Conference Agenda

Homework practices have been contested within education for decades. Often seen as inequitable, and further, the stories of those most affected by homework (i.e., children, families) are rarely part of research. Exclusion of families’ experiences in homework debates means education policies and practices often do not well-serve those who should benefit.  

Our discussion will focus on three objectives across three countries:

1. Examining homework policies across diverse education systems. 

1. Providing an understanding of elementary teachers’ perceptions of homework policies and how they relate to their current pedagogical practices. 

1. Examining ways families experience homework, and possible inequities created.

Research questions: What sacred, cover, and secret stories are being told about homework? What can be learned from the stories of homework both inside and outside of school?

Theoretical Framework

We examine stories of homework both inside and outside of school (Clandinin, 2019). Clandinin & Connelly (1996) propose that narratives of school are shaped by layers of stories that individuals live and tell. These stories often illuminate the tensions between personal experiences and expectations of institutions. Sacred, secret, and cover stories help us gain insights into how experiences shape our understanding of worldviews (Clandinin & Connelly, 1996). Given the perceived ideological nature of schools, the narrative compliance that individuals within schools often feel and the complexity of lived experiences, sacred, secret, and cover stories provide an effective way to talk about the intricacy of lived homework experiences for teachers, students, and families.

Methodology

This study draws on Institutional Ethnography (IE), Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), and Document Analysis (DA). Tenets from each of these methodologies provide a means to document, analyze, and discuss homework policies, teachers’ stories and enactment of such policies, and families’ narratives and lived experiences with carrying out schools’ expectations.

Method/Data Generation 

Data generation:1) analysis of homework policies from Atlantic Canada, South Australia, and Norway; 2) semi-structured focus group interviews with elementary teachers, along with semi-structured family interviews which were influenced by IE, with 8 families in each country. 

Data analysis   

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) A complementary methodology of CDA is used to supplement IE. According to Statham (2022) CDA “recognizes the interconnectedness of discourse, power and ideology and seeks to expose, and indeed to challenge, the role of powerful networks that maintain and reinforce a hierarchical and stratified organisation of society” (p. 10). The practices of homework and the textual documents distributed by schools to homes lend themselves to a critical analysis. CDA is appropriate for this study because it goes beyond the analysis of language alone and addresses social problems (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997). CDA is well aligned with Clandinin and Connelly’s (1996) theoretical framework, which focuses on the narratives evident in the stories told.

Document Analysis (DA) DA aligns well with CDA as a methodology as textual documents position schools and families. DA is a qualitative method that involves the systematic examination and interpretation of various types of documents. An analysis of documents is relevant because texts/policies created by educational stakeholders to govern public schools are only effective when enacted by individuals in their everyday work (Nichols & Griffith, 2009). 

Discussion

We bring our varied experiences as a research team from Canada,  Australia and Norway, collectively to this symposium. We have held many different positions in education systems which provide us with insights into homework policies, homework practices, the ways homework may impact pedagogy, and stories of how homework shape everyday family life. This symposium supports discussions resulting from robust data, explores and compares the contextual factors which impact how homework policies are equitably enacted within families, and how they shape families differently across three countries.  

This paper presents the Canadian portion of research from a larger study carried out in three countries. It explored homework policies, practices and experiences Using Institutional Ethnography (IE) (Griffith & Smith, 2005, 2022; Smith 2005), we identify policies and practices that may lead to educational inequalities. Using IE as a methodology affords an opportunity to examine how education systems can move towards positive futures of doing with families rather than to families. Critical Discourse Analysis and Document Analysis complemented IE to analyze interview data, homework policies, and documents (letters, emails, newsletters and homework assignments) sent to families from schools. Following Clandinin and Connelly (1996), we use sacred, cover, and secret stories as theoretical framing to illuminate the tensions between personal experiences and the expectations of institutions, all within the context of homework. This paper documents the stories of teachers, students, and families, which are shaped by complex multiple layers of lived experiences. Traditionally, research on the impacts of homework has long focussed on educational achievement, producing multiple accounts of the ways homework impacts test scores. While this scholarship has identified differing educational outcomes of homework for children and young people in relation to schools, relatively little research has examined the impacts and outcomes of homework on family life. By ensuring that family voices are heard, valued, and examined within the school/family relationship, we begin to address barriers that have often excluded families—work that is integral to shifting complex systems towards sustainability and well-being. This paper also shows an expansive understanding of the challenges and opportunities of enacted homework practices within homework policy. It demonstrates that homework is a social justice issue because of the ways in which education policies and homework practices might position and impact families through the lens of equity. We hope to broaden the conversation and contribute to the literature informing how schools, school districts, and ministries of education approach homework as it impacts families. We also share the substantiated evidence that contributes to ongoing national and global homework conversations and debates.

Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1996). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes: Teacher stories. Stories of teachers. School stories. Stories of schools. Educational Researcher, 25(3), 24–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176665 Griffith, A. I., & Smith, D. E. (2005). Mothering for schooling. Routledge Falmer. Smith, D. E. (2005). Institutional ethnography: A sociology for people. AltaMira Press. Smith, D. E., & Griffith, A. I. (2022) Simply institutional ethnography: Creating a sociology for people. University of Toronto Press.

