is homework a form of punishment

History Cooperative

The Homework Dilemma: Who Invented Homework?

The inventor of homework may be unknown, but its evolution reflects contributions from educators, philosophers, and students. Homework reinforces learning, fosters discipline, and prepares students for the future, spanning from ancient civilizations to modern education. Ongoing debates probe its balance, efficacy, equity, and accessibility, prompting innovative alternatives like project-based and personalized learning. As education evolves, the enigma of homework endures.

Table of Contents

Who Invented Homework?

While historical records don’t provide a definitive answer regarding the inventor of homework in the modern sense, two prominent figures, Roberto Nevelis of Venice and Horace Mann, are often linked to the concept’s early development.

Roberto Nevelis of Venice: A Mythical Innovator?

Roberto Nevelis, a Venetian educator from the 16th century, is frequently credited with the invention of homework. The story goes that Nevelis assigned tasks to his students outside regular classroom hours to reinforce their learning—a practice that aligns with the essence of homework. However, the historical evidence supporting Nevelis as the inventor of homework is rather elusive, leaving room for skepticism.

While Nevelis’s role remains somewhat mythical, his association with homework highlights the early recognition of the concept’s educational value.

Horace Mann: Shaping the American Educational Landscape

Horace Mann, often regarded as the “Father of American Education,” made significant contributions to the American public school system in the 19th century. Though he may not have single-handedly invented homework, his educational reforms played a crucial role in its widespread adoption.

Mann’s vision for education emphasized discipline and rigor, which included assigning tasks to be completed outside of the classroom. While he did not create homework in the traditional sense, his influence on the American education system paved the way for its integration.

The invention of homework was driven by several educational objectives. It aimed to reinforce classroom learning, ensuring knowledge retention and skill development. Homework also served as a means to promote self-discipline and responsibility among students, fostering valuable study habits and time management skills.

Why Was Homework Invented?

The invention of homework was not a random educational practice but rather a deliberate strategy with several essential objectives in mind.

Reinforcing Classroom Learning

Foremost among these objectives was the need to reinforce classroom learning. When students leave the classroom, the goal is for them to retain and apply the knowledge they have acquired during their lessons. Homework emerged as a powerful tool for achieving this goal. It provided students with a structured platform to revisit the day’s lessons, practice what they had learned, and solidify their understanding.

Homework assignments often mirrored classroom activities, allowing students to extend their learning beyond the confines of school hours. Through the repetition of exercises and tasks related to the curriculum, students could deepen their comprehension and mastery of various subjects.

Fostering Self-Discipline and Responsibility

Another significant objective behind the creation of homework was the promotion of self-discipline and responsibility among students. Education has always been about more than just the acquisition of knowledge; it also involves the development of life skills and habits that prepare individuals for future challenges.

By assigning tasks to be completed independently at home, educators aimed to instill valuable study habits and time management skills. Students were expected to take ownership of their learning, manage their time effectively, and meet deadlines—a set of skills that have enduring relevance in contemporary education and beyond.

Homework encouraged students to become proactive in their educational journey. It taught them the importance of accountability and the satisfaction of completing tasks on their own. These life skills would prove invaluable in their future endeavors, both academically and in the broader context of their lives.

When Was Homework Invented?

The roots of homework stretch deep into the annals of history, tracing its origins to ancient civilizations and early educational practices. While it has undergone significant evolution over the centuries, the concept of extending learning beyond the classroom has always been an integral part of education.

Earliest Origins of Homework and Early Educational Practices

The idea of homework, in its most rudimentary form, can be traced back to the earliest human civilizations. In ancient Egypt , for instance, students were tasked with hieroglyphic writing exercises. These exercises served as a precursor to modern homework, as they required students to practice and reinforce their understanding of written language—an essential skill for communication and record-keeping in that era.

In ancient Greece , luminaries like Plato and Aristotle advocated for the use of written exercises as a tool for intellectual development. They recognized the value of practice in enhancing one’s knowledge and skills, laying the foundation for a more systematic approach to homework.

The ancient Romans also played a pivotal role in the early development of homework. Young Roman students were expected to complete assignments at home, with a particular focus on subjects like mathematics and literature. These assignments were designed to consolidate their classroom learning, emphasizing the importance of practice in mastering various disciplines.

READ MORE: Who Invented Math? The History of Mathematics

The practice of assigning work to be done outside of regular school hours continued to evolve through various historical periods. As societies advanced, so did the complexity and diversity of homework tasks, reflecting the changing needs and priorities of education.

The Influence of Educational Philosophers

While the roots of homework extend to ancient times, the ideas of renowned educational philosophers in later centuries further contributed to its development. John Locke, an influential thinker of the Enlightenment era, believed in a gradual and cumulative approach to learning. He emphasized the importance of students revisiting topics through repetition and practice, a concept that aligns with the principles of homework.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, another prominent philosopher, stressed the significance of self-directed learning. Rousseau’s ideas encouraged the development of independent study habits and a personalized approach to education—a philosophy that resonates with modern concepts of homework.

Homework in the American Public School System

The American public school system has played a pivotal role in the widespread adoption and popularization of homework. To understand the significance of homework in modern education, it’s essential to delve into its history and evolution within the United States.

History and Evolution of Homework in the United States

The late 19th century marked a significant turning point for homework in the United States. During this period, influenced by educational reforms and the growing need for standardized curricula, homework assignments began to gain prominence in American schools.

Educational reformers and policymakers recognized the value of homework as a tool for reinforcing classroom learning. They believed that assigning tasks for students to complete outside of regular school hours would help ensure that knowledge was retained and skills were honed. This approach aligned with the broader trends in education at the time, which aimed to provide a more structured and systematic approach to learning.

As the American public school system continued to evolve, homework assignments became a common practice in classrooms across the nation. The standardization of curricula and the formalization of education contributed to the integration of homework into the learning process. This marked a significant departure from earlier educational practices, reflecting a shift toward more structured and comprehensive learning experiences.

The incorporation of homework into the American education system not only reinforced classroom learning but also fostered self-discipline and responsibility among students. It encouraged them to take ownership of their educational journey and develop valuable study habits and time management skills—a legacy that continues to influence modern pedagogy.

Controversies Around Homework

Despite its longstanding presence in education, homework has not been immune to controversy and debate. While many view it as a valuable educational tool, others question its effectiveness and impact on students’ well-being.

The Homework Debate

One of the central controversies revolves around the amount of homework assigned to students. Critics argue that excessive homework loads can lead to stress, sleep deprivation, and a lack of free time for students. The debate often centers on striking the right balance between homework and other aspects of a student’s life, including extracurricular activities, family time, and rest.

Homework’s Efficacy

Another contentious issue pertains to the efficacy of homework in enhancing learning outcomes. Some studies suggest that moderate amounts of homework can reinforce classroom learning and improve academic performance. However, others question whether all homework assignments contribute equally to learning or whether some may be more beneficial than others. The effectiveness of homework can vary depending on factors such as the student’s grade level, the subject matter, and the quality of the assignment.

Equity and Accessibility

Homework can also raise concerns related to equity and accessibility. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds may have limited access to resources and support at home, potentially putting them at a disadvantage when it comes to completing homework assignments. This disparity has prompted discussions about the role of homework in perpetuating educational inequalities and how schools can address these disparities.

Alternative Approaches to Learning

In response to the controversies surrounding homework, educators and researchers have explored alternative approaches to learning. These approaches aim to strike a balance between reinforcing classroom learning and promoting holistic student well-being. Some alternatives include:

Project-Based Learning

Project-based learning emphasizes hands-on, collaborative projects that allow students to apply their knowledge to real-world problems. This approach shifts the focus from traditional homework assignments to engaging, practical learning experiences.

Flipped Classrooms

Flipped classrooms reverse the traditional teaching model. Students learn new material at home through video lectures or readings and then use class time for interactive discussions and activities. This approach reduces the need for traditional homework while promoting active learning.

Personalized Learning

Personalized learning tailors instruction to individual students’ needs, allowing them to progress at their own pace. This approach minimizes the need for one-size-fits-all homework assignments and instead focuses on targeted learning experiences.

The Ongoing Conversation

The controversies surrounding homework highlight the need for an ongoing conversation about its role in education. Striking the right balance between reinforcing learning and addressing students’ well-being remains a complex challenge. As educators, parents, and researchers continue to explore innovative approaches to learning, the role of homework in the modern educational landscape continues to evolve. Ultimately, the goal is to provide students with the most effective and equitable learning experiences possible.

Unpacking the Homework Enigma

Homework, without a single inventor, has evolved through educators, philosophers, and students. It reinforces learning, fosters discipline and prepares students. From ancient times to modern education, it upholds timeless values. Yet, controversies arise—debates on balance, efficacy, equity, and accessibility persist. Innovative alternatives like project-based and personalized learning emerge. Homework’s role evolves with education.

How to Cite this Article

There are three different ways you can cite this article.

1. To cite this article in an academic-style article or paper , use:

<a href=" https://historycooperative.org/who-invented-homework/ ">The Homework Dilemma: Who Invented Homework?</a>

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

The Surprising History of Homework Reform

Really, kids, there was a time when lots of grownups thought homework was bad for you.

Homework causes a lot of fights. Between parents and kids, sure. But also, as education scholar Brian Gill and historian Steven Schlossman write, among U.S. educators. For more than a century, they’ve been debating how, and whether, kids should do schoolwork at home .

At the dawn of the twentieth century, homework meant memorizing lists of facts which could then be recited to the teacher the next day. The rising progressive education movement despised that approach. These educators advocated classrooms free from recitation. Instead, they wanted students to learn by doing. To most, homework had no place in this sort of system.

Through the middle of the century, Gill and Schlossman write, this seemed like common sense to most progressives. And they got their way in many schools—at least at the elementary level. Many districts abolished homework for K–6 classes, and almost all of them eliminated it for students below fourth grade.

