the impact of homework on self-directivity and self-efficacy among adult learners

The impact of homework on self-directivity and self-efficacy among adult learners.

Aldo Rodriguez

Northern Illinois University

About the author

Aldo Rodriguez is a Uruguayan Fulbright Scholar, adult educator, teacher trainer, and mentor

teacher with fourteen years of experience in the field of Adult education. He is currently

attending a master’s course on Adult and Higher Education at Northern Illinois University. He

also has experience as a researcher in pedagogical and methodological issues regarding

student’s development, curriculum development, motivation and assessment, having presented

nationally and internationally in several conferences, seminars and meetings.

Abstract

The present research aims at analyzing the possible connection between doing homework and

the development of self-directivity and self-efficacy in adult learners. The population chosen for

this research includes the different actors of the Uruguayan educational public system: students,

teachers, school principals, mentor teachers, and supervisors. In order to have a multi-

dimensional perspective on the topic some of those actors filled in a quantitative survey and the

others were interviewed in order to have a more in depth vision about the topic. At the end, there

is a set of issues for discussion that popped up as a consequence of the results obtained. These

topics can be summarized as the role and importance of homework in instruction, the dichotomy

between deontic teaching and fossilized teaching structures, the relationship between learner’s

motivation and homework’s face validity, and homework, when combined with technology, as a

means to address administrative problems such as teacher’s absences.

1 THE IMPACT OF HOMEWORK ON SELF-DIRECTIVITY AND SELF-EFFICACY

AMONG ADULT LEARNERS

Introduction

In every curriculum, regardless the theoretical paradigm on which they are based,

homework is one of the elements included. The purpose of it may vary according to the

psychological and methodological foundation of the curriculum; the amount of it and its

difficulty varies from instructor to instructor and from learning community to learning

community. Even though this learning community includes a wide range of student’s ages,

homework was originally created for children in order to link their homes with education,

experiential learning with the classroom (Dewey, 1916), formal and informal education

(Merriam, Caffarella & Baumgartner, 2007).

Homework has always had a dichotomous vision from scholars, parents, students and

researchers. Some people see it as friend and some see it as foe. In its origin homework was seen

as a way to integrate what children learned at school with the experience their parents have. It

was meant to be a true learning moment where parents and children were together solving

problems and team working. It has proved to help to improve learning and self-discipline (Heller,

n.d.). In contrast with this view, homework also appears to be an intruder in the family; what is

more, it can be argued that not all the parents have the cultural capital to help their children to do

their homework (Kralovec & Buell, 2000). In Uruguay, this debate has been a salient source for

controversy as there is not a systematic research or policy that can shed light on the topic.

After this brief conceptualization we can question ourselves what the role of homework is

in adult education. In a field where some authors claim that learners are self-directed due to their

experience and internal motivation (Knowles, 1980) and willing to be the most self-effective

learners they can, homework may play a vital role. Then, two questions can be posed: Isn’t the



use of homework an expression of self-directivity? Aren’t the students who can do their

homework more self-efficient?

Carrying out a preliminary literature research that motivated the writer to further

investigate, there are many interesting findings about the topic. Gonzalez, Schmitz, and DeLaune

(2006) from the University of Texas have concluded how homework is useful in the treatment of

cocaine abusers with the cognitive behavioral theory. Another example was given by Dr. Tellado

and Dr. Diez-Palomar who presented a European learning community project called INCLUD-

ED carried out by the Center of Research in Theories and Practices whose aim is to overcome

inequalities. The project involves both adult education and experiential learning in which

“Education has an impact on family education, the school and the environment. There is

coordination between family education and school education. Family education helps improve

academic results, they become a source” (CREA, 2008).

The purpose of this paper is to inquire the educational actors involved about the topic and

see how much it applies to self-directedness and self-efficacy. As the literature and research on

the application of this issue in adult education is not so plentiful, studying the theoretical

framework provided by projects like INCLUD-ED may be of great use. It will also be useful to

revise the literature on homework written for K-12 children as some of the criticism on them can

be overcome by adult learners. This literature revision is going to be useful to elaborate a

questionnaire for people who are willing to share their findings from class observation and

experience.

