homework offers an opportunity for parents to be involved in their child’s education. When parents assist their children with homework, they gain insights into their child’s learning progress and can provide additional support and guidance. This partnership between parents and teachers strengthens the educational experience and reinforces the importance of learning beyond the classroom walls.

In conclusion, homework serves as a valuable tool in education by enhancing understanding and retention of lessons. Through the reinforcement of concepts, deepening of understanding, promotion of independent learning, facilitation of retention, encouragement of skill application, provision of feedback and reflection, preparation for assessments, and fostering of parental involvement, homework contributes to the holistic development of students. However, it is essential for educators to strike a balance and ensure that homework assignments are purposeful, meaningful, and manageable, taking into account the individual needs and abilities of students. When implemented effectively, homework can empower students, cultivate a love for lifelong learning, and set them up for success in their academic journey and beyond.

What is the purpose of homework?

Homework serves as an extension of classroom learning, allowing students to practice and apply the knowledge and skills they have acquired during lessons. It provides an opportunity for students to reinforce their understanding of various concepts and foster deeper learning through independent study. Additionally, homework assists in developing important study habits, time management skills, and discipline.

How does homework enhance understanding of lessons?

Homework plays a crucial role in enhancing understanding of lessons by allowing students to revisit and review what they have learned in class. By applying the concepts independently, students can solidify their understanding, identify areas of confusion, and seek clarification if needed. It also helps students to connect different ideas from various lessons, reinforcing a coherent understanding of the subject matter.

Does homework improve retention of lessons?

Absolutely! The act of engaging with homework assignments aids in the retention of lessons. When students actively revisit and practice the material, they are more likely to retain the information in their long-term memory. Regularly spaced intervals of reviewing and recalling the content through homework assignments significantly enhance retention. It reinforces students’ ability to recall and apply the learned knowledge, which is crucial for long-term academic success.

Can homework help in identifying areas of difficulty?

Yes, homework serves as an excellent tool for identifying areas of difficulty and potential gaps in understanding. When students struggle with certain concepts while completing their homework, it highlights the need for further clarification or practice. Teachers can review and provide additional guidance to address these areas of difficulty, promoting a more comprehensive understanding of the lessons. Homework acts as a diagnostic tool, enabling teachers to tailor their instruction to meet the specific needs of students.

Are there any benefits to collaborative homework assignments?

Collaborative homework assignments can offer numerous benefits. When students work together on homework, it encourages discussion, sharing of ideas, and peer learning. This collaborative approach fosters a deeper level of understanding as students explain concepts to one another, ask questions, and engage in problem-solving together. It also enhances communication and teamwork skills, while promoting a sense of community within the classroom.

How can homework be made more effective?

To maximize the effectiveness of homework, it is important to ensure that assignments are meaningful, engaging, and relevant to the lessons taught. Homework should be designed to promote critical thinking, independent problem-solving, and application of knowledge. Providing timely and constructive feedback on completed assignments is also crucial. Additionally, considering the individual needs and abilities of students while assigning homework can help tailor the tasks to their specific learning objectives and enhance overall effectiveness.

How Can You Find Motivation to Apply for a Job?

How can you find motivation for a project, how can you build intrinsic motivation, how can you find motivation for art, the relationship between motivation and discipline: a deeper under, does hypnosis work for motivation.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 11 January 2023

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature

• Enwei Xu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6424-8169 1 ,
• Wei Wang 1 &
• Qingxia Wang 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  16 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

18k Accesses

21 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education as well as a key competence for learners in the 21st century. However, the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking remains uncertain. This current research presents the major findings of a meta-analysis of 36 pieces of the literature revealed in worldwide educational periodicals during the 21st century to identify the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and to determine, based on evidence, whether and to what extent collaborative problem solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. The findings show that (1) collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster students’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]); (2) in respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem solving can significantly and successfully enhance students’ attitudinal tendencies (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.58, 0.82]); and (3) the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have an impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. On the basis of these results, recommendations are made for further study and instruction to better support students’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Similar content being viewed by others

A meta-analysis of the effects of design thinking on student learning

Fostering twenty-first century skills among primary school students through math project-based learning

A meta-analysis to gauge the impact of pedagogies employed in mixed-ability high school biology classrooms

Introduction.

Although critical thinking has a long history in research, the concept of critical thinking, which is regarded as an essential competence for learners in the 21st century, has recently attracted more attention from researchers and teaching practitioners (National Research Council, 2012 ). Critical thinking should be the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education (Peng and Deng, 2017 ) because students with critical thinking can not only understand the meaning of knowledge but also effectively solve practical problems in real life even after knowledge is forgotten (Kek and Huijser, 2011 ). The definition of critical thinking is not universal (Ennis, 1989 ; Castle, 2009 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). In general, the definition of critical thinking is a self-aware and self-regulated thought process (Facione, 1990 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). It refers to the cognitive skills needed to interpret, analyze, synthesize, reason, and evaluate information as well as the attitudinal tendency to apply these abilities (Halpern, 2001 ). The view that critical thinking can be taught and learned through curriculum teaching has been widely supported by many researchers (e.g., Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), leading to educators’ efforts to foster it among students. In the field of teaching practice, there are three types of courses for teaching critical thinking (Ennis, 1989 ). The first is an independent curriculum in which critical thinking is taught and cultivated without involving the knowledge of specific disciplines; the second is an integrated curriculum in which critical thinking is integrated into the teaching of other disciplines as a clear teaching goal; and the third is a mixed curriculum in which critical thinking is taught in parallel to the teaching of other disciplines for mixed teaching training. Furthermore, numerous measuring tools have been developed by researchers and educators to measure critical thinking in the context of teaching practice. These include standardized measurement tools, such as WGCTA, CCTST, CCTT, and CCTDI, which have been verified by repeated experiments and are considered effective and reliable by international scholars (Facione and Facione, 1992 ). In short, descriptions of critical thinking, including its two dimensions of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, different types of teaching courses, and standardized measurement tools provide a complex normative framework for understanding, teaching, and evaluating critical thinking.

Cultivating critical thinking in curriculum teaching can start with a problem, and one of the most popular critical thinking instructional approaches is problem-based learning (Liu et al., 2020 ). Duch et al. ( 2001 ) noted that problem-based learning in group collaboration is progressive active learning, which can improve students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Collaborative problem-solving is the organic integration of collaborative learning and problem-based learning, which takes learners as the center of the learning process and uses problems with poor structure in real-world situations as the starting point for the learning process (Liang et al., 2017 ). Students learn the knowledge needed to solve problems in a collaborative group, reach a consensus on problems in the field, and form solutions through social cooperation methods, such as dialogue, interpretation, questioning, debate, negotiation, and reflection, thus promoting the development of learners’ domain knowledge and critical thinking (Cindy, 2004 ; Liang et al., 2017 ).

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely used in the teaching practice of critical thinking, and several studies have attempted to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature on critical thinking from various perspectives. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of collaborative problem-solving on critical thinking. Therefore, the best approach for developing and enhancing critical thinking throughout collaborative problem-solving is to examine how to implement critical thinking instruction; however, this issue is still unexplored, which means that many teachers are incapable of better instructing critical thinking (Leng and Lu, 2020 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). For example, Huber ( 2016 ) provided the meta-analysis findings of 71 publications on gaining critical thinking over various time frames in college with the aim of determining whether critical thinking was truly teachable. These authors found that learners significantly improve their critical thinking while in college and that critical thinking differs with factors such as teaching strategies, intervention duration, subject area, and teaching type. The usefulness of collaborative problem-solving in fostering students’ critical thinking, however, was not determined by this study, nor did it reveal whether there existed significant variations among the different elements. A meta-analysis of 31 pieces of educational literature was conducted by Liu et al. ( 2020 ) to assess the impact of problem-solving on college students’ critical thinking. These authors found that problem-solving could promote the development of critical thinking among college students and proposed establishing a reasonable group structure for problem-solving in a follow-up study to improve students’ critical thinking. Additionally, previous empirical studies have reached inconclusive and even contradictory conclusions about whether and to what extent collaborative problem-solving increases or decreases critical thinking levels. As an illustration, Yang et al. ( 2008 ) carried out an experiment on the integrated curriculum teaching of college students based on a web bulletin board with the goal of fostering participants’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These authors’ research revealed that through sharing, debating, examining, and reflecting on various experiences and ideas, collaborative problem-solving can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking in real-life problem situations. In contrast, collaborative problem-solving had a positive impact on learners’ interaction and could improve learning interest and motivation but could not significantly improve students’ critical thinking when compared to traditional classroom teaching, according to research by Naber and Wyatt ( 2014 ) and Sendag and Odabasi ( 2009 ) on undergraduate and high school students, respectively.