By the 1950s, many educators roundly condemned drills, like practicing spelling words and arithmetic problems. In 1963, Helen Heffernan, chief of California’s Bureau of Elementary Education, definitively stated that “No teacher aware of recent theories could advocate such meaningless homework assignments as pages of repetitive computation in arithmetic. Such an assignment not only kills time but kills the child’s creative urge to intellectual activity.”

But, the authors note, not all reformers wanted to eliminate homework entirely. Some educators reconfigured the concept, suggesting supplemental reading or having students do projects based in their own interests. One teacher proposed “homework” consisting of after-school “field trips to the woods, factories, museums, libraries, art galleries.” In 1937, Carleton Washburne, an influential educator who was the superintendent of the Winnetka, Illinois, schools, proposed a homework regimen of “cooking and sewing…meal planning…budgeting, home repairs, interior decorating, and family relationships.”

Another reformer explained that “at first homework had as its purpose one thing—to prepare the next day’s lessons. Its purpose now is to prepare the children for fuller living through a new type of creative and recreational homework.”

That idea didn’t necessarily appeal to all educators. But moderation in the use of traditional homework became the norm.

Weekly Newsletter

Get your fix of JSTOR Daily’s best stories in your inbox each Thursday.

Privacy Policy   Contact Us You may unsubscribe at any time by clicking on the provided link on any marketing message.

“Virtually all commentators on homework in the postwar years would have agreed with the sentiment expressed in the NEA Journal in 1952 that ‘it would be absurd to demand homework in the first grade or to denounce it as useless in the eighth grade and in high school,’” Gill and Schlossman write.

That remained more or less true until 1983, when publication of the landmark government report A Nation at Risk helped jump-start a conservative “back to basics” agenda, including an emphasis on drill-style homework. In the decades since, continuing “reforms” like high-stakes testing, the No Child Left Behind Act, and the Common Core standards have kept pressure on schools. Which is why twenty-first-century first graders get spelling words and pages of arithmetic.

Support JSTOR Daily! Join our new membership program on Patreon today.

JSTOR is a digital library for scholars, researchers, and students. JSTOR Daily readers can access the original research behind our articles for free on JSTOR.

Get Our Newsletter

More stories.

Scaffolding a Research Project with JSTOR

Making Implicit Racism

The Diverse Shamanisms of South America

Doing Some (Catfish) Noodling?

Recent posts.

• Medieval Whalers, Smart Plants, and Space Mines
• Arakawa and Gins: An Eternal Architecture
• Zheng He, the Great Eunuch Admiral
• The Dangers of Animal Experimentation—for Doctors
• Fredric Wertham, Cartoon Villain

Support JSTOR Daily

Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Does homework really work?

by: Leslie Crawford | Updated: December 12, 2023

Print article

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

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

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

Homework haterz

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

Nothing more than common kid bellyaching?

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

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

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

How much is too much?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Less is often more

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

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

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

More family time

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

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

Homes Nearby

Homes for rent and sale near schools

How families of color can fight for fair discipline in school

Dealing with teacher bias

The most important school data families of color need to consider

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

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up!

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

Filed under:

• The Highlight

Nobody knows what the point of homework is

The homework wars are back.

Share this story

• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on Twitter
• Share this on Reddit
• Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: Nobody knows what the point of homework is

As the Covid-19 pandemic began and students logged into their remote classrooms, all work, in effect, became homework. But whether or not students could complete it at home varied. For some, schoolwork became public-library work or McDonald’s-parking-lot work.

Luis Torres, the principal of PS 55, a predominantly low-income community elementary school in the south Bronx, told me that his school secured Chromebooks for students early in the pandemic only to learn that some lived in shelters that blocked wifi for security reasons. Others, who lived in housing projects with poor internet reception, did their schoolwork in laundromats.

According to a 2021 Pew survey , 25 percent of lower-income parents said their children, at some point, were unable to complete their schoolwork because they couldn’t access a computer at home; that number for upper-income parents was 2 percent.

The issues with remote learning in March 2020 were new. But they highlighted a divide that had been there all along in another form: homework. And even long after schools have resumed in-person classes, the pandemic’s effects on homework have lingered.

Over the past three years, in response to concerns about equity, schools across the country, including in Sacramento, Los Angeles , San Diego , and Clark County, Nevada , made permanent changes to their homework policies that restricted how much homework could be given and how it could be graded after in-person learning resumed.

Three years into the pandemic, as districts and teachers reckon with Covid-era overhauls of teaching and learning, schools are still reconsidering the purpose and place of homework. Whether relaxing homework expectations helps level the playing field between students or harms them by decreasing rigor is a divisive issue without conclusive evidence on either side, echoing other debates in education like the elimination of standardized test scores from some colleges’ admissions processes.

I first began to wonder if the homework abolition movement made sense after speaking with teachers in some Massachusetts public schools, who argued that rather than help disadvantaged kids, stringent homework restrictions communicated an attitude of low expectations. One, an English teacher, said she felt the school had “just given up” on trying to get the students to do work; another argued that restrictions that prohibit teachers from assigning take-home work that doesn’t begin in class made it difficult to get through the foreign-language curriculum. Teachers in other districts have raised formal concerns about homework abolition’s ability to close gaps among students rather than widening them.

Many education experts share this view. Harris Cooper, a professor emeritus of psychology at Duke who has studied homework efficacy, likened homework abolition to “playing to the lowest common denominator.”

But as I learned after talking to a variety of stakeholders — from homework researchers to policymakers to parents of schoolchildren — whether to abolish homework probably isn’t the right question. More important is what kind of work students are sent home with and where they can complete it. Chances are, if schools think more deeply about giving constructive work, time spent on homework will come down regardless.

There’s no consensus on whether homework works

The rise of the no-homework movement during the Covid-19 pandemic tapped into long-running disagreements over homework’s impact on students. The purpose and effectiveness of homework have been disputed for well over a century. In 1901, for instance, California banned homework for students up to age 15, and limited it for older students, over concerns that it endangered children’s mental and physical health. The newest iteration of the anti-homework argument contends that the current practice punishes students who lack support and rewards those with more resources, reinforcing the “myth of meritocracy.”

But there is still no research consensus on homework’s effectiveness; no one can seem to agree on what the right metrics are. Much of the debate relies on anecdotes, intuition, or speculation.

Researchers disagree even on how much research exists on the value of homework. Kathleen Budge, the co-author of Turning High-Poverty Schools Into High-Performing Schools and a professor at Boise State, told me that homework “has been greatly researched.” Denise Pope, a Stanford lecturer and leader of the education nonprofit Challenge Success, said, “It’s not a highly researched area because of some of the methodological problems.”

Experts who are more sympathetic to take-home assignments generally support the “10-minute rule,” a framework that estimates the ideal amount of homework on any given night by multiplying the student’s grade by 10 minutes. (A ninth grader, for example, would have about 90 minutes of work a night.) Homework proponents argue that while it is difficult to design randomized control studies to test homework’s effectiveness, the vast majority of existing studies show a strong positive correlation between homework and high academic achievement for middle and high school students. Prominent critics of homework argue that these correlational studies are unreliable and point to studies that suggest a neutral or negative effect on student performance. Both agree there is little to no evidence for homework’s effectiveness at an elementary school level, though proponents often argue that it builds constructive habits for the future.

For anyone who remembers homework assignments from both good and bad teachers, this fundamental disagreement might not be surprising. Some homework is pointless and frustrating to complete. Every week during my senior year of high school, I had to analyze a poem for English and decorate it with images found on Google; my most distinct memory from that class is receiving a demoralizing 25-point deduction because I failed to present my analysis on a poster board. Other assignments really do help students learn: After making an adapted version of Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book for a ninth grade history project, I was inspired to check out from the library and read a biography of the Chinese ruler.

For homework opponents, the first example is more likely to resonate. “We’re all familiar with the negative effects of homework: stress, exhaustion, family conflict, less time for other activities, diminished interest in learning,” Alfie Kohn, author of The Homework Myth, which challenges common justifications for homework, told me in an email. “And these effects may be most pronounced among low-income students.” Kohn believes that schools should make permanent any moratoria implemented during the pandemic, arguing that there are no positives at all to outweigh homework’s downsides. Recent studies , he argues , show the benefits may not even materialize during high school.

In the Marlborough Public Schools, a suburban district 45 minutes west of Boston, school policy committee chair Katherine Hennessy described getting kids to complete their homework during remote education as “a challenge, to say the least.” Teachers found that students who spent all day on their computers didn’t want to spend more time online when the day was over. So, for a few months, the school relaxed the usual practice and teachers slashed the quantity of nightly homework.

Online learning made the preexisting divides between students more apparent, she said. Many students, even during normal circumstances, lacked resources to keep them on track and focused on completing take-home assignments. Though Marlborough Schools is more affluent than PS 55, Hennessy said many students had parents whose work schedules left them unable to provide homework help in the evenings. The experience tracked with a common divide in the country between children of different socioeconomic backgrounds.

So in October 2021, months after the homework reduction began, the Marlborough committee made a change to the district’s policy. While teachers could still give homework, the assignments had to begin as classwork. And though teachers could acknowledge homework completion in a student’s participation grade, they couldn’t count homework as its own grading category. “Rigorous learning in the classroom does not mean that that classwork must be assigned every night,” the policy stated . “Extensions of class work is not to be used to teach new content or as a form of punishment.”

Canceling homework might not do anything for the achievement gap

The critiques of homework are valid as far as they go, but at a certain point, arguments against homework can defy the commonsense idea that to retain what they’re learning, students need to practice it.

“Doesn’t a kid become a better reader if he reads more? Doesn’t a kid learn his math facts better if he practices them?” said Cathy Vatterott, an education researcher and professor emeritus at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. After decades of research, she said it’s still hard to isolate the value of homework, but that doesn’t mean it should be abandoned.

