Are homework assignments absurd in the age of ChatGPT?

License Creative Commons

Paco Benítez

“By providing every student with a quality education and the resources they need for both lessons and homework, we can empower learners from all backgrounds to succeed and thrive”.
(London Breed, former Mayor of San Francisco).

This article takes its title from a compelling affirmative response to the titular question recently offered by Antonio Solano Cazorla, teacher and professor of language and literature, as well as headteacher of a state secondary school. In an interview published in the press, he makes a series of sweeping statements about education—statements that merit closer examination, not least because they contradict scientific and empirical evidence and overlook the realities of contemporary classrooms. For instance, he asserts, as he brings it up twice during a brief interview, that repeating a school year is commonplace in the Spanish education system, stating, “If a student fails to achieve a particular competency in the first year of secondary school, they should not be required to repeat the year by default, as they may have mastered other competencies”.

However, the reality is quite different: What by default occurs is that an increasing number of students, despite having undeveloped competencies, advance to the next year due to regulations mandating their promotion and pressure from the educational administration and inspectors, which often coerces teachers into compliance. This continues until they reach advanced stages of secondary education, with serious deficiencies that verge on functional illiteracy.

Later in the interview, the familiar critique of content becomes evident when the respondent affirms that reducing the syllabus in favour of more reading is an effective educational formula. Solano also criticizes the teaching of morphosyntax, arguing that it does not benefit students and instead stresses the importance of skills such as “expressing oneself correctly”. The evidence contradicts the notion of promoting “competency-based learning” at the expense of knowledge acquisition. To be competent in any area, one must possess extensive knowledge of the subject. Competence and skill are impossible without a comprehensive mastery of the necessary knowledge.

Critical thinking, reasoning, problem-solving, and creativity are all enhanced through the acquisition of factual content, which integrates into long-term memory (Willingham, 2011; Ruiz Martín, 2023). Moreover, such knowledge is essential for reading comprehension (Willingham, 2006; Tirado Ramos, 2024). Empirical evidence shows that reducing curricular content in favour of general skills and competencies is counterproductive to student learning (OECD, 2019; Priestley & Sinnema, 2014). Contrary to the binary argument of “less content, more reading”, a stronger foundation in content knowledge enhances reading skills. Vocabulary acquisition, linguistic structures (hence criticisms of morphosyntactic study lack merit), factual and conceptual knowledge, and familiarity with literature and verbal reasoning significantly aid reading comprehension. These pre-existing knowledge elements play a crucial role in understanding texts (Scarborough et al., 2009; Smith et al., 2021). Consequently, it is through knowledge and content that students can learn to “express themselves correctly”.

Turning to the main subject of this article—homework—it is essential to carefully examine this deeply ingrained practice before making sweeping claims such as, “Homework is merely busywork with no learning value. Worse, it punishes those who fail to complete it. What a flawed invention!” Like most complex issues, homework warrants a nuanced “it depends” rather than outright dismissal. First, what do rigorous studies and evidence reveal about the pros and cons of assigning homework, especially concerning its impact on learning? Research findings on homework are numerous and often contradictory, likely due to the difficulty of isolating its effects from the many factors influencing student achievement (Muijs & Reynolds, 2018).

Short-term benefits of homework include improved retention of facts and knowledge, enhanced understanding, development of critical thinking and information-processing skills, and the opportunity to extend the curriculum. Long-term benefits include fostering better study habits, more positive attitudes toward school and learning, and stimulating independent learning outside classroom hours. Additional non-academic benefits include increased self-direction, self-discipline, problem-solving ability, time management, and curiosity. Negative aspects include student fatigue, which may lead to diminished motivation and interest in academic work, increased cheating through copying (potentially exacerbated by AI), and reduced time for extracurricular and leisure activities. Tensions between students and their families may also arise (Cooper et al., 2006).

For homework to be a positive learning tool, several principles must be followed (Muijs & Reynolds, 2018), the first of which is avoiding its use as a form of punishment. When homework is used as a penalty, students are less likely to view it as a learning activity and may put forth less effort. For the same reason, teachers should always provide some form of feedback on assignments, as this not only helps students understand their progress but also offers valuable insights for the teacher regarding their pupils’ development. Homework is more effective when it reinforces key curricular ideas and presents a level of complexity that challenges students while remaining achievable. This balance prevents confusion or frustration and promotes successful task completion. Additionally, connecting classroom learning to students’ everyday lives makes homework more relevant and aids in transferring knowledge to long-term memory.