The above studies show that there is inconsistency regarding the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking. Therefore, it is essential to conduct a thorough and trustworthy review to detect and decide whether and to what degree collaborative problem-solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. Meta-analysis is a quantitative analysis approach that is utilized to examine quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. This approach characterizes the effectiveness of its impact by averaging the effect sizes of numerous qualitative studies in an effort to reduce the uncertainty brought on by independent research and produce more conclusive findings (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ).

This paper used a meta-analytic approach and carried out a meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking in order to make a contribution to both research and practice. The following research questions were addressed by this meta-analysis:

What is the overall effect size of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills)?

How are the disparities between the study conclusions impacted by various moderating variables if the impacts of various experimental designs in the included studies are heterogeneous?

This research followed the strict procedures (e.g., database searching, identification, screening, eligibility, merging, duplicate removal, and analysis of included studies) of Cooper’s ( 2010 ) proposed meta-analysis approach for examining quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. The relevant empirical research that appeared in worldwide educational periodicals within the 21st century was subjected to this meta-analysis using Rev-Man 5.4. The consistency of the data extracted separately by two researchers was tested using Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and a publication bias test and a heterogeneity test were run on the sample data to ascertain the quality of this meta-analysis.

Data sources and search strategies

There were three stages to the data collection process for this meta-analysis, as shown in Fig. 1 , which shows the number of articles included and eliminated during the selection process based on the statement and study eligibility criteria.

This flowchart shows the number of records identified, included and excluded in the article.

First, the databases used to systematically search for relevant articles were the journal papers of the Web of Science Core Collection and the Chinese Core source journal, as well as the Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) source journal papers included in CNKI. These databases were selected because they are credible platforms that are sources of scholarly and peer-reviewed information with advanced search tools and contain literature relevant to the subject of our topic from reliable researchers and experts. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the Web of Science was “TS = (((“critical thinking” or “ct” and “pretest” or “posttest”) or (“critical thinking” or “ct” and “control group” or “quasi experiment” or “experiment”)) and (“collaboration” or “collaborative learning” or “CSCL”) and (“problem solving” or “problem-based learning” or “PBL”))”. The research area was “Education Educational Research”, and the search period was “January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2021”. A total of 412 papers were obtained. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the CNKI was “SU = (‘critical thinking’*‘collaboration’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘collaborative learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘CSCL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem solving’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem-based learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘PBL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem oriented’) AND FT = (‘experiment’ + ‘quasi experiment’ + ‘pretest’ + ‘posttest’ + ‘empirical study’)” (translated into Chinese when searching). A total of 56 studies were found throughout the search period of “January 2000 to December 2021”. From the databases, all duplicates and retractions were eliminated before exporting the references into Endnote, a program for managing bibliographic references. In all, 466 studies were found.

Second, the studies that matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were chosen by two researchers after they had reviewed the abstracts and titles of the gathered articles, yielding a total of 126 studies.

Third, two researchers thoroughly reviewed each included article’s whole text in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meanwhile, a snowball search was performed using the references and citations of the included articles to ensure complete coverage of the articles. Ultimately, 36 articles were kept.

Two researchers worked together to carry out this entire process, and a consensus rate of almost 94.7% was reached after discussion and negotiation to clarify any emerging differences.

Eligibility criteria

Since not all the retrieved studies matched the criteria for this meta-analysis, eligibility criteria for both inclusion and exclusion were developed as follows:

The publication language of the included studies was limited to English and Chinese, and the full text could be obtained. Articles that did not meet the publication language and articles not published between 2000 and 2021 were excluded.

The research design of the included studies must be empirical and quantitative studies that can assess the effect of collaborative problem-solving on the development of critical thinking. Articles that could not identify the causal mechanisms by which collaborative problem-solving affects critical thinking, such as review articles and theoretical articles, were excluded.

The research method of the included studies must feature a randomized control experiment or a quasi-experiment, or a natural experiment, which have a higher degree of internal validity with strong experimental designs and can all plausibly provide evidence that critical thinking and collaborative problem-solving are causally related. Articles with non-experimental research methods, such as purely correlational or observational studies, were excluded.

The participants of the included studies were only students in school, including K-12 students and college students. Articles in which the participants were non-school students, such as social workers or adult learners, were excluded.

The research results of the included studies must mention definite signs that may be utilized to gauge critical thinking’s impact (e.g., sample size, mean value, or standard deviation). Articles that lacked specific measurement indicators for critical thinking and could not calculate the effect size were excluded.

Data coding design

In order to perform a meta-analysis, it is necessary to collect the most important information from the articles, codify that information’s properties, and convert descriptive data into quantitative data. Therefore, this study designed a data coding template (see Table 1 ). Ultimately, 16 coding fields were retained.

The designed data-coding template consisted of three pieces of information. Basic information about the papers was included in the descriptive information: the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper.

The variable information for the experimental design had three variables: the independent variable (instruction method), the dependent variable (critical thinking), and the moderating variable (learning stage, teaching type, intervention duration, learning scaffold, group size, measuring tool, and subject area). Depending on the topic of this study, the intervention strategy, as the independent variable, was coded into collaborative and non-collaborative problem-solving. The dependent variable, critical thinking, was coded as a cognitive skill and an attitudinal tendency. And seven moderating variables were created by grouping and combining the experimental design variables discovered within the 36 studies (see Table 1 ), where learning stages were encoded as higher education, high school, middle school, and primary school or lower; teaching types were encoded as mixed courses, integrated courses, and independent courses; intervention durations were encoded as 0–1 weeks, 1–4 weeks, 4–12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks; group sizes were encoded as 2–3 persons, 4–6 persons, 7–10 persons, and more than 10 persons; learning scaffolds were encoded as teacher-supported learning scaffold, technique-supported learning scaffold, and resource-supported learning scaffold; measuring tools were encoded as standardized measurement tools (e.g., WGCTA, CCTT, CCTST, and CCTDI) and self-adapting measurement tools (e.g., modified or made by researchers); and subject areas were encoded according to the specific subjects used in the 36 included studies.

The data information contained three metrics for measuring critical thinking: sample size, average value, and standard deviation. It is vital to remember that studies with various experimental designs frequently adopt various formulas to determine the effect size. And this paper used Morris’ proposed standardized mean difference (SMD) calculation formula ( 2008 , p. 369; see Supplementary Table S3 ).

Procedure for extracting and coding data

According to the data coding template (see Table 1 ), the 36 papers’ information was retrieved by two researchers, who then entered them into Excel (see Supplementary Table S1 ). The results of each study were extracted separately in the data extraction procedure if an article contained numerous studies on critical thinking, or if a study assessed different critical thinking dimensions. For instance, Tiwari et al. ( 2010 ) used four time points, which were viewed as numerous different studies, to examine the outcomes of critical thinking, and Chen ( 2013 ) included the two outcome variables of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, which were regarded as two studies. After discussion and negotiation during data extraction, the two researchers’ consistency test coefficients were roughly 93.27%. Supplementary Table S2 details the key characteristics of the 36 included articles with 79 effect quantities, including descriptive information (e.g., the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper), variable information (e.g., independent variables, dependent variables, and moderating variables), and data information (e.g., mean values, standard deviations, and sample size). Following that, testing for publication bias and heterogeneity was done on the sample data using the Rev-Man 5.4 software, and then the test results were used to conduct a meta-analysis.

Publication bias test

When the sample of studies included in a meta-analysis does not accurately reflect the general status of research on the relevant subject, publication bias is said to be exhibited in this research. The reliability and accuracy of the meta-analysis may be impacted by publication bias. Due to this, the meta-analysis needs to check the sample data for publication bias (Stewart et al., 2006 ). A popular method to check for publication bias is the funnel plot; and it is unlikely that there will be publishing bias when the data are equally dispersed on either side of the average effect size and targeted within the higher region. The data are equally dispersed within the higher portion of the efficient zone, consistent with the funnel plot connected with this analysis (see Fig. 2 ), indicating that publication bias is unlikely in this situation.

This funnel plot shows the result of publication bias of 79 effect quantities across 36 studies.

Heterogeneity test

To select the appropriate effect models for the meta-analysis, one might use the results of a heterogeneity test on the data effect sizes. In a meta-analysis, it is common practice to gauge the degree of data heterogeneity using the I 2 value, and I 2  ≥ 50% is typically understood to denote medium-high heterogeneity, which calls for the adoption of a random effect model; if not, a fixed effect model ought to be applied (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ). The findings of the heterogeneity test in this paper (see Table 2 ) revealed that I 2 was 86% and displayed significant heterogeneity ( P  < 0.01). To ensure accuracy and reliability, the overall effect size ought to be calculated utilizing the random effect model.