Blanket vilification of homework can also conflate the unique challenges facing disadvantaged students as compared to affluent ones, which could have different solutions. “The kids in the low-income schools are being hurt because they’re being graded, unfairly, on time they just don’t have to do this stuff,” Pope told me. “And they’re still being held accountable for turning in assignments, whether they’re meaningful or not.” On the other side, “Palo Alto kids” — students in Silicon Valley’s stereotypically pressure-cooker public schools — “are just bombarded and overloaded and trying to stay above water.”

Merely getting rid of homework doesn’t solve either problem. The United States already has the second-highest disparity among OECD (the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) nations between time spent on homework by students of high and low socioeconomic status — a difference of more than three hours, said Janine Bempechat, clinical professor at Boston University and author of No More Mindless Homework .

When she interviewed teachers in Boston-area schools that had cut homework before the pandemic, Bempechat told me, “What they saw immediately was parents who could afford it immediately enrolled their children in the Russian School of Mathematics,” a math-enrichment program whose tuition ranges from $140 to about $400 a month. Getting rid of homework “does nothing for equity; it increases the opportunity gap between wealthier and less wealthy families,” she said. “That solution troubles me because it’s no solution at all.”

A group of teachers at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia, made the same point after the school district proposed an overhaul of its homework policies, including removing penalties for missing homework deadlines, allowing unlimited retakes, and prohibiting grading of homework.

“Given the emphasis on equity in today’s education systems,” they wrote in a letter to the school board, “we believe that some of the proposed changes will actually have a detrimental impact towards achieving this goal. Families that have means could still provide challenging and engaging academic experiences for their children and will continue to do so, especially if their children are not experiencing expected rigor in the classroom.” At a school where more than a third of students are low-income, the teachers argued, the policies would prompt students “to expect the least of themselves in terms of effort, results, and responsibility.”

Not all homework is created equal

Despite their opposing sides in the homework wars, most of the researchers I spoke to made a lot of the same points. Both Bempechat and Pope were quick to bring up how parents and schools confuse rigor with workload, treating the volume of assignments as a proxy for quality of learning. Bempechat, who is known for defending homework, has written extensively about how plenty of it lacks clear purpose, requires the purchasing of unnecessary supplies, and takes longer than it needs to. Likewise, when Pope instructs graduate-level classes on curriculum, she asks her students to think about the larger purpose they’re trying to achieve with homework: If they can get the job done in the classroom, there’s no point in sending home more work.

At its best, pandemic-era teaching facilitated that last approach. Honolulu-based teacher Christina Torres Cawdery told me that, early in the pandemic, she often had a cohort of kids in her classroom for four hours straight, as her school tried to avoid too much commingling. She couldn’t lecture for four hours, so she gave the students plenty of time to complete independent and project-based work. At the end of most school days, she didn’t feel the need to send them home with more to do.

A similar limited-homework philosophy worked at a public middle school in Chelsea, Massachusetts. A couple of teachers there turned as much class as possible into an opportunity for small-group practice, allowing kids to work on problems that traditionally would be assigned for homework, Jessica Flick, a math coach who leads department meetings at the school, told me. It was inspired by a philosophy pioneered by Simon Fraser University professor Peter Liljedahl, whose influential book Building Thinking Classrooms in Mathematics reframes homework as “check-your-understanding questions” rather than as compulsory work. Last year, Flick found that the two eighth grade classes whose teachers adopted this strategy performed the best on state tests, and this year, she has encouraged other teachers to implement it.

Teachers know that plenty of homework is tedious and unproductive. Jeannemarie Dawson De Quiroz, who has taught for more than 20 years in low-income Boston and Los Angeles pilot and charter schools, says that in her first years on the job she frequently assigned “drill and kill” tasks and questions that she now feels unfairly stumped students. She said designing good homework wasn’t part of her teaching programs, nor was it meaningfully discussed in professional development. With more experience, she turned as much class time as she could into practice time and limited what she sent home.

“The thing about homework that’s sticky is that not all homework is created equal,” says Jill Harrison Berg, a former teacher and the author of Uprooting Instructional Inequity . “Some homework is a genuine waste of time and requires lots of resources for no good reason. And other homework is really useful.”

Cutting homework has to be part of a larger strategy

The takeaways are clear: Schools can make cuts to homework, but those cuts should be part of a strategy to improve the quality of education for all students. If the point of homework was to provide more practice, districts should think about how students can make it up during class — or offer time during or after school for students to seek help from teachers. If it was to move the curriculum along, it’s worth considering whether strategies like Liljedahl’s can get more done in less time.

Some of the best thinking around effective assignments comes from those most critical of the current practice. Denise Pope proposes that, before assigning homework, teachers should consider whether students understand the purpose of the work and whether they can do it without help. If teachers think it’s something that can’t be done in class, they should be mindful of how much time it should take and the feedback they should provide. It’s questions like these that De Quiroz considered before reducing the volume of work she sent home.

More than a year after the new homework policy began in Marlborough, Hennessy still hears from parents who incorrectly “think homework isn’t happening” despite repeated assurances that kids still can receive work. She thinks part of the reason is that education has changed over the years. “I think what we’re trying to do is establish that homework may be an element of educating students,” she told me. “But it may not be what parents think of as what they grew up with. ... It’s going to need to adapt, per the teaching and the curriculum, and how it’s being delivered in each classroom.”

For the policy to work, faculty, parents, and students will all have to buy into a shared vision of what school ought to look like. The district is working on it — in November, it hosted and uploaded to YouTube a round-table discussion on homework between district administrators — but considering the sustained confusion, the path ahead seems difficult.

When I asked Luis Torres about whether he thought homework serves a useful part in PS 55’s curriculum, he said yes, of course it was — despite the effort and money it takes to keep the school open after hours to help them do it. “The children need the opportunity to practice,” he said. “If you don’t give them opportunities to practice what they learn, they’re going to forget.” But Torres doesn’t care if the work is done at home. The school stays open until around 6 pm on weekdays, even during breaks. Tutors through New York City’s Department of Youth and Community Development programs help kids with work after school so they don’t need to take it with them.

As schools weigh the purpose of homework in an unequal world, it’s tempting to dispose of a practice that presents real, practical problems to students across the country. But getting rid of homework is unlikely to do much good on its own. Before cutting it, it’s worth thinking about what good assignments are meant to do in the first place. It’s crucial that students from all socioeconomic backgrounds tackle complex quantitative problems and hone their reading and writing skills. It’s less important that the work comes home with them.

Jacob Sweet is a freelance writer in Somerville, Massachusetts. He is a frequent contributor to the New Yorker, among other publications.

Will you support Vox today?

Millions rely on Vox’s journalism to understand the coronavirus crisis. We believe it pays off for all of us, as a society and a democracy, when our neighbors and fellow citizens can access clear, concise information on the pandemic. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive. Support from our readers helps us keep it free for everyone. If you have already made a financial contribution to Vox, thank you. If not, please consider making a contribution today from as little as $3.

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via

Social media platforms aren’t equipped to handle the negative effects of their algorithms abroad. Neither is the law.

The real science behind the billionaire pursuit of immortality, if you want to belong, find a third place, sign up for the newsletter today, explained, thanks for signing up.

Check your inbox for a welcome email.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please enter a valid email and try again.

Is Homework Good for Kids? Here’s What the Research Says

A s kids return to school, debate is heating up once again over how they should spend their time after they leave the classroom for the day.

The no-homework policy of a second-grade teacher in Texas went viral last week , earning praise from parents across the country who lament the heavy workload often assigned to young students. Brandy Young told parents she would not formally assign any homework this year, asking students instead to eat dinner with their families, play outside and go to bed early.

But the question of how much work children should be doing outside of school remains controversial, and plenty of parents take issue with no-homework policies, worried their kids are losing a potential academic advantage. Here’s what you need to know:

For decades, the homework standard has been a “10-minute rule,” which recommends a daily maximum of 10 minutes of homework per grade level. Second graders, for example, should do about 20 minutes of homework each night. High school seniors should complete about two hours of homework each night. The National PTA and the National Education Association both support that guideline.

But some schools have begun to give their youngest students a break. A Massachusetts elementary school has announced a no-homework pilot program for the coming school year, lengthening the school day by two hours to provide more in-class instruction. “We really want kids to go home at 4 o’clock, tired. We want their brain to be tired,” Kelly Elementary School Principal Jackie Glasheen said in an interview with a local TV station . “We want them to enjoy their families. We want them to go to soccer practice or football practice, and we want them to go to bed. And that’s it.”

A New York City public elementary school implemented a similar policy last year, eliminating traditional homework assignments in favor of family time. The change was quickly met with outrage from some parents, though it earned support from other education leaders.

New solutions and approaches to homework differ by community, and these local debates are complicated by the fact that even education experts disagree about what’s best for kids.

The research

The most comprehensive research on homework to date comes from a 2006 meta-analysis by Duke University psychology professor Harris Cooper, who found evidence of a positive correlation between homework and student achievement, meaning students who did homework performed better in school. The correlation was stronger for older students—in seventh through 12th grade—than for those in younger grades, for whom there was a weak relationship between homework and performance.

Cooper’s analysis focused on how homework impacts academic achievement—test scores, for example. His report noted that homework is also thought to improve study habits, attitudes toward school, self-discipline, inquisitiveness and independent problem solving skills. On the other hand, some studies he examined showed that homework can cause physical and emotional fatigue, fuel negative attitudes about learning and limit leisure time for children. At the end of his analysis, Cooper recommended further study of such potential effects of homework.

Despite the weak correlation between homework and performance for young children, Cooper argues that a small amount of homework is useful for all students. Second-graders should not be doing two hours of homework each night, he said, but they also shouldn’t be doing no homework.

Not all education experts agree entirely with Cooper’s assessment.

Cathy Vatterott, an education professor at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, supports the “10-minute rule” as a maximum, but she thinks there is not sufficient proof that homework is helpful for students in elementary school.

“Correlation is not causation,” she said. “Does homework cause achievement, or do high achievers do more homework?”

Vatterott, the author of Rethinking Homework: Best Practices That Support Diverse Needs , thinks there should be more emphasis on improving the quality of homework tasks, and she supports efforts to eliminate homework for younger kids.