In addition to this, I believe that part of my hypothesis is based on the fact that adults

have certain characteristics that make homework more suitable for them. In order to define my



hypothesis I will take into account three variables. The first one is the use of homework in adult

education and the other two are self-directivity and self-efficacy as a consequence of the use of

homework. Consequently, my hypothesis is that adult learners who do their homework are more

self-directed and self-efficient learners.

To have a clear idea of the concepts involved within the hypothesis it becomes important

to define the variables taking part in it. The independent variable is the use of homework in adult

education. Homework is considered to be every assignment that is asked to be done outside the

classroom setting. Some examples of it may include group work, research work, individual tasks,

and surveys, among other types of assignments. In Cooper’s (1989) words it can be defined as

“tasks assigned to students by schoolteachers that are meant to be carried out during non-school

hours” (p.7). Homework has a key role in learning as it links the classroom with the outside

world and they were created to provide the students with time to revise what they learn in class

and expand that knowledge by means of assignments that promote the use of new strategies,

knowledge or simply revise some existing ones.

These assignments set as homework can have different particular purposes according to

the importance the teacher puts on it or the stage of the learning process it represents. Homework

can serve as preparation for the topics that are going to be treated in class, or as practice of the

topics treated in class. Those two uses are part of a teacher-centered paradigm which is not the

objective of this research. However, homework can also serve as extension or integration. It

serve as extension when the assignments serve as a way of expanding knowledge by using other

sources or more varied information than the one it was used in class. It serves as integration

when the assignments are used to establish connection among topics or themes or abstract



knowledge with experiential one. This can be accomplished by sending homework that includes

all levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (Wankat, 2001).

The dependent variables are self-directivity and self-efficacy. Self-directivity can be

defined as “the ability to take the initiative with or without the help of others in diagnosing their

learning needs, formulating goals, identifying human and material resources, selecting

appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating learning outcomes” (Knowles, 1980). Part of the

characterization of what a self-directed student is includes how to self-manage their learning, and

take time out to reflect on and monitor their learning as well as be confident, independent and

prepared to take risks (University of Queenland, 2011). Self-directed learning, as conceptualized

before, is just one dimension of the role it has in this research paper. There are four additional

layers in this conceptualization that are essential to fully understand how homework impact on

self-directivity. Those layers define self-directed learning as a high-level skill (Martin, 1985), a

useful technique (Knowles, 1985) (as cited by Bouchard, 1994), and an assumption in adult

learners (Knowles, 1980) and together with the process (Knowles, 1975) end up in the fourth

layer that is self-directedness as a personality trait (Oddi, as cited by Bouchard, 1994).

According to Zimmerman (2002), homework “may also prompt them (the students) to engage in

self-initiated and self-directed studying” (p. 5).

The third variable, self-efficacy, is the person’s belief in his or her ability to succeed in a

particular situation. These beliefs are described as determinants of how people think, behave, and

feel (Bandura, 1994; Moss, & Brookhart, 2009). For that reason adults engage in homework

activities they foresee they will succeed. Part of this self-efficacy in adult education can be

attained to the improvement in their labor market problems and situations to solve (Mayers, & de



Broucker, 2006). Self-efficacy is intrinsically associated with a self-regulation approach to

homework where the learner can self-manage the selection of either the tasks to do or the sources

from where they are taking the information to construct knowledge. They can also monitor their

homework in terms of goal-accomplishment and efficacy and they have the ability to self-assess

their work (Bembenutty, 2010).

These variables will be framed in the context of adult education in Uruguay represented

by the students attending the night shift of middle and high schools. In order to have a

multidimensional perspective the participants in this research are teachers, students, supervisors

and school directors from Uruguay. There was a formal petition to the Uruguayan authorities in

Education and they agreed on providing this research with a formal framework.