The analysis of the overall effect size

This meta-analysis utilized a random effect model to examine 79 effect quantities from 36 studies after eliminating heterogeneity. In accordance with Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1992 ), it is abundantly clear from the analysis results, which are shown in the forest plot of the overall effect (see Fig. 3 ), that the cumulative impact size of cooperative problem-solving is 0.82, which is statistically significant ( z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]), and can encourage learners to practice critical thinking.

This forest plot shows the analysis result of the overall effect size across 36 studies.

In addition, this study examined two distinct dimensions of critical thinking to better understand the precise contributions that collaborative problem-solving makes to the growth of critical thinking. The findings (see Table 3 ) indicate that collaborative problem-solving improves cognitive skills (ES = 0.70) and attitudinal tendency (ES = 1.17), with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.95, P  < 0.01). Although collaborative problem-solving improves both dimensions of critical thinking, it is essential to point out that the improvements in students’ attitudinal tendency are much more pronounced and have a significant comprehensive effect (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]), whereas gains in learners’ cognitive skill are slightly improved and are just above average. (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

The analysis of moderator effect size

The whole forest plot’s 79 effect quantities underwent a two-tailed test, which revealed significant heterogeneity ( I 2  = 86%, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01), indicating differences between various effect sizes that may have been influenced by moderating factors other than sampling error. Therefore, exploring possible moderating factors that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis, such as the learning stage, learning scaffold, teaching type, group size, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, in order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking. The findings (see Table 4 ) indicate that various moderating factors have advantageous effects on critical thinking. In this situation, the subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01), and teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05) are all significant moderators that can be applied to support the cultivation of critical thinking. However, since the learning stage and the measuring tools did not significantly differ among intergroup (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05, and chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05), we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These are the precise outcomes, as follows:

Various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively, without significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05). High school was first on the list of effect sizes (ES = 1.36, P  < 0.01), then higher education (ES = 0.78, P  < 0.01), and middle school (ES = 0.73, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the learning stage’s beneficial influence on cultivating learners’ critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is essential for cultivating critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Different teaching types had varying degrees of positive impact on critical thinking, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05). The effect size was ranked as follows: mixed courses (ES = 1.34, P  < 0.01), integrated courses (ES = 0.81, P  < 0.01), and independent courses (ES = 0.27, P  < 0.01). These results indicate that the most effective approach to cultivate critical thinking utilizing collaborative problem solving is through the teaching type of mixed courses.

Various intervention durations significantly improved critical thinking, and there were significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01). The effect sizes related to this variable showed a tendency to increase with longer intervention durations. The improvement in critical thinking reached a significant level (ES = 0.85, P  < 0.01) after more than 12 weeks of training. These findings indicate that the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated, with a longer intervention duration having a greater effect.

Different learning scaffolds influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01). The resource-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.69, P  < 0.01) acquired a medium-to-higher level of impact, the technique-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.63, P  < 0.01) also attained a medium-to-higher level of impact, and the teacher-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.92, P  < 0.01) displayed a high level of significant impact. These results show that the learning scaffold with teacher support has the greatest impact on cultivating critical thinking.

Various group sizes influenced critical thinking positively, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05). Critical thinking showed a general declining trend with increasing group size. The overall effect size of 2–3 people in this situation was the biggest (ES = 0.99, P  < 0.01), and when the group size was greater than 7 people, the improvement in critical thinking was at the lower-middle level (ES < 0.5, P  < 0.01). These results show that the impact on critical thinking is positively connected with group size, and as group size grows, so does the overall impact.

Various measuring tools influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05). In this situation, the self-adapting measurement tools obtained an upper-medium level of effect (ES = 0.78), whereas the complete effect size of the standardized measurement tools was the largest, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 0.84, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the beneficial influence of the measuring tool on cultivating critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Different subject areas had a greater impact on critical thinking, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05). Mathematics had the greatest overall impact, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 1.68, P  < 0.01), followed by science (ES = 1.25, P  < 0.01) and medical science (ES = 0.87, P  < 0.01), both of which also achieved a significant level of effect. Programming technology was the least effective (ES = 0.39, P  < 0.01), only having a medium-low degree of effect compared to education (ES = 0.72, P  < 0.01) and other fields (such as language, art, and social sciences) (ES = 0.58, P  < 0.01). These results suggest that scientific fields (e.g., mathematics, science) may be the most effective subject areas for cultivating critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

According to this meta-analysis, using collaborative problem-solving as an intervention strategy in critical thinking teaching has a considerable amount of impact on cultivating learners’ critical thinking as a whole and has a favorable promotional effect on the two dimensions of critical thinking. According to certain studies, collaborative problem solving, the most frequently used critical thinking teaching strategy in curriculum instruction can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking (e.g., Liang et al., 2017 ; Liu et al., 2020 ; Cindy, 2004 ). This meta-analysis provides convergent data support for the above research views. Thus, the findings of this meta-analysis not only effectively address the first research query regarding the overall effect of cultivating critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills) utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving, but also enhance our confidence in cultivating critical thinking by using collaborative problem-solving intervention approach in the context of classroom teaching.

Furthermore, the associated improvements in attitudinal tendency are much stronger, but the corresponding improvements in cognitive skill are only marginally better. According to certain studies, cognitive skill differs from the attitudinal tendency in classroom instruction; the cultivation and development of the former as a key ability is a process of gradual accumulation, while the latter as an attitude is affected by the context of the teaching situation (e.g., a novel and exciting teaching approach, challenging and rewarding tasks) (Halpern, 2001 ; Wei and Hong, 2022 ). Collaborative problem-solving as a teaching approach is exciting and interesting, as well as rewarding and challenging; because it takes the learners as the focus and examines problems with poor structure in real situations, and it can inspire students to fully realize their potential for problem-solving, which will significantly improve their attitudinal tendency toward solving problems (Liu et al., 2020 ). Similar to how collaborative problem-solving influences attitudinal tendency, attitudinal tendency impacts cognitive skill when attempting to solve a problem (Liu et al., 2020 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ), and stronger attitudinal tendencies are associated with improved learning achievement and cognitive ability in students (Sison, 2008 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ). It can be seen that the two specific dimensions of critical thinking as well as critical thinking as a whole are affected by collaborative problem-solving, and this study illuminates the nuanced links between cognitive skills and attitudinal tendencies with regard to these two dimensions of critical thinking. To fully develop students’ capacity for critical thinking, future empirical research should pay closer attention to cognitive skills.

The moderating effects of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

In order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking, exploring possible moderating effects that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis. The findings show that the moderating factors, such as the teaching type, learning stage, group size, learning scaffold, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, could all support the cultivation of collaborative problem-solving in critical thinking. Among them, the effect size differences between the learning stage and measuring tool are not significant, which does not explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

In terms of the learning stage, various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively without significant intergroup differences, indicating that we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking.

Although high education accounts for 70.89% of all empirical studies performed by researchers, high school may be the appropriate learning stage to foster students’ critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving since it has the largest overall effect size. This phenomenon may be related to student’s cognitive development, which needs to be further studied in follow-up research.

With regard to teaching type, mixed course teaching may be the best teaching method to cultivate students’ critical thinking. Relevant studies have shown that in the actual teaching process if students are trained in thinking methods alone, the methods they learn are isolated and divorced from subject knowledge, which is not conducive to their transfer of thinking methods; therefore, if students’ thinking is trained only in subject teaching without systematic method training, it is challenging to apply to real-world circumstances (Ruggiero, 2012 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Teaching critical thinking as mixed course teaching in parallel to other subject teachings can achieve the best effect on learners’ critical thinking, and explicit critical thinking instruction is more effective than less explicit critical thinking instruction (Bensley and Spero, 2014 ).

In terms of the intervention duration, with longer intervention times, the overall effect size shows an upward tendency. Thus, the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated. Critical thinking, as a key competency for students in the 21st century, is difficult to get a meaningful improvement in a brief intervention duration. Instead, it could be developed over a lengthy period of time through consistent teaching and the progressive accumulation of knowledge (Halpern, 2001 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Therefore, future empirical studies ought to take these restrictions into account throughout a longer period of critical thinking instruction.