“I have no concerns about students not starting homework until fourth grade or fifth grade,” she said, noting that while the debate over homework will undoubtedly continue, she has noticed a trend toward limiting, if not eliminating, homework in elementary school.

The issue has been debated for decades. A TIME cover in 1999 read: “Too much homework! How it’s hurting our kids, and what parents should do about it.” The accompanying story noted that the launch of Sputnik in 1957 led to a push for better math and science education in the U.S. The ensuing pressure to be competitive on a global scale, plus the increasingly demanding college admissions process, fueled the practice of assigning homework.

“The complaints are cyclical, and we’re in the part of the cycle now where the concern is for too much,” Cooper said. “You can go back to the 1970s, when you’ll find there were concerns that there was too little, when we were concerned about our global competitiveness.”

Cooper acknowledged that some students really are bringing home too much homework, and their parents are right to be concerned.

“A good way to think about homework is the way you think about medications or dietary supplements,” he said. “If you take too little, they’ll have no effect. If you take too much, they can kill you. If you take the right amount, you’ll get better.”

More Must-Reads From TIME

• Putin’s Enemies Are Struggling to Unite
• Women Say They Were Pressured Into Long-Term Birth Control
• What Student Photojournalists Saw at the Campus Protests
• Scientists Are Finding Out Just How Toxic Your Stuff Is
• Boredom Makes Us Human
• John Mulaney Has What Late Night Needs
• The 100 Most Influential People of 2024
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Write to Katie Reilly at [email protected]

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

American academy of arts & sciences welcomes five bu members, com’s newest journalism grad took her time, could boston be the next city to impose congestion pricing, alum has traveled the world to witness total solar eclipses, opening doors: rhonda harrison (eng’98,’04, grs’04), campus reacts and responds to israel-hamas war, reading list: what the pandemic revealed, remembering com’s david anable, cas’ john stone, “intellectual brilliance and brilliant kindness”, one good deed: christine kannler (cas’96, sph’00, camed’00), william fairfield warren society inducts new members, spreading art appreciation, restoring the “black angels” to medical history, in the kitchen with jacques pépin, feedback: readers weigh in on bu’s new president, com’s new expert on misinformation, and what’s really dividing the nation, the gifts of great teaching, sth’s walter fluker honored by roosevelt institute, alum’s debut book is a ramadan story for children, my big idea: covering construction sites with art, former terriers power new professional women’s hockey league.

The History of Homework: Why Was it Invented and Who Was Behind It?

• By Emily Summers
• February 14, 2020

Homework is long-standing education staple, one that many students hate with a fiery passion. We can’t really blame them, especially if it’s a primary source of stress that can result in headaches, exhaustion, and lack of sleep.

It’s not uncommon for students, parents, and even some teachers to complain about bringing assignments home. Yet, for millions of children around the world, homework is still a huge part of their daily lives as students — even if it continues to be one of their biggest causes of stress and unrest.

It makes one wonder, who in their right mind would invent such a thing as homework?

Who Invented Homework?

Pliny the younger: when in ancient rome, horace mann: the father of modern homework, the history of homework in america, 1900s: anti-homework sentiment & homework bans, 1930: homework as child labor, early-to-mid 20th century: homework and the progressive era, the cold war: homework starts heating up, 1980s: homework in a nation at risk, early 21 st century, state of homework today: why is it being questioned, should students get homework pros of cons of bringing school work home.

Online, there are many articles that point to Roberto Nevilis as the first educator to give his students homework. He created it as a way to punish his lazy students and ensure that they fully learned their lessons. However, these pieces of information mostly come from obscure educational blogs or forum websites with questionable claims. No credible news source or website has ever mentioned the name Roberto Nevilis as the person who invented homework . In fact, it’s possible that Nevilis never even existed.

As we’re not entirely sure who to credit for creating the bane of students’ existence and the reasons why homework was invented, we can use a few historical trivia to help narrow down our search.

Mentions of the term “homework” date back to as early as ancient Rome. In I century AD, Pliny the Younger , an oratory teacher, supposedly invented homework by asking his followers to practice public speaking at home. It was to help them become more confident and fluent in their speeches. But some would argue that the assignment wasn’t exactly the type of written work that students have to do at home nowadays. Only introverted individuals with a fear of public speaking would find it difficult and stressful.

It’s also safe to argue that since homework is an integral part of education, it’s probable that it has existed since the dawn of learning, like a beacon of light to all those helpless and lost (or to cast darkness on those who despise it). This means that Romans, Enlightenment philosophers, and Middle Age monks all read, memorized, and sang pieces well before homework was given any definition. It’s harder to play the blame game this way unless you want to point your finger at Horace Mann.

In the 19 th century, Horace Mann , a politician and educational reformer had a strong interest in the compulsory public education system of Germany as a newly unified nation-state. Pupils attending the Volksschulen or “People’s Schools” were given mandatory assignments that they needed to complete at home during their own time. This requirement emphasized the state’s power over individuals at a time when nationalists such as Johann Gottlieb Fichte were rallying support for a unified German state. Basically, the state used homework as an element of power play.

Despite its political origins, the system of bringing school assignments home spread across Europe and eventually found their way to Horace Mann, who was in Prussia at that time. He brought the system home with him to America where homework became a daily activity in the lives of students.

Despite homework being a near-universal part of the American educational experience today, it hasn’t always been universally accepted. Take a look at its turbulent history in America.

In 1901, just a few decades after Horace Mann introduced the concept to Americans, homework was banned in the Pacific state of California . The ban affected students younger than 15 years old and stayed in effect until 1917.

Around the same time, prominent publications such as The New York Times and Ladies’ Home Journal published statements from medical professionals and parents who stated that homework was detrimental to children’s health.

In 1930, the American Child Health Association declared homework as a type of child labor . Since laws against child labor had been passed recently during that time, the proclamation painted homework as unacceptable educational practice, making everyone wonder why homework was invented in the first place.

However, it’s keen to note that one of the reasons why homework was so frowned upon was because children were needed to help out with household chores (a.k.a. a less intensive and more socially acceptable form of child labor).

During the progressive education reforms of the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries, educators started looking for ways to make homework assignments more personal and relevant to the interests of individual students. Maybe this was how immortal essay topics such as “What I Want to Be When I Grow Up” and “What I Did During My Summer Vacation” were born.

After World War II, the Cold War heated up rivalries between the U.S. and Russia. Sputnik 1’s launch in 1957 intensified the competition between Americans and Russians – including their youth.

Education authorities in the U.S. decided that implementing rigorous homework to American students of all ages was the best way to ensure that they were always one step ahead of their Russian counterparts, especially in the competitive fields of Math and Science.

In 1986, the U.S. Department of Education’s pamphlet, “What Works,” included homework as one of the effective strategies to boost the quality of education. This came three years after the National Commission on Excellence in Education published “ Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform .” The landmark report lambasted the state of America’s schools, calling for reforms to right the alarming direction that public education was headed.

Today, many educators, students, parents, and other concerned citizens have once again started questioning why homework was invented and if it’s still valuable.

Homework now is facing major backlash around the world. With more than 60% of high school and college students seeking counselling for conditions such as clinical depression and anxiety, all of which are brought about by school, it’s safe to say that American students are more stressed out than they should be.

After sitting through hours at school, they leave only to start on a mountain pile of homework. Not only does it take up a large chunk of time that they can otherwise spend on their hobbies and interests, it also stops them from getting enough sleep. This can lead to students experiencing physical health problems, a lack of balance in their lives, and alienation from their peers and society in general.

Is homework important and necessary ? Or is it doing more harm than good? Here some key advantages and disadvantages to consider.

• It encourages the discipline of practice

Using the same formula or memorizing the same information over and over can be difficult and boring, but it reinforces the practice of discipline. To master a skill, repetition is often needed. By completing homework every night, specifically with difficult subjects, the concepts become easier to understand, helping students polish their skills and achieve their life goals.

• It teaches students to manage their time

Homework goes beyond just completing tasks. It encourages children to develop their skills in time management as schedules need to be organized to ensure that all tasks can be completed within the day.

• It provides more time for students to complete their learning process

The time allotted for each subject in school is often limited to 1 hour or less per day. That’s not enough time for students to grasp the material and core concepts of each subject. By creating specific homework assignments, it becomes possible for students to make up for the deficiencies in time.

• It discourages creative endeavors

If a student spends 3-5 hours a day on homework, those are 3-5 hours that they can’t use to pursue creative passions. Students might like to read leisurely or take up new hobbies but homework takes away their time from painting, learning an instrument, or developing new skills.

• Homework is typically geared toward benchmarks

Teachers often assign homework to improve students’ test scores. Although this can result in positive outcomes such as better study habits, the fact is that when students feel tired, they won’t likely absorb as much information. Their stress levels will go up and they’ll feel the curriculum burnout.

• No evidence that homework creates improvements

Research shows that homework doesn’t improve academic performance ; it can even make it worse. Homework creates a negative attitude towards schooling and education, making students dread going to their classes. If they don’t like attending their lessons, they will be unmotivated to listen to the discussions.

With all of the struggles that students face each day due to homework, it’s puzzling to understand why it was even invented. However, whether you think it’s helpful or not, just because the concept has survived for centuries doesn’t mean that it has to stay within the educational system.

Not all students care about the history of homework, but they all do care about the future of their educational pursuits. Maybe one day, homework will be fully removed from the curriculum of schools all over the world but until that day comes, students will have to burn the midnight oil to pass their requirements on time and hopefully achieve their own versions of success.

About the Author

Emily summers.

Male and Female Cannabis Flowers Identifying the Differences

Why early education is so important for your child

The benefits of music instruction in the best local preschool

Navigating the Complexities of the Appeal Process in Criminal Cases

Debunking the Myth of Roberto Nevilis: Who Really Invented Homework?

Is the D Important in Pharmacy? Why Pharm.D or RPh Degrees Shouldn’t Matter

How to Email a Professor: Guide on How to Start and End an Email Conversation

Everything You Need to Know About Getting a Post-Secondary Education

Grammar Corner: What’s The Difference Between Analysis vs Analyses?