There are several limitations found when pursuing this research project. One of the

limitations I encounter has to do with the pedagogical background of instructors as the teachers

attending this particular population have not had any particularized instruction on the field of

adult education (it does not exist as such in Uruguay) and their professional formation is not at

the same level all around the country. Another limitation is that a small number of teachers work

in adult education, about two teachers per province except for Montevideo. In addition to this,

Uruguayan teachers and students are at the end of their school year and many of the possible

interviewees may not be attending classes regularly. Finally, the fact that data collecting

regarding mentors and supervisors is going to be based on observation brings about the intrinsic

limitation of the subjectivity and bias from the observer as well as the difficulties in replicating

what has been observed and the interaction with the objects.

Method



This basic experimental research will contain a mixed approach due to the combination

of quantitative and qualitative data collection (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2009). It is considered as

basic because it is focused on the discovery of knowledge for the solely sake of knowledge; it is

also experimental because there will be results comparison. Talking about the measurement

analysis it will be both quantitative and qualitative as it will contain multiple choice surveys

which are essentially quantitative as well as interviews where some qualitative information is

going to be taken from.

Measures. There are going to be two types of quantitative instruments, one addressing

students and the other one addressing teachers. These questionnaires will focus on the amount of

homework sent, the amount of homework that students actually do, the relevance students see on

it and the appropriateness teachers see in it, how self-directed students feel when doing them, if

teachers when analyzing the tasks they assign they see it as an opportunity for self-directivity, if

students feel more self-efficient, if they associate doing homework with a better performance,

and whether they think that more homework would help them have better results in class. Both

questionnaires have questions where the participants need to mark a pre-determined answer that

can be yes/no in the case of the students and a number meaning the frequency the teacher

performs that activity in a range from 1 to 7 being 7 the most frequent in the case of the

instructors. The questionnaire for teachers will also include three open questions to know more

about their ideas on the topic.

The qualitative measurement is going to be represented by interviews to mentor teachers,

supervisors, school directors. Those interviews are going to be carried out in English to teachers,

mentors, and supervisors because they will be oriented to EFL educators and in Spanish to

School directors because they do not speak English. The participants of these interviews,



supervisors, mentors and directors, are people who are not directly related with the

learning/teaching process but they are indirectly related by means of class observation and

assessment. It will contain five questions which will focus on the way they perceive homework

based on their vast experience and what they observe in the institutions they work, if they see

that teachers send the type of homework that would promote self-directed learning and self-

efficacy and if they actually notice any visible change in the way students act and behave in the

learning process.

Participants. The selection of the people taking part in this work was made according to

the number of schools, the number of students, and teachers that actually take part in adult

education in Uruguay. The sample was chosen among fifteen out of the nineteen provinces in

Uruguay where the teacher/s in charge of teaching adults as well as the head/heads was/were

interviewed. In total, the two national supervisors, 20 school directors, 16 mentor teachers, 28

teachers, and 84 students intervened all around the country.

Procedure. As soon as the national authorities gave the required permission to interview

the different actors of the educational scenario, the research instruments were sent by email. The

national supervisors submitted the information directly to the researcher’s email. However, the

mentor teacher allocated in the different Uruguayan provinces collected the data from the

students, directors, teacher, and their own interviews and submitted that information to the

researcher’s email address. The rate of answers was high as about 80 per cent of the expected

responses were actually received.

Results



The results obtained are going to be broken down according to the different categories of

respondents and then a discussion on further topics is going to be set. An important feature that is

noticeable in all the different instruments received is that the responses do not contain clear and

unisonous positions toward the role of homework, probably because of the double-barreled effect

that the literature in general has historically stated as one of the main characteristics of this issue.