With regard to group size, a group size of 2–3 persons has the highest effect size, and the comprehensive effect size decreases with increasing group size in general. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a group composed of two to four members is most appropriate for collaborative learning (Schellens and Valcke, 2006 ). However, the meta-analysis results also indicate that once the group size exceeds 7 people, small groups cannot produce better interaction and performance than large groups. This may be because the learning scaffolds of technique support, resource support, and teacher support improve the frequency and effectiveness of interaction among group members, and a collaborative group with more members may increase the diversity of views, which is helpful to cultivate critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

With regard to the learning scaffold, the three different kinds of learning scaffolds can all enhance critical thinking. Among them, the teacher-supported learning scaffold has the largest overall effect size, demonstrating the interdependence of effective learning scaffolds and collaborative problem-solving. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a successful strategy is to encourage learners to collaborate, come up with solutions, and develop critical thinking skills by using learning scaffolds (Reiser, 2004 ; Xu et al., 2022 ); learning scaffolds can lower task complexity and unpleasant feelings while also enticing students to engage in learning activities (Wood et al., 2006 ); learning scaffolds are designed to assist students in using learning approaches more successfully to adapt the collaborative problem-solving process, and the teacher-supported learning scaffolds have the greatest influence on critical thinking in this process because they are more targeted, informative, and timely (Xu et al., 2022 ).

With respect to the measuring tool, despite the fact that standardized measurement tools (such as the WGCTA, CCTT, and CCTST) have been acknowledged as trustworthy and effective by worldwide experts, only 54.43% of the research included in this meta-analysis adopted them for assessment, and the results indicated no intergroup differences. These results suggest that not all teaching circumstances are appropriate for measuring critical thinking using standardized measurement tools. “The measuring tools for measuring thinking ability have limits in assessing learners in educational situations and should be adapted appropriately to accurately assess the changes in learners’ critical thinking.”, according to Simpson and Courtney ( 2002 , p. 91). As a result, in order to more fully and precisely gauge how learners’ critical thinking has evolved, we must properly modify standardized measuring tools based on collaborative problem-solving learning contexts.

With regard to the subject area, the comprehensive effect size of science departments (e.g., mathematics, science, medical science) is larger than that of language arts and social sciences. Some recent international education reforms have noted that critical thinking is a basic part of scientific literacy. Students with scientific literacy can prove the rationality of their judgment according to accurate evidence and reasonable standards when they face challenges or poorly structured problems (Kyndt et al., 2013 ), which makes critical thinking crucial for developing scientific understanding and applying this understanding to practical problem solving for problems related to science, technology, and society (Yore et al., 2007 ).

Suggestions for critical thinking teaching

Other than those stated in the discussion above, the following suggestions are offered for critical thinking instruction utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

First, teachers should put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, to design real problems based on collaborative situations. This meta-analysis provides evidence to support the view that collaborative problem-solving has a strong synergistic effect on promoting students’ critical thinking. Asking questions about real situations and allowing learners to take part in critical discussions on real problems during class instruction are key ways to teach critical thinking rather than simply reading speculative articles without practice (Mulnix, 2012 ). Furthermore, the improvement of students’ critical thinking is realized through cognitive conflict with other learners in the problem situation (Yang et al., 2008 ). Consequently, it is essential for teachers to put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, and design real problems and encourage students to discuss, negotiate, and argue based on collaborative problem-solving situations.

Second, teachers should design and implement mixed courses to cultivate learners’ critical thinking, utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving. Critical thinking can be taught through curriculum instruction (Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), with the goal of cultivating learners’ critical thinking for flexible transfer and application in real problem-solving situations. This meta-analysis shows that mixed course teaching has a highly substantial impact on the cultivation and promotion of learners’ critical thinking. Therefore, teachers should design and implement mixed course teaching with real collaborative problem-solving situations in combination with the knowledge content of specific disciplines in conventional teaching, teach methods and strategies of critical thinking based on poorly structured problems to help students master critical thinking, and provide practical activities in which students can interact with each other to develop knowledge construction and critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Third, teachers should be more trained in critical thinking, particularly preservice teachers, and they also should be conscious of the ways in which teachers’ support for learning scaffolds can promote critical thinking. The learning scaffold supported by teachers had the greatest impact on learners’ critical thinking, in addition to being more directive, targeted, and timely (Wood et al., 2006 ). Critical thinking can only be effectively taught when teachers recognize the significance of critical thinking for students’ growth and use the proper approaches while designing instructional activities (Forawi, 2016 ). Therefore, with the intention of enabling teachers to create learning scaffolds to cultivate learners’ critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem solving, it is essential to concentrate on the teacher-supported learning scaffolds and enhance the instruction for teaching critical thinking to teachers, especially preservice teachers.

Implications and limitations

There are certain limitations in this meta-analysis, but future research can correct them. First, the search languages were restricted to English and Chinese, so it is possible that pertinent studies that were written in other languages were overlooked, resulting in an inadequate number of articles for review. Second, these data provided by the included studies are partially missing, such as whether teachers were trained in the theory and practice of critical thinking, the average age and gender of learners, and the differences in critical thinking among learners of various ages and genders. Third, as is typical for review articles, more studies were released while this meta-analysis was being done; therefore, it had a time limit. With the development of relevant research, future studies focusing on these issues are highly relevant and needed.

Conclusions

The subject of the magnitude of collaborative problem-solving’s impact on fostering students’ critical thinking, which received scant attention from other studies, was successfully addressed by this study. The question of the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking was addressed in this study, which addressed a topic that had gotten little attention in earlier research. The following conclusions can be made:

Regarding the results obtained, collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster learners’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]). With respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem-solving can significantly and effectively improve students’ attitudinal tendency, and the comprehensive effect is significant (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

As demonstrated by both the results and the discussion, there are varying degrees of beneficial effects on students’ critical thinking from all seven moderating factors, which were found across 36 studies. In this context, the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have a positive impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. Since the learning stage (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05) and measuring tools (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05) did not demonstrate any significant intergroup differences, we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included within the article and its supplementary information files, and the supplementary information files are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IPFJO6 .

Bensley DA, Spero RA (2014) Improving critical thinking skills and meta-cognitive monitoring through direct infusion. Think Skills Creat 12:55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Castle A (2009) Defining and assessing critical thinking skills for student radiographers. Radiography 15(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2007.10.007

Chen XD (2013) An empirical study on the influence of PBL teaching model on critical thinking ability of non-English majors. J PLA Foreign Lang College 36 (04):68–72

Google Scholar  

Cohen A (1992) Antecedents of organizational commitment across occupational groups: a meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130602

Cooper H (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis: a step-by-step approach, 4th edn. Sage, London, England

Cindy HS (2004) Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 51(1):31–39

Duch BJ, Gron SD, Allen DE (2001) The power of problem-based learning: a practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline. Stylus Educ Sci 2:190–198

Ennis RH (1989) Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educ Res 18(3):4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x018003004

Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. Eric document reproduction service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed315423

Facione PA, Facione NC (1992) The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) and the CCTDI test manual. California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA

Forawi SA (2016) Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Think Skills Creat 20:52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.005

Halpern DF (2001) Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. J Gen Educ 50(4):270–286. https://doi.org/10.2307/27797889

Hu WP, Liu J (2015) Cultivation of pupils’ thinking ability: a five-year follow-up study. Psychol Behav Res 13(05):648–654. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2015.05.010

Huber K (2016) Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 86(2):431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Kek MYCA, Huijser H (2011) The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: preparing students for tomorrow’s digital futures in today’s classrooms. High Educ Res Dev 30(3):329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501074

Kuncel NR (2011) Measurement and meaning of critical thinking (Research report for the NRC 21st Century Skills Workshop). National Research Council, Washington, DC

Kyndt E, Raes E, Lismont B, Timmers F, Cascallar E, Dochy F (2013) A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educ Res Rev 10(2):133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002

Leng J, Lu XX (2020) Is critical thinking really teachable?—A meta-analysis based on 79 experimental or quasi experimental studies. Open Educ Res 26(06):110–118. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2020.06.011

Liang YZ, Zhu K, Zhao CL (2017) An empirical study on the depth of interaction promoted by collaborative problem solving learning activities. J E-educ Res 38(10):87–92. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2017.10.014

Lipsey M, Wilson D (2001) Practical meta-analysis. International Educational and Professional, London, pp. 92–160

Liu Z, Wu W, Jiang Q (2020) A study on the influence of problem based learning on college students’ critical thinking-based on a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Explor High Educ 03:43–49

Morris SB (2008) Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organ Res Methods 11(2):364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106291059

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Mulnix JW (2012) Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educ Philos Theory 44(5):464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x

Naber J, Wyatt TH (2014) The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 34(1):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.002