Who Invented Homework? A Big Question Answered with Facts

Crystal Bourque

Delving into the intriguing history of education, one of the most pondered questions arises: Who invented homework?

Love it or hate it, homework is part of student life.

But what’s the purpose of completing these tasks and assignments? And who would create an education system that makes students complete work outside the classroom?

This post contains everything you’ve ever wanted to know about homework. So keep reading! You’ll discover the answer to the big question: who invented homework?

Who Invented Homework?

The myth of roberto nevilis: who is he, the origins of homework, a history of homework in the united states, 5 facts about homework, types of homework.

• What’s the Purpose of Homework? 
• Homework Pros
• Homework Cons

When, How, and Why was Homework Invented?

Daniel Jedzura/Shutterstock.com

To ensure we cover the basics (and more), let’s explore when, how, and why was homework invented.

As a bonus, we’ll also cover who invented homework. So get ready because the answer might surprise you!

It’s challenging to pinpoint the exact person responsible for the invention of homework.

For example, Medieval Monks would work on memorization and practice singing. Ancient philosophers would read and develop their teachings outside the classroom. While this might not sound like homework in the traditional form we know today, one could argue that these methods helped to form the basic structure and format.

So let’s turn to recorded history to try and identify who invented homework and when homework was invented.

Pliny the Younger

Credit: laphamsquarterly.org

Mention of homework appears in the writings of Pliny the Younger, meaning we can trace the term ‘homework’ back to ancient Rome. Pliny the Younger (61—112 CE) was an oratory teacher, and often told his students to practice their public speaking outside class.

Pliny believed that the repetition and practice of speech would help students gain confidence in their speaking abilities.

Johann Gottlieb Fichte

Credit: inlibris.com

Before the idea of homework came to the United States, Germany’s newly formed nation-state had been giving students homework for years.

The roots of homework extend to ancient times, but it wasn’t until German Philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762—1814) helped to develop the Volksschulen (People’s Schools) that homework became mandatory.

Fichte believed that the state needed to hold power over individuals to create a unified Germany. A way to assert control over people meant that students attending the Volksshulen were required to complete assignments at home on their own time.

As a result, some people credit Fichte for being the inventor of homework.

Horace Mann

Credit: commons.wikimedia.org

The idea of homework spread across Europe throughout the 19th century.

So who created homework in the United States?

The history of education and homework now moves to Horace Mann (1796—1859), an American educational reformer, spent some time in Prussia. There, he learned more about Germany’s Volksshulen, forms of education , and homework practices.

Mann liked what he saw and brought this system back to America. As a result, homework rapidly became a common factor in students’ lives across the country.

Credit: medium.com

If you’ve ever felt curious about who invented homework, a quick online search might direct you to a man named Roberto Nevilis, a teacher in Venice, Italy.

As the story goes, Nevilis invented homework in 1905 (or 1095) to punish students who didn’t demonstrate a good understanding of the lessons taught during class.

This teaching technique supposedly spread to the rest of Europe before reaching North America.

Unfortunately, there’s little truth to this story. If you dig a little deeper, you’ll find that these online sources lack credible sources to back up this myth as fact.

In 1905, the Roman Empire turned its attention to the First Crusade. No one had time to spare on formalizing education, and classrooms didn’t even exist. So how could Nevilis spread the idea of homework when education remained so informal?

And when you jump to 1901, you’ll discover that the government of California passed a law banning homework for children under fifteen. Nevilis couldn’t have invented homework in 1905 if this law had already reached the United States in 1901.

Inside Creative House/Shutterstock.com

When it comes to the origins of homework, looking at the past shows us that there isn’t one person who created homework. Instead, examining the facts shows us that several people helped to bring the idea of homework into Europe and then the United States.

In addition, the idea of homework extends beyond what historians have discovered. After all, the concept of learning the necessary skills human beings need to survive has existed since the dawn of man.

More than 100 years have come and gone since Horace Mann introduced homework to the school system in the United States.

Therefore, it’s not strange to think that the concept of homework has changed, along with our people and culture.

In short, homework hasn’t always been considered acceptable. Let’s dive into the history or background of homework to learn why.

Homework is Banned! (The 1900s)

Important publications of the time, including the Ladies’ Home Journal and The New York Times, published articles on the negative impacts homework had on American children’s health and well-being.

As a result, California banned homework for children under fifteen in 1901. This law, however, changed again about a decade later (1917).

Children Needed at Home (The 1930s)

Formed in 1923, The American Child Health Association (ACHA) aimed to decrease the infant mortality rate and better support the health and development of the American child.

By the 1930s, ACHA deemed homework a form of child labor. Since the government recently passed laws against child labor , it became difficult to justify homework assignments. College students, however, could still receive homework tasks as part of their formal schooling.

Studio Romantic/Shutterstock.com

A Shift in Ideas (The 1940s—1950s)

During the early to mid-1900s, the United States entered the Progressive Era. As a result, the country reformed its public education system to help improve students’ learning.

Homework became a part of everyday life again. However, this time, the reformed curriculum required teachers to make the assignments more personal.

As a result, American students would write essays on summer vacations and winter breaks, participate in ‘show and tell,’ and more.

These types of assignments still exist today!

Homework Today (The 2000s)

The focus of American education shifted again when the US Department of Education was founded in 1979, aiming to uplevel education in the country by, among other things, prohibiting discrimination ensuring equal access, and highlighting important educational issues.

In 2022, the controversial nature of homework in public schools and formal education is once again a hot topic of discussion in many classrooms.

According to one study , more than 60% of college and high school students deal with mental health issues like depression and anxiety due to homework. In addition, the large number of assignments given to students takes away the time students spend on other interests and hobbies. Homework also negatively impacts sleep.

As a result, some schools have implemented a ban or limit on the amount of homework assigned to students.

Test your knowledge and check out these other facts about homework:

• Horace Mann is also known as the ‘father’ of the modern school system and the educational process that we know today (read more about Who Invented School ).
• With a bit of practice, homework can improve oratory and writing skills. Both are important in a student’s life at all stages.
• Homework can replace studying. Completing regular assignments reduces the time needed to prepare for tests.
• Homework is here to stay. It doesn’t look like teachers will stop assigning homework any time soon. However, the type and quantity of homework given seem to be shifting to accommodate the modern student’s needs.
• The optimal length of time students should spend on homework is one to two hours. Students who spent one to two hours on homework per day scored higher test results.
•   So, while completing assignments outside of school hours may be beneficial, spending, for example, a day on homework is not ideal.

Explore how the Findmykids app can complement your child’s school routine. With features designed to ensure their safety and provide peace of mind, it’s a valuable tool for parents looking to stay connected with their children throughout the day. Download now and stay informed about your child’s whereabouts during their academic journey.

Ground Picture/Shutterstock.com

The U.S. Department of Education provides teachers with plenty of information and resources to help students with homework.

In general, teachers give students homework that requires them to employ four strategies. The four types of homework types include:

• Practice: To help students master a specific skill, teachers will assign homework that requires them to repeat the particular skill. For example, students must solve a series of math problems.
• Preparation: This type of homework introduces students to the material they will learn in the future. An example of preparatory homework is assigning students a chapter to read before discussing the contents in class the next day.
• Extension: When a teacher wants to get students to apply what they’ve learned but create a challenge, this type of homework is assigned. It helps to boost problem-solving skills. For example, using a textbook to find the answer to a question gets students to problem-solve differently.
• Integration: To solidify the student learning experience , teachers will create a task that requires the use of many different skills. An example of integration is a book report. Completing integration homework assignments helps students learn how to be organized, plan, strategize, and solve problems on their own. Encouraging effective study habits is a key idea behind homework, too.

Ultimately, the type of homework students receive should have a purpose, be focused and clear, and challenge students to problem solve while integrating lessons learned.

What’s the Purpose of Homework?

LightField Studios/Shutterstock.com

Homework aims to ensure individual students understand the information they learn in class. It also helps teachers to assess a student’s progress and identify strengths and weaknesses.

For example, school teachers use different types of homework like book reports, essays, math problems, and more to help students demonstrate their understanding of the lessons learned.

Does Homework Improve the Quality of Education?

Homework is a controversial topic today. Educators, parents, and even students often question whether homework is beneficial in improving the quality of education.

Let’s explore the pros and cons of homework to try and determine whether homework improves the quality of education in schools.

Homework Pros:

• Time Management Skills : Assigning homework with a due date helps students to develop a schedule to ensure they complete tasks on time. Personal responsibility amongst students is thereby promoted.
• More Time to Learn : Students encounter plenty of distractions at school. It’s also challenging for students to grasp the material in an hour or less. Assigning homework provides the student with the opportunity to understand the material.
• Improves Research Skills : Some homework assignments require students to seek out information. Through homework, students learn where to seek out good, reliable sources.

Homework Cons:

• Reduced Physical Activity : Homework requires students to sit at a desk for long periods. Lack of movement decreases the amount of physical activity, often because teachers assign students so much homework that they don’t have time for anything else. Time for students can get almost totally taken up with out-of-school assignments.
• Stuck on an Assignment: A student often gets stuck on an assignment. Whether they can’t find information or the correct solution, students often don’t have help from parents and require further support from a teacher. For underperforming students, especially, this can have a negative impact on their confidence and overall educational experience.
• Increases Stress : One of the results of getting stuck on an assignment is that it increases stress and anxiety. Too much homework hurts a child’s mental health, preventing them from learning and understanding the material.

Some research shows that homework doesn’t provide educational benefits or improve performance, and can lead to a decline in physical activities. These studies counter that the potential effectiveness of homework is undermined by its negative impact on students.

However, research also shows that homework benefits students—provided teachers don’t give them too much. Here’s a video from Duke Today that highlights a study on the very topic.