The first piece of these results is the one that corresponds to students. The vast majority

of the students, 76 per cent, do homework on a regular basis and at least once a week. A very

high percentage of them agree that they feel they can do the homework; they are equipped with

the necessary knowledge, strategies, and abilities to succeed in doing it well. However, 15 % of

the total number of students feels that they cannot do their homework. The same figure

represents the amount of students that do not see a connection between what is taught in class

and what the teachers sends as homework. An astounding majority go along with the fact that as

adult learners they have a lot of responsibilities and consequently limited time to do their

homework. They express their willingness to do more homework and have more time to do it as

they showed their belief that more homework would help them acquire more knowledge in an

independent way, and at the same time get better results at school.

The second part of these results refers to the answers provided by the teachers. Even

though the results are very interesting, there are two types of perspectives. The first one can be

noticed in the answers to three questions where the teachers were inclined to be in any of the two

extremes. The second trend shows a pseudo equal distribution of the answers. The questions that

produced the first type of answer are the one in which teachers assessed their coherence between

their teaching and the type of homework they sent. When responding to this question, the

interviewees identify a strong connection between their practice and the tasks assigned to the



students to do at home. The second question that the great majority favored was the one in which

they were asked if they used homework as further practice, as a way to expand the concepts and

knowledge acquired in class. The counterpart in this first trend was the question where they were

inquired about the use of homework as a way to cover topics not treated in class.

The second type of figure distribution noted in the results is the one that shows a

distribution of the answers that does not allow the researcher to observe a clear tendency toward

the topic. The paramount finding is in the first question where teachers rated the importance they

give to homework in instruction because there is not a unisonous answer and they actually used

all the choices given. The same happened with their view of homework as a source of

knowledge and the periodicity they sent homework, the latter has a subtle negative tendency

meaning that teachers do not usually send homework. Yet, there is a positive tendency regarding

the question of homework as a way to promote self-directed learning and self-efficacy.

There were three extra open-ended questions for teachers inquiring about the way they

identify self-directivity and self-efficacy in adult learners, how they promote it, and if they think

self-directivity and self-efficacy affect learning and how this happens. Those questions were a

great source of ideas. In response to the first one, regarding the way teachers identify student’s

self-directivity and self-efficacy, they voiced that self-directed and self-efficient students were

the ones working on their own, autonomously, leading their own learning by using different

strategies like problem-solving and making decisions among choices to go beyond classroom

knowledge. Self-directed students were those who do not need clarification and question their

perspectives toward new concepts, integrate prior and present knowledge from different subjects,

need the teacher only as a facilitator, and their activities are successfully achieved. Some other

characteristics of self-directed students include those who have self-discipline, who are capable



of acquiring the knowledge they get from other sources like the dictionary, the XO computer,

books, or the Internet.

When teachers were asked to share the way they prompted self-directed learning and self-

efficiency in their classes they listed many ideas. Those ideas included guiding the students by

making associations with the real world, encouraging them to make decisions, being positive and

encouraging while working on self-confidence, self-production, self-reflection, and discussions.

On the side of the teacher’s actions, they believed that when tasks are carefully planned and they

challenge the student’s knowledge they are an effective tool to promote the two aspects. The

interviewees were split regarding whether individual work or team work would promote self-

directivity and efficacy, the majority was inclined to the use of group work as a way of not

having the teacher all the time helping and influencing the learner. Finally, they pointed out the

use of positive formative feedback as an important component to enhance adult’s self-directivity

and efficiency. All the participants agreed that by developing self-efficacy and self-directivity

with homework students will have better performance at school.

The three remaining pieces to be analyzed are the mentor’s responses, the school

principal’s responses, and the supervisor’s response; all of them used qualitative research

instruments to provide information. The interview consisted of five questions, the same for the

three of them, in which the participants needed to answer about the role they observe teachers

assign to homework, whether they see those assignments promote self-directivity and self-

efficacy, if they are connected with classroom work, the advantages they see in sending

homework, and if they find any connection between sending homework, self-directivity, and

performance.