National Research Council (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Niu L, Behar HLS, Garvan CW (2013) Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 9(12):114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Peng ZM, Deng L (2017) Towards the core of education reform: cultivating critical thinking skills as the core of skills in the 21st century. Res Educ Dev 24:57–63. https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2017.24.011

Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13(3):273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2

Ruggiero VR (2012) The art of thinking: a guide to critical and creative thought, 4th edn. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York

Schellens T, Valcke M (2006) Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Comput Educ 46(4):349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.07.010

Sendag S, Odabasi HF (2009) Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 53(1):132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008

Sison R (2008) Investigating Pair Programming in a Software Engineering Course in an Asian Setting. 2008 15th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 325–331. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2008.61

Simpson E, Courtney M (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Mary Courtney 8(2):89–98

Stewart L, Tierney J, Burdett S (2006) Do systematic reviews based on individual patient data offer a means of circumventing biases associated with trial publications? Publication bias in meta-analysis. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, pp. 261–286

Tiwari A, Lai P, So M, Yuen K (2010) A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Med Educ 40(6):547–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02481.x

Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G (2006) The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17(2):89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Wei T, Hong S (2022) The meaning and realization of teachable critical thinking. Educ Theory Practice 10:51–57

Xu EW, Wang W, Wang QX (2022) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programming teaching in promoting K-12 students’ computational thinking. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11445-2

Yang YC, Newby T, Bill R (2008) Facilitating interactions through structured web-based bulletin boards: a quasi-experimental study on promoting learners’ critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 50(4):1572–1585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.006

Yore LD, Pimm D, Tuan HL (2007) The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. Int J Sci Math Educ 5(4):559–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4

Zhang T, Zhang S, Gao QQ, Wang JH (2022) Research on the development of learners’ critical thinking in online peer review. Audio Visual Educ Res 6:53–60. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2022.06.08

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the graduate scientific research and innovation project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region named “Research on in-depth learning of high school information technology courses for the cultivation of computing thinking” (No. XJ2022G190) and the independent innovation fund project for doctoral students of the College of Educational Science of Xinjiang Normal University named “Research on project-based teaching of high school information technology courses from the perspective of discipline core literacy” (No. XJNUJKYA2003).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science, Xinjiang Normal University, 830017, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China

Enwei Xu, Wei Wang & Qingxia Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Enwei Xu or Wei Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

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

Supplementary information

Supplementary tables, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Xu, E., Wang, W. & Wang, Q. The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Download citation

Received : 07 August 2022

Accepted : 04 January 2023

Published : 11 January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

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

This article is cited by

Impacts of online collaborative learning on students’ intercultural communication apprehension and intercultural communicative competence.

• Hoa Thi Hoang Chau
• Hung Phu Bui
• Quynh Thi Huong Dinh

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: a meta-analysis

The impacts of computer-supported collaborative learning on students’ critical thinking: a meta-analysis.

• Yoseph Gebrehiwot Tedla
• Hsiu-Ling Chen

Sustainable electricity generation and farm-grid utilization from photovoltaic aquaculture: a bibliometric analysis

• A. A. Amusa
• M. Alhassan

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Introducing TeachCatalystAI

TeachCatalystAI is a professional teaching assistant tool designed to help teachers create lesson plan, teaching materials, and many more with ease. Our AI-powered tool will help you streamline your classroom management, making it easier to keep track of students, assignments, and behavior. Our AI-powered tools and templates are great and configured to make you effective in teaching.

Our Mission:

Classroom management priciples, education theory.

This category explores the understanding of educational theories and how it impacts teachers’ classroom management.

Teacher well-being and self-care

Latest posts, direct instruction benefits in special education, peer mediation in multicultural school settings: 15 tips to succeed, peer mediation and peer mentoring connections: 9 ways they differ, peer mediation and restorative justice practices: 9 ways they differ, peer mediation for special education classrooms: 15 ways to succeed, peer mediation for diverse student populations: 15 tips to succeed.

Top 10 Best Medical Colleges in Bangalore 2024

How High Schools Can Help Students Choose the Best College

A Step-by-Step Guide: How to Calculate Standard Deviation with Example

12 Amazing Ways to Improve Memory Power for Students

10 Best Piping Design Course Institutes in India

• Career & Jobs
• Career Guidance
• Study Abroad
• Personality Development

15 Surprising Benefits of Homework for Students

• The importance of homework for students
• 3 Helpful tips to do your homework effectively
• 15 benefits of homework

Homework is an important component of the learning and growing process. It is a common practice for students to develop their skills and learn new information.

Homework is simply a general term that we use to describe work that you have to do at home. Typically, it’s assigned by the teacher during school hours and meant to be completed after school in the evenings or weekends.

Homework is loved and hated by many, but it is an integral part of education. It is not just a boring part of the learning process. It has a lot to offer!

The Importance of Homework for Students

So, why should students have homework? According to research conducted by Duke University psychology professor Harris Cooper , there was a positive relation between homework and student achievement. He found out that homework can help students perform better in school.

This shows the importance of homework in a student’s life. Homework is not always popular with students because it takes away their free time at home.

However, there are many benefits associated with homework.  Homework helps students understand the material in greater depth. Moreover, it allows teachers to assess how much the student has learned.

Tips for Doing Your Homework Faster

It is important to have a homework routine. A routine will help you know what to expect at the end of the day, and it will give you time to digest what you learned.

In addition, a routine will help you to be stress-free because you won’t be worrying about when to start your homework or whether you’re going to finish it on time.

So, here are some tips on how to set up a good homework routine:

• Find a place in the house where you can study without interruption.
• Set a timer for how long each assignment should take.
• Make sure your table is neat and that you have all of your materials ready before starting.

These tips will surely make your student life easier and put you on the right track towards higher grades!

The Benefits of Homework for Students

There are numerous reasons why homework is given in schools and colleges. Students can reap the benefits even in their professional lives.

But what exactly are the benefits of homework and how can it help students? Let us take a look at some of them:

1. Students Learn the Importance of Time Management

They will learn to balance play and work. Students will also learn to complete assignments within deadlines by learning to prioritize their time.

It helps them understand the importance of time management skills . When they are assigned a project or a test, they will know when it is due, how much time they have to complete it, and what they need to do.

This also helps them in their future careers. Employees must be able to manage their time efficiently in order to be successful.

If a project is due soon, employees should take effective steps to get it done on time. Homeworks in the schooling years teaches this practice of time management.

2. Promotes Self-Learning

Students get more time to review the content and this promotes self-learning . This is a big advantage of homework.

It also promotes continuous learning as students can revise their syllabus on their own. Homework gives them an opportunity to develop their critical thinking skills and problem-solving abilities.

3. Helps Teachers Assess a Student’s Learning

Homeworks help teachers track how well the students are grasping the content . They can modify their teaching methods based on the responses they receive from their students.

4. Teaches Students to Be Responsible

Students learn to become independent learners as they do their homework without any help from the teacher.

Studying at home also motivates students to study harder in order to achieve better results. This encourages them to take up more responsibilities at home too.

5. Boosts Memory Retention

Homework provides practice time to recall concepts discussed in class, thereby enabling students to memorize facts and figures taught at school.

One of the advantages of homework is that it sharpens memory power and concentration.

6. Enables Parents to Track a Student’s Performance

Parents can assess how well their children are doing with regard to academic performance by checking their homework assignments.

This gives parents a chance to discuss with teachers about improving their child’s performance at school .

7. Allows Students to Revise Content

Revising together with other students can also help with understanding  information because it gives you another perspective, as well as an opportunity to ask questions and engage with others.

8. Practice Makes Perfect

Doing homework has numerous benefits for students. One of them is that it helps students learn the concepts in depth.

Homework teaches them how to apply the concepts to solve a problem. It gives them experience on how to solve problems using different techniques.

9. Develops Persistence

When students do their homework, they have to work hard to find all the possible solutions to a problem.

They have to try out different methods until they reach a solution that works. This teaches them perseverance and helps them develop their determination and grit to keep working hard.

10. Helps Them to Learn New Skills

Homework is important because it helps students to learn new and advanced skills. It promotes self-study, research and time management skills within students.

It also builds their confidence in tackling problems independently without constant help from teachers and parents.

11. Helps in Building a Positive Attitude Towards Learning

12. Students Can Explore Their Areas of Interest

Homework helps in building curiosity about a subject that excites them. Homework gives students an opportunity to immerse themselves in a subject matter.

When they become curious, they themselves take the initiative to learn more about it.

13. Encourages In-Depth Understanding of The Concepts

Homeworks allow students to learn the subject in a more detailed manner. It gives students the chance to recall and go over the content.