Homework Today

The question of “Who Invented Homework?” delves into the historical evolution of academic practices, shedding light on its significance in fostering responsibility among students and contributing to academic progress. While supported by education experts, homework’s role as a pivotal aspect of academic life remains a subject of debate, often criticized as a significant source of stress. Nonetheless, when balanced with extracurricular activities and integrated seamlessly into the learning process, homework continues to shape and refine students’ educational journeys.

Maybe one day, students won’t need to submit assignments or complete tasks at home. But until then, many students understand the benefits of completing homework as it helps them further their education and achieve future career goals.

Before you go, here’s one more question: how do you feel about homework? Do you think teachers assign too little or too much? Get involved and start a discussion in the comments!

Elena Kharichkina/Shutterstock.com

Who invented homework and why?

The creation of homework can be traced back to the Ancient Roman Pliny the Younger, a teacher of oratory—he is generally credited as being the father of homework! Pliny the Younger asked his students to practice outside of class to help them build confidence in their speaking skills.

Who invented homework as a punishment?

There’s a myth that the Italian educator Roberto Nevilis first used homework as a means of punishing his students in the early 20th century—although this has now been widely discredited, and the story of the Italian teacher is regarded as a myth.

Why did homework stop being a punishment?

There are several reasons that homework ceased being a form of punishment. For example, the introduction of child labor laws in the early twentieth century meant that the California education department banned giving homework to children under the age of fifteen for a time. Further, throughout the 1940s and 1950s, there was a growing emphasis on enhancing students’ learning, making homework assignments more personal, and nurturing growth, rather than being used as a form of punishment.

The picture on the front page: Evgeny Atamanenko/Shutterstock.com

The school year is now starting again and with that, the Internet is blowing up…

It’s impossible to overemphasize the importance of learning alphabet letters for kids. This primary milestone…

An aggressive child is not uncommon in the modern world. Unfortunately, for many parents this…

Subscribe now!

Glad you've joined us🎉🎉.

Was Homework Created As a Punishment?

Homework was not created to punish the students . Roberto Nevilis, an Italian teacher, invented it in 1905. The motivation behind Homework was quite simple. 

As a teacher, Nevilis believed that his lessons had lost meaning when they quit the classroom and went back to the comfort of their homes.

Saddened that the students could not perform better than themselves, he decided to adopt different strategies despite his efforts. This led to Homework being invented . 

The concept of Homework, as we know, is not the primary goal of Nevilis. Nevilis saw it more as a means to punishment since physical punishment was not an option.

Homework is essential to learning in school and is here to stay. But sometimes, kids need extra help to complete assignments, and schools and teachers should understand that every child is unique and should create homework assignments for each student versus generally for the whole class.

Table of Contents

History of Homework in the United States

In American culture, Homework was always frowned upon. Many students could not attend higher school, and many teenagers had to do chores and farm work. This made Homework a disliked subject by both parents and schools. 

Students dropped out of school because they couldn’t keep up with Homework. This was due to them mainly memorizing a text at home.

Parents complained at every level of society. In 1880, Francis Amasa Walker persuaded the Boston school board to ban math homework assignments for children under 15. Some people supported reforming Homework and, for example, making the lessons more relevant to students’ lives outside school.

After the Cold War ended, Homework became less popular.

United Kingdom

Students in Britain do more Homework than students from other European countries. The average weekly homework time for this subject is 5 hours. 

The significant difference in UK homework is that middle-class teenagers get more Homework than those from Europe and Asia.

Here are some things that might help your child learn better

1. here are some tips to make it easier.

• Make sure your child has enough time to complete their Homework .
• If your child needs more time, ask them what they want to work on next.
• Ask your child how they feel about doing Homework.
• Let your child choose the order of tasks.
• Give your child choices when possible.
• Don’t give up on your child.
• Encourage your child to use technology to help with Homework.
• Be patient.
• Please help your child understand why they should try harder.
• Have fun – Make Homework Fun and exciting.

2. Set aside time every day to complete assignments.

Many students say completing Homework is one of the most complex parts of the school. They often feel overwhelmed by the work they must do each night. This feeling can lead to stress and anxiety.

Setting aside time daily will make them more focused and disciplined in doing their Homework, after which they will be free to spend time on other hobbies or recreational activities.

3. Doing some Research will help

If you’re having trouble with your Homework, try doing some research first. Find out what topics you’ll cover in class and what assignments will be due. Then, make a plan to tackle your Homework. You might even want to set up an automatic reminder so you won’t forget.

4. Do your best assignment first thing in the morning

Many students say they struggle with Homework because they don’t start early enough. They often find themselves procrastinating until the last minute.

This means that when they finally sit down to do their Homework, they spend more time than necessary. Instead, try starting your Homework as soon as you wake up. That way, you’ll be ready to focus on your studies before school starts.

5. Write down what you need to remember.

If you’re having trouble remembering things, write them down. You might also use sticky or post-it notes to remind yourself of important facts.

Final Word – Was homework created as a punishment?

Homework is here to stay, regardless of who came up with the Homework or if you think it’s a punishment.

While Homework has many advantages, teachers must be aware of when and when to effectively utilize it as an instrument to enhance classroom learning instead of a substitute for classroom instruction.

Students required to do too many homework assignments experience anxiety, depression, and anger. Therefore, teachers and schools should ensure to keep Homework to the minimum.

It isn’t always helpful for students as it could hinder their ability to learn or play outdoors, which is vital to ensure the development of children. Therefore, Homework should not be treated as a punishment but as a tool to improve our child’s learning skills.

FAQ – Was Homework Created As a Punishment

How does homework benefit students.

Homework helps students consolidate their understanding of a subject, develop good study habits, and increase academic independence. It’s a proven concept, hence widely used globally.

How much Homework is considered appropriate for students?

The amount of Homework considered appropriate varies by age and subject, but it is generally recommended that students receive 10-30 minutes per night per grade level.

Are there any drawbacks to Homework?

Too much Homework can lead to stress and burnout and negatively impact a student’s home life and relationships. It is vital to strike a balance between homework and leisure time.

Who Created Homework and Why?

The origin of Homework and who created it is not well documented, and there are varying accounts. However, one widely accepted story is that Homework was introduced by Roberto Nevilis, an Italian teacher, in the early 20th century to keep students occupied outside school hours.

According to this story, Nevilis was frustrated with students not completing their classwork, so he punished them with additional work to complete at home.

However, this story has been largely discredited, and no concrete evidence supports it. The use of Homework has been a part of education for centuries. Its purpose has evolved to reinforce learning and allow students to practice and apply concepts learned in class.

Share this:

• Read Our Blog
• Preschool Skills
• Learning Abilities
• Choosing a school
• Learning Disabilities
• Study Skills
• Grades & Retention
• Other Subjects
• Homework & Study Skills
• College Preparation
• Jobs & Careers
• Financial Aid
• College Life

Homework and Tests as Punishment for Misbehavior

Question: Is it fair for teachers to use homework or tests as punishment for a class? My son's fourth-grade teacher gives extra homework or a test whenever the class misbehaves. It doesn't seem right for her to punish the whole class instead of targeting the children who are causing the disturbance. Can you help me understand this teacher's reasoning? - Displeased

Answer: Call the school and talk to the teacher to find out her reasons for disciplining the entire class. This will enable you to understand her viewpoint as well as to explain it to your son. Hopefully, she will be able to find less-punitive ways to control her class as time goes on.

Giving tests or assigning homework to control a class is a poor disciplinary technique. It will usually control the behavior of a class for a while because students don't want to do extra work or have to study for a test; however, the troublemakers are likely to misbehave again unless peer pressure forces them to behave. Perhaps the worst thing about assigning homework as punishment is that it sends a mixed message about the purpose of homework. Students might begin to regard regular homework as both unnecessary and a punishment rather than as a way to reinforce what is being learned in the classroom.

Obviously your child's teacher is having difficulty with classroom control. The administration needs to provide her with assistance in this task so that she has alternative methods of managing the students. A mentor teacher can often be very helpful in this regard.

One additional step that you should take is to remind your child that his good behavior in the classroom is important. You should also avoid criticizing the teacher to him.

Home » The New School » Is Homework A Punishment?

Is Homework A Punishment?

Table of Contents

Is Homework a Punishment? The Italian pedagog, Roberto Nevilis, who invented homework, initially used it as a form of punishment . However, the practice later evolved to become part of the educational curricular. Despite its enormous benefits, some experts believe it is counterproductive and harmful to students’ health.

Is homework given as punishment?

In a declaration of policy yesterday, the Board of Education said homework must be related to class activities and adapted to the needs of the children. This was in answer to complaints by parents that homework had been given purely as a punitive measure by some teachers . The policy statement, issued by Miss Truda T.

Is homework harmful or hurtful?

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.

Who created homework?

Roberto Nevelis Roberto Nevelis of Venice, Italy, is often credited with having invented homework in 1095—or 1905, depending on your sources.

Why should we not do homework?

“The findings were troubling: Research showed that excessive homework is associated with high stress levels, physical health problems and lack of balance in children’s lives ; 56% of the students in the study cited homework as a primary stressor in their lives,” according to the CNN story.

Is homework a punishment for kids?

Is Homework a Punishment? The Italian pedagog, Roberto Nevilis, who invented homework, initially used it as a form of punishment. However, the practice later evolved to become part of the educational curricular. Despite its enormous benefits, some experts believe it is counterproductive and harmful to students’ health .

Who created school?

Horace Mann Horace Mann is considered as the inventor of the concept of school. He was born in 1796 and later became Secretary of Education in Massachusetts. He was a pioneer in bringing educational reforms into society.

How much homework is too much?

How much is too much? According to the National PTA and the National Education Association, students should only be doing about 10 minutes of homework per night per grade level . But teens are doing a lot more than that, according to a poll of high school students by the organization Statistic Brain.

Do teachers like homework?

Many veteran educators aren&#39;t fan … According to The Educators Room, “homework for the sake of homework is actually doing more harm than good.” This means that if there is not a purpose behind the homework being assigned, it is going to do nothing to further the learning of concepts being presented in class.