The results collected from the mentor teachers and the supervisors have some contrasting

points and some clear positions toward the topic. They coincide with the teacher’s perspective

regarding the role of homework in instruction as they do not have clear thoughts toward it. They

believe that homework should support what is taught at school, and due to time constraints on

the side of adults, teachers should be very selective in the type of homework they send. This also

depends on the degree of involvement the teacher promotes in the student. Some teachers

address this characteristic of adults by not sending homework; what is more, a mentor teacher

pointed out that “teachers do not send homework because they stopped thinking that they can

enhance self-directivity and self-efficacy”. They see it as further practice rather than an

opportunity to find other paths for learning; it is also argued that students do not see the

importance of homework reflected on the teacher’s practice. Along with this idea, the supervisor

stated that “students do not have time to do homework because of the time, the motivation, and

the importance teachers give to homework”. The fact that homework is usually explained at the

end of the class produces an extra burden as students are more interested in leaving the

classroom than in understanding what the teacher expects as homework. This lack of

understanding prevents them from doing it for the next class.

In teaching English as a foreign or second language, the role of homework might be more

vital than in other subject areas. Homework might be remedial to “the lower command second

language adults have at public high schools, there is a special need to set homework on a regular

basis”. This regularity is not always seen as positive by the respondents as they see some

teachers who assign homework as part of their jobs, as an extra activity, without having clear

objectives and therefore it does not promote student’s learning and lacks appropriate formative



feedback what worsens the described situation. Sometimes homework assignments are just a way

to collect marks.

The assignments analyzed also led to dichotomous results. On the one side, the majority

of the mentor teachers visualized a promotion of self-directivity and self-efficacy, especially

when tasks are well-thought and carefully-planned, motivating authentic tasks and the students

can easily see the meaningful purpose, value, benefit of doing them, and at the same time they

can have a sense of achievement by doing them. On the other hand, the interviewees asserted that

homework in the way teachers design it nowadays do not promote self-directivity or self-

efficiency. The tasks are meant just to fulfill the syllabi lacking meaning to students. The

learners are still too dependent expecting guidance from the teacher and the teachers do not

promote autonomy among learners. Part of this absence of progressive independence and

autonomy is due to the fact that teachers still send mechanical exercises as homework.

Consequently, the teacher may design tasks intended to promote self-directivity and self-efficacy

though in the implementation process they pursue other goals that are more practice-oriented.

The relationship among assigning homework, being self-directed and self-efficient

appears to be clear amidst all the persons interviewed. They see homework as the “key” to foster

self-directivity and self-efficacy. The reason for this asseveration is in the advantages they attain

to homework. Those advantages include the self-direction as well as the self-monitoring of the

learning process and curriculum enrichment, an increased understanding and development of

critical and creative thinking, development of self-independence and self-responsibility in

problem-solving situations with the chance of further research and expand their knowledge due

to the extended pedagogical time. Being students on their own they can make choices, select

appropriate sources, and edit and revise their responses.



Finally, the school principals manifested the broadest perspective of all the interviewees

for two reasons: the first one, they are in contact with adult educators from different subjects; the

second one, there are many curricular programs for adults running in the country so they have

different perspectives toward various topics. The most outstanding finding in their responses is

the use of a certain type of homework as paramount to promote self-direction and self-efficacy in

adult learners: project work. Almost all the principals coincided in that important feature of adult

instruction because it allows students to research, have a continuity of classroom work, more

reflecting time, and have new information to share with peers which altogether makes adults

extremely efficient. In this process they can keep focused on their goals, apply their own ways of

learning, work on their own pace, and link prior knowledge and experiences. As a consequence,

the instructor can observe not only student’s individual work but also his/her interpersonal skills

and ability to work in groups.