If homework is not completed, students should face some form of consequence, such as completing the task during a break, receiving a negative mark, or losing a privilege. This discourages them from neglecting assignments, as repeated non-compliance could escalate into a broader classroom issue. Finally, there is the question of time and the appropriate amount of homework. Research suggests that for the first four years of primary school, about 20 minutes per day is ideal; for the later years of primary school, 30–40 minutes is appropriate; and in secondary school, up to 90 minutes is recommended (Trautwein, 2007). To manage this effectively, it has been shown that implementing a consistent homework policy across the entire school is highly beneficial. Such a policy ensures that all students are treated equally, as all teachers adhere to the same guidelines. It also prevents conflicts that may arise when different teachers assign excessive amounts of homework to be completed within the same timeframe.

Therefore, if evidence clearly demonstrates the positive impact of homework on the learning process, particularly during secondary school, should we simply give up on using it because there is a technology that can be used disruptively? Or worse yet, because some families find it “hateful and tedious”? To begin with, any form of learning—like any professional work—inevitably involves moments of boredom, if not plenty of them, and understanding and coping with this reality is part of life. In school, as in life, “no tot són flors I violes” (it’s not all a bed of roses), as they say in my beloved Catalan homeland. Let’s start from the premise that when a teacher assigns homework, it is not done to annoy or punish students, as this teacher hints at in their interview. Instead, it serves a learning objective tied to a pedagogical plan. Let’s also acknowledge that teachers strive to adhere to the principles outlined earlier when assigning homework, though this does not mean we always succeed in executing them perfectly. After all, we are only human, and we all make mistakes. In fact, the benefits of homework extend beyond academic achievement. Recent research indicates that completing homework even benefits students’ mental health. It is one of the activities associated with mental health improvements and reduces time spent on another activity that negatively impacts it: the use of mobile phones and social media (Twenge et al., 2018). Doing homework is among five activities—including playing sports or engaging in physical exercise, attending religious services, reading books or other printed materials, and engaging in in-person social interactions—that are inversely correlated with depression.

Another key benefit, often overlooked, is its role in fostering students’ individual responsibility, autonomy in learning, and self-regulation. Completing homework requires students to develop skills such as self-motivation, resisting distractions, using strategies to complete tasks, time management, setting goals, reflecting on their performance, and exercising self-control to delay gratification. This last skill, in particular, has been positively correlated with academic success throughout life, as well as numerous social and health benefits, especially for students from disadvantaged backgrounds (Ruiz Martín, 2019). So, isn’t it hypocritical to criticize teachers for assigning homework to your children, claiming it overwhelms them, while simultaneously enrolling them in two or three extracurricular activities each week? Moreover, considering that the average daily smartphone use among Spanish teenagers is 4 hours and 15 minutes, shouldn’t homework be seen as something positive? Beyond its inherent learning value and contribution to developing personal responsibility, it at least provides a chance for young people to disconnect from technology for a while in the afternoons.

It’s true that, with the advent of powerful AI tools like ChatGPT, certain homework assignments should be reconsidered, as students can easily rely on AI to complete tasks such as writing essays, analysing sentences morpho-syntactically, or solving specific math problems. Personally, I have already limited these types of assignments—which are crucial for developing students’ competencies—to the classroom whenever possible. In this controlled environment, I can ensure that students engage with the work themselves, fostering the cognitive skills these tasks are intended to build. That said, it still depends on the student—their character, the level of parental supervision at home, or the academic level they are at. For instance, managing a responsible student differs significantly from dealing with one who might misuse AI to complete homework, even at the cost of learning nothing in the process. Similarly, approaches vary across academic levels. For example, I often assign writing tasks to my second-year high school students, trusting they won’t resort to cheating because they understand that doing so would only harm their own progress. This practice directly supports their preparation for the selectividad (university entrance) exams. From the very first day of class, I work with them didactically to instil the principle that consistent practice and learning from mistakes lead to better outcomes.