Can homework give you depression?

As beneficial as homework is to the students’ academic development, the fact remains that an additional two hours spent on homework after spending around 8 hours in school is too much and could lead to a massive mental breakdown .

How can I finish my homework faster?

8 Easy Ways to Finish Your Homework Faster

• Make a list. This should be a list of everything that has to be done that evening.
• Estimate the time needed for each item on your list. You can be a little ruthless here.
• Gather all your gear.
• Time yourself.
• Stay on task.
• Take plenty of breaks.
• Reward yourself!

What does homework stand for?

Half Of My energy Wasted On Random Knowledge Product Description. Homework stands for “ Half Of My energy Wasted On Random Knowledge “.

Should high school students have homework?

While some researchers suggest reducing homework for high school students, most researchers agree that homework at this age level is important because it has been positively linked to academic achievement .

Should schools get rid of homework?

Key takeaways: Doing homework is linked to better academic achievement in high school and middle school . But no significant link has been found for elementary school students. Spending more time than recommended on homework has actually been linked to lower test scores and higher rates of anxiety and depression.

Why do students hate homework?

Some of the many reasons why students hate homework is because they think homework should only be used as additional practice for students who need it, or to study for tests and quizzes when possible . Moreover, homework can be too overwhelming. It can cause fatigue, stress, and many other things.

Why does homework do more harm than good?

In fact, too much homework can do more harm than good. Researchers have cited drawbacks, including boredom and burnout toward academic material, less time for family and extracurricular activities, lack of sleep and increased stress .

Why does homework exist?

Your overall educational experience is better, because homework helps you to gain and retain more knowledge than would be possible with only classroom work . As you learn more, you know more and you achieve more…and you have homework to thank! Homework teaches lessons beyond just what’s taught in the classroom, too.

Who invented school tests?

The man considered to be the Father of Standardized Testing in the U.S. is Horace Mann , who was secretary of the Massachusetts State Board of Education from 1837-48.

When did homework begin?

An Italian pedagog Roberto Nevilis is considered the real “inventor” of homework. He was the person who invented homework in far 1905 and made it a punishment to his students. Since time when was homework invented, this practice has become popular around the world.

Is 98% of what you learn in school a waste?

98% of what we learn changes More accurate than the idea that 98% of what we learn is a waste is the idea that it changes . Since most of what we learn isn’t from reading books and taking tests in school, the idea that learning is synonymous to education is the actual problem.

Who taught the first teacher?

Of course, if we were to believe Greek mythology, it was the god Chiron who taught the first teacher, seeing as that the centaur was known for his abilities to impart knowledge.

By Travis Thornton

Travis Thornton is an education expert who has dedicated his life to helping students achieve their academic goals. He has worked as a teacher, tutor, and administrator in both public and private schools, and he currently serves as the dean of admissions at a prestigious university.

Travis believes that every student has the potential to succeed, and he tirelessly works to help them reach their full potential. He is a passionate advocate for education, and he believes that every student should have access to a quality education.

Travis is also a father of three young children, and he loves spending time with his family. He enjoys playing sports and watching movies together.

You might also like:

Why is school so stressful, how do you fit in as the new kid, what is a new student called.

Discipline, Punishment, and Rewards

Reviewed by Psychology Today Staff

Parents have a responsibility not only to provide for their children but also to teach them the practical and psychological skills they will need to be well-functioning adults. To that end, parents set their expectations for and try to model appropriate behavior. They often reward obedience and respect, and they may use discipline to correct a child who acts in an inappropriate or unsafe way. Discipline, punishment, and reward are all part of the parental toolbox to be used when and how the situation warrants.

On This Page

• Maintaining Discipline
• Praise and Rewards

Parents are responsible for keeping their children safe and to guide them toward safe and appropriate behavior. Meeting those goals requires establishing a secure relationship and introducing age-appropriate discipline. Generally, when people think of discipline in families, their thoughts turn to punishment —time outs, grounding, denying certain privileges, etc. But discipline, research consistently shows, is often more effective when it’s positive and focused on teaching and obtaining rewards rather than avoiding punishment.

Most relationships experience conflict at some point, but when a parent and child are locked in a power struggle, no one wins. Effective parenting is not about controlling a child , nor does it mean trying to change a child’s nature to fit with preconceived notions about what constitutes a “good kid." Instead, effective parents set expectations and standards for behavior and then take the time to help their children meet them. They also make an effort to listen and to understand on a fundamental level how their child’s needs differ from their own.

When a child's or teenager's behavior is dangerous to themselves or others, parents need to persuade them to change. However, the word “no,” when constantly repeated, can harm a young person's self-esteem. If children and adolescents constantly receive negative feedback without any positive reinforcement, they may start to internalize negative beliefs about themselves and feel that they can never do anything right; as a result, they may stop trying, or even adopt self-harming behaviors. Parents and caregivers need to recognize that their words hold greater weight with children and teens than they may realize—or than their kids let on.

Time-outs may be good for adults, but they may not benefit kids , especially at an age when they haven’t yet developed strong emotion-regulation skills. Time-outs are nonviolent, but they are still a form of punishment. A child in time-out typically feels socially isolated and rejected, and they may come to believe that their parents’ love is conditional upon certain behaviors. Time-outs erode the trust between a parent and a child, teaching kids that they have to hide difficult feelings, or they will be banished from their family’s presence. Stopping an unwelcome behavior often isn’t worth the long-term cost to the parent-child bond and the child’s self-esteem.

Many parenting experts agree that time-outs need a time out . Instead of sending a child to another room, they suggest focusing on discipline that sets limits and re-directs the child to healthier responses in the moment. In this way, kids can learn to talk through their intense feelings, and eventually better manage them. This type of discipline has the added advantage of keeping the parent or caregiver physically close to the child, strengthening their connection rather than jeopardizing it.

Parents are often quick to become angry or annoyed with a whining child, but there are better ways to respond to kids’ whining . For starters, be aware that children and teens whine for different reasons: to get help or resources they urgently need, to receive more positive connection, to express unpleasant feelings, or to get rewarded with a parent’s immediate attention. If parents can identify the need behind their child’s whining, they can meet it more quickly and effectively. A positive, loving response is more likely to soothe a child and secure the relationship than an angry or frustrated one.

Rebellion is a natural part of growing up as a child learns to forge their own identity independent from parents and siblings. Adolescents who don’t want to be treated as a child anymore might rebel as they try to figure out how they want to define themselves. When taken to extremes, rebellion in adolescence can cause young people to act against their own self-interest, engage in behaviors that are self-destructive or self-defeating, take greater risks, allow their impulses to override their good judgment, and sometimes damage their closest relationships. Parents can help young rebels by listening to what they need, allowing them to experience the natural consequences of their mistakes, and providing continuous compassion and understanding.

It’s not unusual for parents to set clear limits and consequences and then not follow through. Children learn quickly if a parent is inconsistent and are more likely to take risks when they think there’s a possibility that they won’t be disciplined. Other adults in the child’s life, including relatives and babysitters, also need to be on board with the parents’ rules and enforce them consistently. If a child won’t respond to rules or consequences , parents can try using a chart system to keep their child organized and reward desirable behaviors. They can also take a deeper look at the consequences they’ve chosen and ask whether they are suitable and strong enough motivation.

Many parents will deprive their children of something they value when they misbehave (e.g., grounding, taking away a cellphone or computer, etc.). For this to be an  effective punishment for the adolescent , parents need to follow a few guidelines: Don’t take away every freedom the child has; don’t deny them access to a pillar of self-esteem, such as a sport or special interest; don’t cut off all social contact; keep the punishment short. Some parents will find it more effective to insist the child or teenager make reparation by fulfilling tasks at home or community service. These punishments only work if, once they have been completed, the parents don’t refer to the misbehavior again.

Children need a stable, safe environment with rules and consequences they can count on. However, parents often fall into a pattern where one is kinder and more nurturing and the other is the stricter disciplinarian. The inconsistency with which the two parents approach their child’s emotions and behavior can be both confusing and upsetting for the child. A healthier parenting dynamic can develop once parents get on the same page about shared values and how to handle discipline and rewards.

While it may seem counterintuitive, regularly rewarding a child for good behavior, whether that means with a material gift or verbal praise, tends to backfire. Praise and rewards can make a child feel like their parents’ love is conditional—they may become obsessed with achievement and avoid any activity where they have to work harder and run the risk of failure. As a result, they miss out on opportunities to grow and try new things.

Praise and rewards prove most helpful when they are doled out in small doses or for special emphasis. Parents will find positive encouragement and discipline to be more effective ways of getting their child to behave well. In response, children will develop a growth mindset and greater confidence in their own skills, which will only benefit them as they mature into adults.

Positive encouragement motivates children and teens to repeat helpful behaviors better than criticism does and, as a result, should be used more frequently. But praise can be tricky. Every parent needs to know that while praise feels good in the moment, it can sabotage kids in the long run when it makes a judgment about a child’s overall abilities (e.g., “You’re a genius!”). Children may be so fearful of losing their parents’ approval that they stop trying new things and lose confidence in themselves. A better approach to praise is noting effort rather than focusing on achievements (“You’ve really been working hard at learning those numbers, and you can count higher today than you could last week!”); this also facilitates a growth mindset that benefits children as they grow older.

Praise is a common form of recognition and encouragement in many different kinds of relationships, not just that of parent and child. It’s natural to want others to have a good opinion of you, and praise fulfills that basic human need. Many experts believe that parents should praise their children to strengthen familial bonds, promote prosocial values, and provide the emotional support we all need.

Education critics like Alfie Kohn argue that it’s a bad idea to praise children , no matter how good the intention. They view all types of praise from an adult as a type of extrinsic reward that undermines any intrinsic motivation a child has for repeating a specific behavior; a child only acts in the desired way when they can be sure of receiving more praise. Thus, praise becomes a form of control in the relationship.