The second finding obtained from the principals’ answers refers to the use of technology

as a way to promote self-directedness and student’s efficacy. They see technological advances as

an instructional friend for adults and a supplement to overcome teacher’s absences high rates,

lack of class time (30 minutes per class in some programs), and provide the students with more

time to be creative and work on his/her own. Some principals explained that schools have

facilities that would allow teachers and students to work on homework that are sent by email or

downloaded from blogs and web pages. They added that the possibility of having an Internet

connection eases the access to information and, as a result, students can do their homework faster

and more efficiently.

The third aspect contributed by principals highlights the shifting in modern curricular

programs regarding adult learners. Some principals evinced that the 1994 Program assigned



homework an important role as the second evaluation is carried out as a homework. In this

rationale, this test is not only summative, even though this is the name it has, but also formative

because the learner will go through this experience and see it as a learning situation. Other

principals talked about 2009 Program where students are expected to make decisions about their

learning. Adult learners set their own learning goals according to their own interests.

Discussion

After analyzing the data obtained, it is important to reflect on certain aspects that require

further discussion. One of the surprising aspects to discuss is the role of homework in

instruction. It is surprising but at the same time expected that there are answers in each of the

possible choices. It is surprising because in a country where education is highly ruled by the

government that provides with a syllabus, a methodology to implement the syllabus, a way of

evaluating the students as a more general political educational program for public education,

there should be a clear policy about homework and its importance. However, it is also an

expected result because neither policy makers and scholars, nor teachers and students have a

clear viewpoint on the topic and there has been a swinging along history on whether homework

should play an important role in instruction or not.

Another interesting finding is in relationship to the learner’s motivation and appreciation

of homework’s face-validity. Here, there are two variables that might be affecting one to the

other. As it was said before, while 15% of the students revealed that they did not feel they could

do it, a similar amount of students did not establish a connection between what it was taught in

class and what the teacher sent as homework. Can it be possible that this lack of connection is

because the tasks lack face-validity? How can we compare and contrast this fact with the idea



that teachers express that homework and classroom work are perfectly coherent? If we consider

that teachers see the homework they sent as coherent with classroom work, how can we put the

teacher’s view together with the student’s view? Where is the gap between classroom work and

homework? How can we bridge the gap between them?

One of the teachers interviewed had a very skeptical view toward this issue. When asked

about the way he/she identified these two traits the instructor said “they do not have any (traits),

adults need more guidance than young learners, they lack confidence and simple drill exercises

are helpful, but even then, they ask for teacher’s help or modeling”. It is interesting that the vast

majority of the professionals were in favor of a positive attitude toward self-directivity and self-

efficacy in adults and only one teacher explicitly rejects the idea. The reason for this interest is

that even though almost all the teachers favored self-directivity and efficacy and they saw in

homework a good tool to develop those characteristics, this is more apparent than real. While

reading the answers some of the language encountered was “to be tutored or aided by the

teacher”, “letting them express their opinions”, “working on their mistakes”, “when they learn

best what the teacher teaches”. All these phrases are an indicator of how deeply rooted the

teacher-centered model is in those teachers. This may provide a dual view of those teachers as

they are informed and conscious about this learner-centered approach in education called self-

directed or self-planned learning but the old learning structures pop up with the same intensity

yet in a hidden way.

When reading the results from supervisors and mentor teachers the reader may have

noticed on the positive attitude toward homework and how it can be a means to achieve self-

directivity and self-efficacy. However, it is interesting to note that some participants who held

the position just stated gave answers that oppose the rationale of self-directed learning. They



believed in homework as a tool for better retention of factual knowledge, reinforce and retain

class knowledge while maintaining a routine, check understanding and practice. The association

between practice and independence as a synonym for it was stated by many participants.

Needless to say, practice as such corresponds to a positivist paradigm and therefore it is not

aligned with the foundations of self-directed learning so it is intriguing how a contradiction

unveils. Again, a dichotomous thought is found as mentor teachers and supervisors are sure

about the positive effects of homework on self-directivity and self-efficacy but at the same time

the use contradicting ideas which remind us of the built structures everyone has regarding the

way we learnt and the model of teaching we were exposed to.