This will lead to better understanding and they will be able to remember the information for a long time.

14. Minimizes Screen Time:

Homework is not only a great way to get students to do their work themselves, but it can also encourage them to reduce screen time.

Homework gives students a good reason to stay off their computers and phones. Homework promotes the productive use of time .

15. Helps Develop Good Study Habits

The more they do their homework, the better they will get it. They will learn to manage their time in a more effective way and be able to do their work at a faster rate.

Moreover, they will be able to develop a good work ethic, which will help them in their future careers.

We all know that too much of anything can be bad. Homework is no different. If the workload of the students is too much, then it can lead to unnecessary stress .

Therefore, it is necessary for teachers to be mindful of the workload of students. That way, students will be able to enjoy their free time and actually enjoy doing homework instead of seeing it as a burden.

You Might Also Like

How to write and evaluate algebraic expressions: a beginner’s guide, interactive learning: how slideshows enhance student engagement, how to convert an assignment document into text, leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Weekly Newsletter

subscribe to our latest blog and weekly newsletter

Popular News

Importance of being Focused in Life

- Advertisement -

• Certifications

Top Categories

Subscribe us, for quick admission assistance.

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

• [email protected]
• Login / Register

Why Critical Thinking Is Important: Skills and Benefits Explained

Article 07 Sep 2024 130 0

Critical thinking is one of the most essential cognitive skills, vital for navigating today’s complex world. Whether you are a student, educator, professional, or lifelong learner, developing critical thinking abilities can dramatically improve your problem-solving skills, decision-making processes, and intellectual independence.

What is Critical Thinking?

At its core, critical thinking refers to the ability to think clearly and rationally, understanding the logical connections between ideas. It involves analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing information to form judgments. Rather than accepting information at face value, critical thinkers delve deeper, questioning assumptions and assessing the evidence before drawing conclusions.

Components of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a multifaceted skill, which includes:

• Analysis : Breaking down complex information into smaller, more manageable parts.
• Evaluation : Judging the credibility of sources and the strength of arguments.
• Logical reasoning : Making decisions based on coherent and well-structured thought processes.
• Intellectual independence : Forming opinions based on careful examination rather than external influences.

By understanding these components, you can build a strong foundation for developing critical thinking skills , applicable to all aspects of life.

Importance of Critical Thinking in Daily Life

Why is critical thinking important? In today’s information-driven world, where we are constantly bombarded with data, opinions, and perspectives, being able to distinguish facts from fiction is essential. Critical thinking plays a key role in decision-making , problem-solving , and understanding complex issues . Let’s explore its significance in various areas:

1. Decision-Making

Effective decision-making requires the ability to weigh options, consider consequences, and anticipate outcomes. Critical thinking enables individuals to make informed decisions based on facts and reason, rather than emotions or bias. For example, when choosing a career path, a critical thinker will evaluate job market trends, personal interests, and long-term goals to make a well-informed decision.

2. Problem-Solving

In both personal and professional environments, problem-solving is an everyday necessity. Critical thinking enhances your ability to tackle challenges by breaking problems into manageable parts, analyzing potential solutions, and selecting the most effective approach. When faced with a complex issue at work, for example, a critical thinker will systematically evaluate possible solutions rather than jumping to conclusions.

3. Understanding Complex Issues

Whether in academics, work, or social interactions, understanding multifaceted issues requires higher-order thinking . Critical thinking allows you to approach these issues objectively, avoiding oversimplifications or emotional reactions. This skill is particularly valuable in today’s polarized world, where complex social, political, and environmental issues require careful thought and nuanced understanding.

Benefits of Developing Critical Thinking Skills

1. improved problem-solving abilities.

One of the most significant advantages of honing critical thinking is the improvement in problem-solving abilities. By learning to break down issues and consider various angles, you become adept at finding solutions that others might overlook. This skill is particularly valuable in fields like business, technology, and education, where innovation and creativity are prized.

2. Better Decision-Making

Good decisions stem from the ability to evaluate situations clearly and rationally. Critical thinking ensures that you are not swayed by emotional or impulsive reactions but instead base your decisions on sound reasoning. This leads to more consistent, reliable outcomes in both personal and professional settings.

3. Enhanced Communication Skills

Effective communication is built on clear thinking. By developing critical thinking skills , you improve your ability to express ideas clearly and persuasively. Whether in writing or speech, critical thinkers can present their ideas logically and support them with solid evidence, making their arguments more compelling.

4. Increased Intellectual Independence

Critical thinkers develop the habit of questioning information and seeking their own answers. This fosters intellectual independence , enabling individuals to form their own opinions and perspectives based on careful analysis rather than relying on others’ viewpoints. This independence is crucial in a world where misinformation is rampant.

5. Boosted Creativity and Innovation

Critical thinking is not only about logic; it also encourages creativity. By questioning assumptions and exploring new possibilities, critical thinkers often develop innovative solutions and ideas. This is particularly beneficial in fields that require out-of-the-box thinking, such as technology, entrepreneurship, and the arts.

How to Develop Critical Thinking Skills

Developing critical thinking skills is a lifelong process, but with intentional practice, anyone can improve. Here are actionable steps you can take:

1. Question Assumptions

The first step in critical thinking is to challenge your assumptions. Ask yourself: Why do I believe this? What evidence supports this claim? By questioning assumptions, you open your mind to new perspectives and solutions.

2. Analyze Information Critically

When presented with information, whether in the form of news, reports, or advice, practice analyzing it critically. What is the source of the information? Is it reliable? Are there biases that could affect the interpretation of the data? Critical thinking requires that you not only take information at face value but also dig deeper to understand its context.

3. Seek Out Diverse Perspectives

Exposure to different viewpoints strengthens your ability to think critically. By engaging with a wide range of opinions and ideas, you can challenge your preconceptions and develop a more balanced view of complex issues.

4. Reflect on Your Thinking Process

Reflective thinking is an integral part of critical thinking . After making decisions or solving problems, take time to evaluate your thought process. What worked well? Where could you improve? This self-reflection helps refine your thinking skills over time.

5. Practice Problem-Solving in Real-Life Scenarios

A great way to develop critical thinking is by applying it to real-life situations. Take on complex tasks at work, analyze current events, or even engage in strategy games that require planning and decision-making. By practicing problem-solving regularly, you will sharpen your critical thinking abilities.

Teaching Critical Thinking Skills

Critical thinking is not an innate ability; it must be nurtured and developed, particularly in educational settings. Here’s how educators can teach these essential skills:

1. Encourage Open-Ended Questions

In the classroom, asking open-ended questions encourages students to think critically rather than simply regurgitate information. Questions like “Why do you think this is true?” or “How would you solve this problem?” prompt students to analyze information and consider alternative solutions.

2. Promote Active Learning

Engaging students in active learning exercises, such as debates, group discussions, or problem-based learning, helps develop their critical thinking . These activities require students to articulate their thoughts, evaluate others’ perspectives, and revise their ideas based on evidence.

3. Teach Metacognitive Skills

Metacognition, or thinking about one’s thinking, is crucial for critical thinking . Teachers can encourage students to reflect on their thought processes by asking them to explain how they arrived at their conclusions. This practice helps students become more aware of their thinking patterns and biases.

Critical thinking is a powerful skill that enhances decision-making, problem-solving, and intellectual independence. It is essential in today’s fast-paced, information-rich world, where the ability to analyze information and make informed decisions is critical. By developing critical thinking skills , you can navigate complex issues with confidence, communicate more effectively, and innovate in both personal and professional environments.

To enhance your critical thinking , practice questioning assumptions, analyzing information critically, and seeking out diverse perspectives. Whether in education, work, or daily life, these skills will equip you to face challenges with clarity and logic, leading to better decisions and greater personal growth.

• Latest Articles

AI and the Future of Humans: Impact, Ethics, and Collaboration

Why ai is the future: innovations driving global change, how information technology is shaping the future of education, the impact of ai on employment: positive and negative effects on jobs, negative impact of ai on employment: automation and job loss, top 10 benefits of infographics in education for enhanced learning, positive impact of ai on employment: opportunities & benefits, blended learning: maximize impact with hybrid education models, accessibility in education: every student's voice matters, ai’s influence on job market trends | future of employment, improve your writing skills: a beginner's guide, shifts in pop culture & their societal implications, top study tips for exam success: effective strategies for academic achievement, 9 practical tips to start reading more every day, top study strategies for student success, personalized learning: tailored education for every student, how to study smarter, not harder: tips for success, 10 important roles of technology in education, apply online.