Norway has had a common curriculum for all students in compulsory schooling from 1939, and in these national curriculums, homework as a teaching practice was thoroughly described from 1939 even until 1974 (Rønningen and Djupedal, 2026). After decades of being overlooked in educational governmental documents, homework got its own paragraph in the new Education Act effecting from August 2024, sounding: “Students can be imposed to do schoolwork outside of school hours (homework). Students’ rights to leisure and free time should be accounted for.” (Law enaction 89 (2022–2023), 2023). Yet, during these five decades, homework has been a common part of Norwegian everyday schooling, and more than nine out of ten schools assign homework to their students (Rogde et al, 2019). In this current study, all families tell stories of homework as a part of their daily life. Homework is communicated through writing, in Norwegian, through the weekly plan that the students bring home every Monday. This plan is also available digitally, and it informs the students and the home about homework for the current week in different subjects. Homework includes reading in Norwegian, glossaries in English, and math tasks, often on a sheet. The afternoons are described as hectic, but all the families strive to be involved and to complete what is scheduled in the weekly plan. Common for most parents are that they do not question the practice, but a few are wondering what they would do if their child struggled at school, or they themselves struggled to support their children. The family and teacher stories span across several themes relating to purposes and functions of homework, and in our ongoing analysis we are unpacking the secret, sacred, and cover stories (Clandinin and Connelly, 1996) of homework in a Norwegian contemporary context. For now, we have interviewed six families and one teacher, and we are still recruiting and interviewing participants to get a solid foundation for the Norwegian part of this study in three countries. Our family and teacher participants are recruited from public schools, and more than 90% of Norwegian students attend public compulsory schooling. However, from 2015 to 2022, the number of private schools have been increasing, and a corresponding number of students have left public schools (Statistics Norway, 2026). Maybe this implies that our future efforts of recruiting participants should also consider teachers and families belonging to the private school sector.

Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1996). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes: Teacher stories. Stories of teachers. School stories. Stories of schools. Educational Researcher, 25(3), 24–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176665 Law resolution 89 (2022–2023): Resolution pertaining to the Act relating to Primary and Secondary Education and Training (the Education Act) [Vedtak til lov om grunnskoleopplæringa og den vidaregåande opplæringa (opplæringslova)]. https://www.stortinget.no/no/Saker-og-publikasjoner/Vedtak/Beslutninger/Lovvedtak/2022-2023/vedtak-202223-089/?all=true Rogde, K., Daus, S., Pedersen, Vaagland, K. and Federici, R. A. (2019). Questions for School Norway. Analyses and results from the Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training’s survey of schools and school owners, spring 2019 [Spørsmål til Skole-Norge. Analyser og resultater fra Utdanningsdirektoratets spørreundersøkelse til skoler og skoleeiere våren 2019]. (Reports 8/2019). NIFU. Rønningen, E. and Djupedal, E. F. (2026, accepted for publication). Homework regulation. From a teaching-oriented school practice to a focus on the accountability of the student and the home. [Lex lekser. Frå ein undervisningsorientert skulepraksis til ei orientering mot eleven og heimen sitt ansvar.] Nordic Journal of Pedagogy and Critique. Statistics Norway (2026, January 20). The number of private primary and lower secondary schools continue to increase [Talet på private grunnskolar aukar stadig]. SSB. https://www.ssb.no/utdanning/grunnskoler/statistikk/elevar-i-grunnskolen/artikler/talet-pa-private-grunnskolar-aukar-stadig

This paper draws from a larger study carried out in three countries. Homework in Australia is positioned within an educational landscape where schools, teachers and students are benchmarked according to testing data. School funding in Australia is linked to student outcomes on the National Assessment Plan for Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) and, increasingly, schools and teachers are held solely accountable for student outcomes (Farrell & Danby, 2015; Richardson, 2014). For families, these expectations stem, in part, from shifting family structures, increased employment pressures, and generally busy family lives (Richardson, 2014; Smith et al., 2023). Some research has highlighted the possibilities for homework to support the development of self-regulation (Smith et al., 2023) and home-school partnerships (Vincent & Martin, 2002). Critiques of homework in Australia have highlighted issues such as a disconnect between school and homework (Smith et al., 2023), the narrow view of learning that may be represented by homework tasks (Trenholm & Chinnappan, 2019), and the sense of homework as an imposition on children and families (Farrell & Danby, 2015). While research has suggested that homework is of little benefit in primary school (ages 5-12) settings (Cooper et al., 2006; Dettmers, et al., 2009), it remains culturally entrenched as an everyday activity in Australian homes (Farrell & Danby, 2015; Richardson, 2014). The research presented in this paper is positioned in reference to the Australian schooling context and our interest in understanding how homework is experienced by children and parents. Interviews took place with ten families, each with between one and three primary-school aged children. Most interviews went for one hour and took place in family homes, with some over Zoom. Children were interviewed first, providing them with an opportunity to generate their own accounts (Farrell & Danby, 2015) of how they experience homework, followed by their parents. Many of the children offered examples of their homework. We initially engaged in thematic analysis (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011), before considering the themes in the context of stories (Clandinin & Connelly, 1996). Our analysis examines the contradictions evident in their stories, with most children and parents discussing the importance of homework, while also describing the frustration and imposition that homework represents in their lives, as well as questioning its usefulness. These contradictions highlight how the ‘common-sense’ discourses about homework in Australia do not accurately represent how it experienced in families in the day-to-day.

Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of educational research, 76(1), 1-62. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. SAGE. Dettmers, S., Trautwein, U., & Lüdtke, O. (2009). The relationship between homework time and achievement is not universal: Evidence from multilevel analyses in 40 countries. School Effectiveness and school improvement, 20(4), 375-405. Farrell, A., & Danby, S. (2015). How does homework ‘work’ for young children? Children’s accounts of homework in their everyday lives. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 36(2), 250-269. Richardson, S. (2014). Australian classroom teacher homework practices in designing homework learning resources. Smith, J., Kettle, M., & Alford, J. (2023). Scaffolding homework for foreign language and self-regulated learning: lessons from an Australian primary school. Education 3-13, 51(4), 620-635. Trenholm, S., & Chinnappan, M. (2019). Prospective primary teachers’ perceptions about the use of mathematics homework. Teacher Development, 23(1), 50-63.