One of the primary benefits of homework is extending learning time and enabling students to complete unfinished classwork. Moreover, many homework tasks can be engaging, non-tedious, and challenging to accomplish with AI. At most, AI might assist with idea generation, which can then be incorporated into the final product—a highly productive and appropriate use of this technology. For instance, I often assign tasks such as creating metaphorical images to represent the causes and consequences of World War I, which students later present to their classmates, producing a video explaining an invention, or reading a book chapter to discuss and analyze in class the following day. Countless other examples from colleagues could be cited—some equally valid, others even better—but for the reader’s sake, I will refrain from further lengthening an already extended article.

In fact, even if we accept the complaint from the interview that “I have two daughters, and I’ve spent entire afternoons doing homework with them because they couldn’t do it on their own”, suggesting that teachers may have poorly assessed the suitability or difficulty of the assignments—we must also recognize one of homework’s key benefits: fostering parental involvement in children’s learning, provided families view it as such. That said, this parent appears to have been remarkably unlucky, as all the homework their daughters have encountered throughout their school years seems to have been boring, poorly suited to their abilities, and ineffective in supporting their learning. What can we do? Nonetheless, evidence indicates that when parents show interest in their children’s homework, they help instil the belief that homework is important and valuable (Hallam, 2004).

We are heading toward a social reality where people increasingly delegate their mental and cognitive functions to technology, a trend that poses risks as it stifles personal autonomy. Families, aware of both the pedagogical benefits of homework and the potential dangers of AI, should protect their children from these risks by monitoring their homework to ensure it is completed honestly, thereby fostering the skills and learning these tasks are meant to develop. As Ana María Pedraza Moreno, a physics and chemistry teacher in Andalusia, aptly notes, we are likely to see a divide among children based on family attitudes toward technology: those with “restrictive” families and those without—either because their families fail to understand the issue or because they are overly optimistic technophiles. The indiscriminate use of AI by students is more likely to diminish their cognitive abilities (similar to giving a six-year-old a calculator to perform basic addition). Children and adolescents stop exercising their capacity to think and create their own work, leading to what some psychologists term “mental sedentarism.” Looking ahead, we can foresee a movement of informed and conscientious parents who will protect their children from premature exposure to AI, much like Silicon Valley executives shield their own children from the very technology they market to the masses.

For this reason, the question should not be whether to assign homework (the answer should be a resounding “yes”), but how. This is particularly critical for students from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds, who start at a disadvantage due to a lack of strong parental oversight. The amount of homework is not positively correlated with student achievement. Instead, factors such as managing distractions, self-efficacy and perceived responsibility for learning, goal-setting, self-reflection, time management, and having a designated place to do homework play a far more significant role (Ramdass & Zimmerman, 2011). Instead of giving up and abandoning a resource that supports the teaching-learning process simply because of a challenge like the one posed by AI tools, teachers should seek solutions and apply to themselves the advice we often give our students: to face challenges and overcome them. We should lead by example (acta non verba) rather than giving up at the first obstacle.

I have a few proposals to achieve this. One proven method, particularly beneficial for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, is implementing “homework clubs” (Hallam, 2004), where schools provide facilities and support staff in the afternoons to assist students with their homework, offering them a calm, resourceful space conducive to learning. This requires investment and resources, but if the administration genuinely cares about inclusion, excuses disguised in feel-good rhetoric won’t suffice. Teachers also need training on designing homework tasks that have clear pedagogical value in the age of AI. This means reducing the dominance of courses on emotional well-being, new methodologies, and digital competencies in the public training offerings for teachers, making way for more practical training relevant to day-to-day pedagogy in different subjects.

Furthermore, we need to educate both families and students on the risks of indiscriminate AI use in completing homework. For families, this could involve meetings and explanations, potentially with the help of experts. For students, the goal would be to make them aware and inspire them with the idea that only those who resist the easy route will truly be empowered, avoiding the inevitable “technological slavery” and gaining autonomy and a greater chance of future success. It may sound utopian, but if we don’t try, we’ll never know. If there’s one thing my teaching experience has taught me, it’s that students can surprise you—and often, in very positive ways.