From the principals’ perspectives it is essential to observe how they went beyond the

pedagogical aspects of the teaching/learning transaction and they analyzed administrative aspects

of it. It is extremely gripping and thought-provoking the way they combined technology use such

as email and blogs, with homework and project work to find a solution to teachers’ frequent

absences. They visualized many advantages in the use of homework as a way to enhance self-

regulation among adult learners. However, principals observed how the teachers are fearful about

sending homework, or others do it just as part of their job duties and they do not use the results

appropriately. It becomes evident then that the learning communities need to work on this

subject in order to take the best out of it and at the same time use a cheap tool that will definitely

impact on student’s achievement and learning.

One final idea that might engross the discussion is this concept of a multi-dimensional

gap existing in the educational system. This breach is manifested in what teachers say and what

teachers do, what students think and what teachers think, what teachers see and what

administrators observe, the excuses the principals recognize on the teacher’s actions and what



students actually see. This multi-dimensional gap sets the scene for a profound discussion about

the way the teaching/learning process should be approached and how the different persons taking

part in it can act coherently and systematically in order to bridge those gaps.



References

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V.S. Ramachaudran (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Human

Behavior, 4, pp.71-81.

Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. New York, NY: Cambridge University

Press.

Bembenutty, H. (2010). Homework completion: The role of self-efficacy, delay of gratification,

and self-regulatory processes. In The International Journal of Educational and

Psychological Assessment, 6, pp. 1-20

Bouchard, P. (1994). Self-directed professionals and autodidactic choice: A framework for

analysis. In H. B. Long New ideas about self-directed learning, Oklahoma Research

Center for Continuing Professional and Higher Education of the University of Oklahoma,

Ch. 9, pp. 121-137.

Brookhart, S. (2009). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Cooper, H. (1989). Homework. New York, NY: Longman.

CREA UB (2008). One of CREA’s projects has become the first integrated project (IP) research

framework program of the European Union coordinated from Spain. Retrieved from

http://creaub.info/2008/09/10/includ-ed-first-ip-project-on-education-coordinated-by-a-

research-centre-of-spain/

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York, NY: Free Press.



Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research. Competencies for analysis

and applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Gonzalez, V.M., Schmitz, J. M. & DeLaume, K. A. (2006). The role of homework in cognitive-

behavioral therapy for cocaine dependence. Journal of consulting and clinical

psychology 74(3). Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16822120

Heller, K. (n.d.). Viewing homework as an educational liability. In Parenting and marital advice.

Retrieved from http://www.drheller.com/viewing_homework.html

Kralovec, E., & Buell, J. (2000). The end of homework: How homework disrupts families,

overburdens children and limits learning. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Englewood, NJ:

Cambridge Adult Education.

Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy.

New York, NY: Cambridge Books

Mayers, K., & de Broucker, P. (2006). Too many left behind: Canada’s adult education and

training system (CPRN Research Report W/34). Retrieved from Canadian Policy

Research Network Inc. website: www.cprn.org

Merriam, S.B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A

comprehensive guide (3rd

edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Ba

University of Queenland (2011). What is self-directed learning all about?. Retrieved from

http://www.uq.edu.au/hanginthere/selfDirect/selfDirect01.html

http://www.cprn.org/

http://www.uq.edu.au/hanginthere/selfDirect/selfDirect01.html



Utopia Dream (2010). Learning communities’ web. Retrieved from

http://www.utopiadream.info/red/tiki-index.php

Wankat, P. C. (2001). The role of homework. Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for

Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Retrieved from

http://www.engr.uky.edu/~aseeched/papers/2001/a0880.pdf

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Achieving self-regulation: The trial and triumph of adolescence. In f.

Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.) Adolescence and Education, 2, pp. 1-27.

http://www.utopiadream.info/red/tiki-index.php

the impact of homework on self-directivity and self-efficacy among adult learners

Documents