Find Detailed information on:

• Top Colleges & Universities
• Popular Courses
• Exam Preparation
• Admissions & Eligibility
• College Rankings

Sign Up or Login

Not a Member Yet! Join Us it's Free.

Already have account Please Login

5 Ways How Does Homework Teach Students How To Problem Solve

Problem solving is an art that can be developed through reading, learning, and with experience. Homework provides a mindset and technic which indirectly trains the student’s mind in problem-solving. Let’s dive deep to understand this better.

Table of Contents

1. Homework helps improve your memory and be creative with ideas.

Additionally, homework allows students to explore different ways of approaching a problem and to think outside the box. This can lead to more creative solutions when students face real-world problems.

2. Homework helps manage your time and improves time management

3. homework helps analyze a problem and think of possible solutions..

Homework teaches students how to problem solve by helping them analyze a problem and think of possible solutions. It is a valuable tool that can help students learn how to identify and understand a problem and develop and test potential solutions.

4. Homework helps you stay disciplined and organized.

Homework is often thought of as a necessary evil by students. However, homework can be a valuable tool that helps students learn how to problem-solve.

This skill can be transferred to other areas of life , such as jobs and families. Students who can stay disciplined with their homework are more likely to be successful in other areas of their lives.

5. Homework allows you to plan and execution any task

Homework allows students to practice and reinforce the skills they are learning in class. It also provides a way for teachers to assess how well students understand the material.

Homework can teach students how to problem-solve in several ways. For example, it can help them learn how to find information, identify and use relevant resources, and develop and use critical thinking skills.

Share this:

Admission for January 2023 Cohort Closing Soon

• Subject Choices
• Online Education
• University Admissions
• Student Stories
• How It Works?
• Enquire Now

Home » Blog » The Importance of Homework in Students Life

The Importance of Homework in Students Life

A very familiar word in every student’s life is “Homework”. These are the assignments given to them by the teachers to do at home after school. Why is this even important, have you ever thought about it?

Let’s delve deep into this blog to understand how crucial homework is in students’ lives. We are also going to explore the importance of homework and some exciting ways to make it fun and feasible. 

From developing good academic skills to inculcating responsibility and time management, homework significantly helps in shaping students’ education path. Now let’s focus and uncover how significant it is and its  potential impact on students’ life.

Students dread the word “homework” because they don’t need any more school work during their valuable weekends after spending hours in class.

Even though it’s well recognized that homework is a requirement of traditional education , the subject has grown to be somewhat contentious. 

While some people believe that homework is an essential part of education, others believe the time could be better spent elsewhere. Do pupils need to do homework? Take a closer look at both sides’ arguments about the Importance of homework to make your own decision.

• What is Homework?

Practice Makes Perfect: 

Review and reinforcement: , independent learning: , preparation for assessments: , extension of learning: , feedback and assessment: , 1. improve thinking and extend learning skills , 2. learn to use resources, 3. helps develop good study habits, 4. prepare for the following day’s class, 5. investigate subjects and develop research skills, 6. increases concentration, 7. develops memory, 8. time management, 9. students become independent, 10. homework improves student achievement, create a dedicated workspace: , provide necessary supplies:, establish a routine: , offer support, but don’t overdo it: , encourage regular breaks: , designate a study space: , set a schedule: , priorities tasks: , stay organized: , limit distractions: , potential of promoting classroom learning, develops crucial study skills, it encourages the discipline of practice, homework builds communication bridges, takes away from leisure time, causes unnecessary stress, not always effective, final thoughts.

It can be understood as work assigned to the students by their teachers to be completed in the time apart from their regular classes.

It can be given in different forms, for instance assignments, project works, reading articles or activities that support what they have already learnt in class. It brushes up their knowledge and they also get an opportunity to translate their understanding to application.

The complexity and duration of homework may vary depending on the grade level and subjects. The ultimate aim of giving homeworks is to boost up the understanding, improve skills and support independent learning.

How Does Homework Help Students Learn?

As we discussed, homework is very impactful in a student’s learning. It’s not about finishing the task; but revisiting the concepts that are already learnt in class. Here are different ways in which homework is helpful to the students:

Whether it is about solving maths problems, improving writing skills or learning languages, continuous practice with the help of homework builds the concepts and also helps in revision of what is already learnt.

Homework helps in revision of the concepts that are already taught in class. Regularly revising the topics helps students to gain a grasp on concepts and retain it for a longer time.

Students develop a sense of responsibility for their own learning by completing their homeworks. It develops very essential skills such as independence and self-discipline which will not only help to excel their academics but life too.

As we discussed, by completing homeworks students not only strengthen their concepts but also get them prepared for upcoming tests, quizzes, and exams.By practising related problems they become more confident and give their best in assessments.

Homework is also helpful in increasing the horizon of knowledge for students. It may include research, projects or some skill-based education activities which enables them to think beyond the classroom learning a particular topic deeply and develop critical thinking and analytical skills.

Valuable feedback always helps in the betterment of students. Teachers are able to understand students’ understanding about the topic by assessing their homeworks. They accordingly help the students struggling in a particular area.

Importance of Homework

In today’s academic world homework plays a significant role in shaping the academic journey of students. Let’s explore the different aspects of importance of homework:

Students develop various life skills for instance critical thinking, problem-solving and analytical skills by thinking beyond their curriculum. Homework’s helps them to translate the theoretical knowledge to practical applications.

Sometimes for the completion of assignments students are encouraged to utilise various online resources , different textbooks and libraries to gather critical informations.This becomes an expert at gathering information thereby improving their research abilities.

Regular homeworks seeds the sense of responsibility and discipline in students. It helps them develop a study routine, by which they learn to manage their time efficiently and stay organised. This leads to great success in their academics and life.

It is always better to read and make ourselves familiar with the topic which is going to be discussed in class. Through homeworks students are allowed to do that. They are well aware of the topic to be discussed which enables them to actively participate in class, ask accordant questions and even learn the topic better.

Assignments frequently pushes students to learn more about a certain topic, which increases their curiosity and desire for learning, for instance, research -based works make them learn how to gather, analyse and evaluate information, in turn improving their research skills.

Being involved in homework requires maintained focus and concentration. The independent study periods helps in practicing concentration which improves their potential to work efficiently for extended period of time, which is crucial for both academic and daily life.

Interaction is the important part of homework assignments. By revising and practising concepts students boost up their concepts, memory recall and also retain the information for a longer period of time.

Homeworks often comes with a deadline. Students learn how to wisely utilize their time to complete the task within the provided deadline.

This helps in developing essential time management skills by prioritising assignments, assigning certain time to particular work and sticking by the schedule. This is something they develop which is applicable throughout their life.

Homeworks are to be done beyond the classroom timings and without the help of teachers. This teaches students to own their work, perform independently, be confident as they deal with these academic problems and hopefully prevail over it with minimum guidance.

As we discussed, homework is a preview of preparation for assessments. It helps students in revision, and retention of the concepts being taught in class. It is often observed that ones who are regularly completing their homeworks are more likely to have good academic performance and grades overall.

How to Make Homework Comfortable for Kids? 

Although homeworks have immense benefits, it can be an arduous tasks for kids, but we can make it fun and intriguing for them. Following are the easy ways to tackle homework :

Good ambience do affect working efficiency. The place designed for kids to study must be away from distractions like TV, loud noises,or toys. It should have proper lighting, quiet and comfortable area to work in.

All the requirements for completion of homework like eraser, pencil, colors, notebooks etc must be checked prior such that there will be less interruptions during study time.

There must be a proper routine based on the child’s preference of learning time, which should be followed consistently. Children get benefitted by this as they learn what to expect and develops a sense of structure.

One should always be available to help or guide their child if needed, but never do their works for them. Parents should encourage their children to develop problem-solving skills and the sense of working independently.

Study period should have a decent amount of short breaks to avoid exhaustion. Child should be motivated to do some physical activities during these breaks to freshen up their minds.

What are some Good Homework Habits?

To give their apt performance in homeworks, students must develop some good homework habits. Following are some tips which can help them develop constructive homework habits:

Students should always have a better workplace which should be quite, with good lighting, and free from all sorts of distractions. Positive learning environment has direct effects on how efficiently we perform, being focused and organized.

Being consistent is the key to success. Students must fix their study time and abide by it. It will help prevent procrastination and will produce fruitful outcomes.

Prioritising assignments based on how challenging and important it is will help in its completion within the given timeline. Students should wisely divide their time and stick by the schedule for timely completion of their tasks.

Staying organised will save a lot of time. Students should always keep a track of their assignments, deadlines and study materials required for it. They can make a planner or use digital tools to stay updated and prevent forgetting important stuff.