Should we abandon a tool that benefits so many just because some misuse it? It would be like eliminating exams because some students cheat—incidentally, a dream scenario for many modern pedagogues. Despite individual opinions and personal experiences, and the inevitable educational demagoguery surrounding the topic, rigorous studies consistently show that homework is a powerful driver of learning and a fundamental element of the education system. As I have mentioned before – and we must not forget – the primary goal of schools is to help students learn, even if that involves tasks they don’t particularly enjoy. Just as we don’t remove vegetables from children’s diets because they dislike them, knowing they’re good for their health, we shouldn’t eliminate homework, knowing it benefits their education.

And what never ceases to amaze me is that all these proposals from the advocates of the old “new” education always end up disadvantaging students from broken families and/or socioeconomically underprivileged backgrounds. Take, for example, the proposal to eliminate homework, when “socioeconomically advantaged students and those attending similarly advantaged schools tend to spend more time on homework”, and “more time spent on homework is associated with better performance by students and schools” (OECD, 2014). The OECD therefore recommends that “schools and teachers should find ways to encourage disadvantaged students and those facing difficulties to complete their homework”. These advocates criticize academic content in favour of general skills and competencies, promote discovery-based learning through methods like project-based learning (PBL), or introduce UDL, which is based on neuromyths.

It almost seems as though all these ideas are designed to undermine the education of these students—always, of course, with a condescending attitude, wrapped in flashy rhetoric and trendy language. Luckily for them, they present themselves as champions of inclusion; otherwise, one might suspect that this is their actual goal.

References:

Cooper H, Robinson, J.C. & Patel, E.A. (2006). Does Homework Improve Academic Achievement? A Synthesis of Research, 1987-2003. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 1-62.

Hallam, S. (2004). Homework: The Evidence. London: Institute of Education.

Muijs, D. & Reynolds, D. (2018). Effective teaching. Evidence and practice. London: SAGE.

OECD (2014). ¿Perpetúan los deberes las desigualdades en educación? PISA In Focus, 46 ​​Paris: PISA, OECD Publishing. https://www.educacionfpydeportes.gob.es/inee/dam/jcr:8fd5734c-1633-4796-8796-e2e686e2df20/pisa-in-focus-n46-esp.pdf

OECD. (2019). Conceptual learning framework: Knowledge for 2030 concept note. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/teaching-and-learning/learning/knowledge/in_brief_Knowledge.pdf

Priestley, M., & Sinnema, C. (2014). Downgraded curriculum? An analysis of knowledge in new curricula in Scotland and New Zealand. In Creating curricula: Aims, knowledge and control (pp. 61–86). Routledge.

Ramdass, D. & Zimmerman, B.J. (2011). Developing Self-regulation Skills: The Important Role of Homework. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(3), 194-218.

Ruiz Martín, H. (2019). ¿Cómo aprendemos? Una aproximación científica al aprendizaje y la enseñanza. Barcelona, Graó.

Ruiz Martín, H. (2023). Edumitos. Ideas sobre el aprendizaje sin respaldo científico.  International Science Teaching Foundation.

Scarborough, H. S., Neuman, S., & Dickinson, D. (2009). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis) abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. Approaching Difficulties in Literacy Development: Assessment, Pedagogy and Programmes, 10, 23–38.

Smith, R., Snow, P., Serry, T., & Hammond, L. (2021). The role of background knowledge in reading comprehension: A critical review. Reading Psychology, 42(3), 214–240.

Tirado Ramos, M. A. (2024a). Dime cómo lees y te diré cómo aprendes: ¿Qué nos aporta la investigación a la enseñanza de la lectura?. Supervisión 21, 71(71). https://doi.org/10.52149/Sp21/71.8

Trautwein, U. (2007). The Homework-achievement Relation Reconsidered: Differentiating Homework Time, Homework Frequency, and Homework Effort. Learning and Instruction, 17(3), 372-388.

Twenge, J.M., Joiner, T.E., Rogers, M.L. & Martin, G.N. (2018). Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among U.S. adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media scree time. Clinical Psychological Science 6(1), 3-17.

Willingham, D. T. (2006). How knowledge helps: It speeds and strengthens reading comprehension, learning and thinking. American Educator, 30(1), 30.

Willingham, D. T. (2011). ¿Por qué a los niños no les gusta ir a la escuela?: las respuestas de un neurocientífico al funcionamiento de la mente y sus consecuencias en el aula (Vol. 34). Graó.

Source: educational EVIDENCE

Rights: Creative Commons