Avoid electronic gadgets, mobile phones, speakers in the workplace. Time assigned for the short breaks should not exceed by any means to remain focused towards your work. Parents need to create ways to limit the screen time of children .

A Closer Look at the   Advantages and Disadvantages of Homework

Students perform best when their homework reinforces what they’ve learned in class. Homework assignments that review lessons from the previous day increase pupils’ retention of important material.

When the students have completed homework, they can use their newly acquired skills to apply to other topics and real-life scenarios.

Another importance of homework is that students develop various necessary skills that they will carry with them throughout their academic and professional life, from time management and organization to self-motivation and independent learning.

While doing the same issues again might be tedious and challenging, it also strengthens the disciplined practice. It’s common to need repetition to get better at a skill. Each repetition makes you more proficient.

When homework is finished each night, especially for a challenging subject, the principles are easier to comprehend. This gives the student a benefit while looking for vocational employment later on in life.

The relationship between the student, the teacher, the school, and the parents are forged by homework. Everyone can get to know one another better, and parents can identify where their kids are having difficulty. In a similar vein, parents may observe what areas their kids are doing particularly well.

Children can relax and explore the world during free time; for example, learning to ride a bike, reading a book , or socialising with friends and family teaches kids valuable skills that cannot be acquired when sitting at a computer.

Getting enough exercise, which can improve cognitive function , might be hampered by sedentary activities like doing schoolwork.

The mere mention of “homework” can make students feel dreadful. Homework makes pupils feel worried, agitated, and unmotivated when the workload is excessive, and the tasks get harder.

As well as causing behavioural problems and sleep deprivation , this can make schoolwork a burdensome part of school life.

Numerous research has attempted to evaluate the importance of homework and how it enhances academic performance.

According to research by John Hattie, a professor of education at the University of Melbourne, homework in elementary school has a negligible impact since pupils are working on independent, unconnected projects rather than consolidating previously learned material.

According to Hattie’s research, homework at the elementary and secondary levels only works when it requires pupils to review previously taught material.

Last but not the least, homework do play a significant part in not only letting students perform better academically but also excel in life.

They develop very important skills like time-management, being responsible, being ready for future challenges and lot more. It helps them prepare for their upcoming exams by practicing and revising the topics already learnt in class.

In addition to it, homework develops self-discipline and perseverance, the attributes that are indispensable for success in life. In spite of few complaints, homework’s hold a crucial place in education system, contributing to a student’s academic performance and a holistic development.

The advantages and disadvantages of homework are both genuine, and it appears that the topic of whether or not students should have homework is not an easy one to answer. It is often observed that parents and teachers are at odds while the students are left out in the middle.

It’s crucial to weigh both viewpoints to reach a middle ground. The achievement of the learner is ultimately everyone’s goal.

To help achieve this goal even more easily, 21K School has designed curriculums that will minimize the workload on students and help them have a better learning experience.

Despite occasional complaints, homework remains an essential component of education, contributing significantly to students’ academic growth and overall development.

Read our latest education blogs here. We are pioneers in proffering personalised, affordable and high-quality lessons using an advanced learning platform.

Why is homework good for students?

Homework can benefit students because it reinforces learning, helps develop responsibility and time management skills, and provides opportunities for independent practice and self-reflection.

Is daily homework necessary for students?

The necessity of daily homework for students can depend on various factors such as the student’s age, grade level, learning style, and the goals of the curriculum. Daily homework may not be necessary for younger students as they may require more hands-on and play-based learning experiences. However, as students get older, daily homework can become more critical as it helps reinforce learning and develop time management and study skills.

How is homework good for your brain?

Homework can be good for your brain in several ways:

Memory retention: Homework can help you better retain and recall information by providing opportunities for repetition and practice.

Critical thinking: Homework can help you develop critical thinking skills by challenging you to analyse and apply information in new and creative ways.

Time management: Completing homework requires discipline and time management skills, which can help improve executive functioning in the brain.

Self-reflection: Homework can provide opportunities for self-reflection and self-assessment, which can help you identify areas where you need to improve and develop a growth mindset.

Overall, regular homework assignments can help keep your brain active and engaged outside of the classroom, which can have long-term benefits for learning and academic success.

Does homework have a positive effect?

Yes, homework can have a positive effect. It can help students develop organisational and time management skills, reinforce what has been learned in class, and prepare for upcoming tests and assignments. Homework also encourages independent learning, which is critical to success in school and beyond. As students get older, homework increasingly allows them to take responsibility.

Why is homework beneficial for students?

Homework is beneficial to students in a variety of ways. It allows students to practice and reinforce the material they are learning. This repetition helps them develop better understanding and mastery of the subject matter, which can result in improved performance on tests and assignments. Homework also helps teach students responsibility, as they are expected to complete the assigned tasks. Additionally, it gives students an opportunity to work independently and develop problem solving skills that will be useful throughout their academic careers.

How does homework help students in the future?

Homework can help students in the future by reinforcing the concepts and skills taught in class, improving time management and study skills, and preparing students for future academic and career responsibilities.

How to give homework to students?

When giving homework to students, it is essential to provide clear instructions and expectations, assign tasks that align with class objectives, and provide opportunities for students to seek clarification or additional help.

How to motivate students to do their homework?

To motivate students to do their homework, teachers can provide incentives, offer choices, make the assignments relevant and engaging, and provide timely feedback and recognition for completed work.

Why do you think teachers give homework to students?

Teachers give homework to students for several reasons, including reinforcing learning, assessing understanding, providing additional practice, developing study habits and time management skills, and preparing students for future academic and career responsibilities.

Join Asia’s Leading Online School and Unlock endless opportunities

You may also want to read

Fun in Learning: How Does It Work?

Top 10 Benefits of Remote Learning

Peer-to-Peer Education: 7 Benefits of Collaboration in Schools

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Speak to Us

Get a call from the 21K School Advisor. Learn about the fee structure, admission process, International curriculum & more

Invalid value

Enter a value for this field.

Please ensure the number is reachable through WhatsApp and Normal calls

Select a choice

Select a choice.

Please select State

Please tick the box to confirm.

• Request a Callback

All rights reserved © 2024

Mindreflex Technologies Pte. Ltd.

Regd Address: 3 Phillip Street

#14-05 Royal Group Building

• How does it work?

crispebooks.org

Don't be afraid of homework, ways in which homework helps you in the future.

Students may have a perception that homework is just a waste of time. They may feel doing something else could be a better use of their time. A lot of students use professional custom services to complete their homework. However, homework is designed to help students prepare for the future and develop skills that may come in handy in life.

From real-time experiences, people can confirm how homework helped shape their skills for the future. These are the skills that make adults successful with better working habits. Here are six ways in which homework helps students in the future.

• Develops Your Memory and Critical Thinking

The practice is an activity that ensures knowledge gets ingrained in the brain. One can develop a better memory and incorporate new skills with repetition. Homework is based on classwork and focuses on integrating the new skill through its practice. This helps in boosting memory and retaining the acquired knowledge for exams and future tests. Moreover, the skill of critical thinking shapes one’s lifelong decisions.

• Build Suitable Study Habits

Study habits include planning study hours, sitting, and focusing on meaningful goals. Some students may be able to concentrate on any situation with loud sounds or soft music. On the other hand, some may need silence and alone time to focus on the tasks. The time spent studying and the number of hours determines how long one can concentrate on one thing. It is essential to teach effective study habits before you reach a hectic college schedule.

• Learn Time Management

To finish tasks on time, one needs to prioritize activities and plan them. You can make a list of things you need to do and prioritize them accordingly. This helps in accomplishing more work in a limited time. You may be able to squeeze time for fun activities after finishing your homework.

• Realize Personal Responsibility

Your homework provides you with a sense of responsibility for your assignments. This makes you accountable to finish them in time and finish them with utmost precision. You will be able to finish work with more accuracy and quality when you realize you will be graded for it.

• Learn How to Work Independently

You may consider your memory and perception to be right when learning something at school. But, at home, you will apply the concepts that you learned in class. This is a test for your knowledge and problem-solving skills when studying on your own. Moreover, you will learn about your abilities and new methods to complete your work. These challenges will develop your brain to solve more significant problems in life.

• Learn to Use Resources and Research Better

When you work on challenging tasks, you use research papers, books, websites, and videos. This helps you learn more and get a better grade for your homework. With these impeccable research skills, you will be ready to take on life in the future and save a lot of time by not depending on others.

Homework may seem like additional work that is preventing you from having fun in life. But emphasize its benefits and how it will help you in the future. This positive notion will prepare you for your life ahead while excelling in homework.

© crispebooks.org 2024