Praising a child’s character (“You’re so great!”) instead of their effort or behavior (“You studied hard and did a great job on that test!”) links their success to their sense of identity. So if the next test is more difficult for them, or they don’t do as well on it, they feel like they have failed as a person. Praising children with low self-esteem can backfire  since they are more likely to experience shame and disappointment as a result of future failures.

Children need positive encouragement and emotional support that doesn’t feel conditional. Parents who are wondering what to say instead of praising can try explaining how their child’s actions affected someone else (“Look how happy your friend is to have a turn with your toy!”), noticing their effort (“You tried hard, and you got a good grade!”), and sharing their own feelings about their child’s behavior (“I loved watching you play soccer today!”). The point is to try to avoid expressing judgment and encourage a growth mindset so that children feel rewarded intrinsically by working their hardest whether they succeed this time or not.

Parents may express disapproval with the goal of teaching their children that behavior is not acceptable or helping them avoid certain mistakes. However, the child tends to feel this criticism as a sign that they will never be good enough to win their parents’ approval. The rebellion of the over-criticized child occurs when a child gives up trying to change and instead becomes angry and argumentative or withdraws completely. In extreme cases, the child may exhibit self-sabotaging or self-harming behaviors. Unrelenting parental criticism can have a lasting impact, making it tough for the child to have healthy relationships as an adult.

According to research, rewarding good behavior often leads to bad behavior . Instead of offering material rewards, adults will have better luck reinforcing a child’s sense of autonomy and competence. Relying on a child’s intrinsic motivation to behave well and get along with others will result in more positive outcomes over time. That’s how people learn to do the right thing even when no one is watching. While the goal should be to build up a child’s intrinsic motivation, tangible rewards used sparingly can help encourage positive behaviors, particularly in younger children.

For parents who worry about the ethics of rewards, be assured that you’re not bribing your kids . A bribe is an incentive for someone to engage in bad behavior, whereas a reward is often used to motivate prosocial actions for the benefit of everyone. Parents can even be upfront with their children that they may sometimes choose to reward good behavior or hard work once in a while, but their kids shouldn’t expect an incentive every time. That way, everyone is on the same page, and rewards can be used to celebrate a special success or milestone.

Parenting experts recommend motivating children without rewards for a number of reasons: Children who are rewarded for good behavior wind up doing it less; an extrinsic reward makes it seem like the behavior is difficult or unpleasant when it doesn’t have to be (like eating vegetables or working out); and children wind up developing a transactional attitude so that they expect an incentive in exchange for behavior they should have anyway (like sharing toys with others or talking to people respectfully). As a result, parents may have better luck raising healthy and well-adjusted children by prioritizing intrinsic motivations over extrinsic rewards.

Like other forms of corporal punishment, spanking is associated with a wide range of negative developmental outcomes for children. Spanking is generally defined as hitting a child with an open hand. Parents may resort to spanking when they feel overwhelmed and need a quick fix in the moment, but spanking does little to resolve problem behavior in the long term and only serves to widen the emotional rift between parent and child. In general, parents benefit from more positive discipline strategies that boost their child’s confidence and self-esteem rather than shaming and humiliating them with physical punishment.

In December 2018, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommended that parents not spank their children. Similar to other forms of corporal punishment, the science of spanking shows that not only is spanking ineffective at changing children’s behavior, but it often backfires, increasing negative behaviors like physical aggression. Other methods are more effective at modifying a child’s behavior without causing long-term damage.

Spanking damages the relationship between parent and child. What really happens when parents spank kids is that they incorrectly model for the child that adults can use physical aggression to solve their problems. Children who are spanked may suffer long-term consequences, including mental health problems, lower self-esteem, cognitive dysfunction, antisocial behavior, and anxiety. They are also more likely to use spanking and other physical punishment to raise their own children, increasing the risk of abuse.

Spanking, which is defined as open-handed hitting, is not recommended as a form of punishment for children. Parents who spank are often at a loss for how to get their child to behave otherwise, but research clearly shows that spanking doesn’t achieve the desire result and only serves to harm the child’s mental health. What really happens when parents hit their kids is they are putting themselves at greater risk of losing control and physically hurting their child.

Truly seeing your child involves getting to know your child, accepting her for who she is, and admiring her when she does something really noteworthy.

Learn 10 vital strategies for raising emotionally healthy children (as opposed to narcissists).

The first and most important parenting decision a future parent can make is who to parent with. This is one choice that is too important to be left up to chance.

Get out of your comfort zone and learn to rewire your ADHD brain to improve your cognitive skills.

You might struggle when school says your child should see a therapist. Here are ways to understand yourself and make the most of the consultation process for you and your child.

Anger is a big emotion; learning to manage it will help young children avoid trouble in kindergarten and beyond. Self-regulation is a teachable skill that requires practice.

Fragmented attention is common these days as we all jump from a work task to a notification on our phone—and it is not good for us or our children.

An addiction psychologist and mother explains the problems with "drug-free kids" programs, and why we should instead aim for "addiction-resistant kids."

Has your child ever shocked you with "I'm going to kill you" or "I wish I was dead"? Don't panic or demand they speak nicely. Respond to the emotion they are trying to articulate.

When parents tell kids they've decided to become consensually nonmonogamous, the kids will have questions. Children living in polyfamilies offer these 5 tips for navigating the change.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

11.9: Reinforcement and Punishment

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 59956

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Learning Objectives

• Explain the difference between reinforcement and punishment (including positive and negative reinforcement and positive and negative punishment)
• Define shaping
• Differentiate between primary and secondary reinforcers

In discussing operant conditioning, we use several everyday words—positive, negative, reinforcement, and punishment—in a specialized manner. In operant conditioning, positive and negative do not mean good and bad. Instead, positive means you are adding something, and negative means you are taking something away. Reinforcement means you are increasing a behavior, and punishment means you are decreasing a behavior. Reinforcement can be positive or negative, and punishment can also be positive or negative. All reinforcers (positive or negative) increase the likelihood of a behavioral response. All punishers (positive or negative) decrease the likelihood of a behavioral response. Now let’s combine these four terms: positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment (Table 1).

Reinforcement

The most effective way to teach a person or animal a new behavior is with positive reinforcement. In positive reinforcement , a desirable stimulus is added to increase a behavior.

For example, you tell your five-year-old son, Jerome, that if he cleans his room, he will get a toy. Jerome quickly cleans his room because he wants a new art set. Let’s pause for a moment. Some people might say, “Why should I reward my child for doing what is expected?” But in fact we are constantly and consistently rewarded in our lives. Our paychecks are rewards, as are high grades and acceptance into our preferred school. Being praised for doing a good job and for passing a driver’s test is also a reward. Positive reinforcement as a learning tool is extremely effective. It has been found that one of the most effective ways to increase achievement in school districts with below-average reading scores was to pay the children to read. Specifically, second-grade students in Dallas were paid $2 each time they read a book and passed a short quiz about the book. The result was a significant increase in reading comprehension (Fryer, 2010). What do you think about this program? If Skinner were alive today, he would probably think this was a great idea. He was a strong proponent of using operant conditioning principles to influence students’ behavior at school. In fact, in addition to the Skinner box, he also invented what he called a teaching machine that was designed to reward small steps in learning (Skinner, 1961)—an early forerunner of computer-assisted learning. His teaching machine tested students’ knowledge as they worked through various school subjects. If students answered questions correctly, they received immediate positive reinforcement and could continue; if they answered incorrectly, they did not receive any reinforcement. The idea was that students would spend additional time studying the material to increase their chance of being reinforced the next time (Skinner, 1961).

In negative reinforcement , an undesirable stimulus is removed to increase a behavior. For example, car manufacturers use the principles of negative reinforcement in their seatbelt systems, which go “beep, beep, beep” until you fasten your seatbelt. The annoying sound stops when you exhibit the desired behavior, increasing the likelihood that you will buckle up in the future. Negative reinforcement is also used frequently in horse training. Riders apply pressure—by pulling the reins or squeezing their legs—and then remove the pressure when the horse performs the desired behavior, such as turning or speeding up. The pressure is the negative stimulus that the horse wants to remove.

Link to Learning

Watch this clip from The Big Bang Theory to see Sheldon Cooper explain the commonly confused terms of negative reinforcement and punishment.

Many people confuse negative reinforcement with punishment in operant conditioning, but they are two very different mechanisms. Remember that reinforcement, even when it is negative, always increases a behavior. In contrast, punishment always decreases a behavior. In positive punishment, you add an undesirable stimulus to decrease a behavior. An example of positive punishment is scolding a student to get the student to stop texting in class. In this case, a stimulus (the reprimand) is added in order to decrease the behavior (texting in class). In negative punishment , you remove a pleasant stimulus to decrease a behavior. For example, when a child misbehaves, a parent can take away a favorite toy. In this case, a stimulus (the toy) is removed in order to decrease the behavior.

Punishment, especially when it is immediate, is one way to decrease undesirable behavior. For example, imagine your four year-old son, Brandon, hit his younger brother. You have Brandon write 50 times “I will not hit my brother” (positive punishment). Chances are he won’t repeat this behavior. While strategies like this are common today, in the past children were often subject to physical punishment, such as spanking. It’s important to be aware of some of the drawbacks in using physical punishment on children. First, punishment may teach fear. Brandon may become fearful of the hitting, but he also may become fearful of the person who delivered the punishment—you, his parent. Similarly, children who are punished by teachers may come to fear the teacher and try to avoid school (Gershoff et al., 2010). Consequently, most schools in the United States have banned corporal punishment. Second, punishment may cause children to become more aggressive and prone to antisocial behavior and delinquency (Gershoff, 2002). They see their parents resort to spanking when they become angry and frustrated, so, in turn, they may act out this same behavior when they become angry and frustrated. For example, because you spank Margot when you are angry with her for her misbehavior, she might start hitting her friends when they won’t share their toys.

While positive punishment can be effective in some cases, Skinner suggested that the use of punishment should be weighed against the possible negative effects. Today’s psychologists and parenting experts favor reinforcement over punishment—they recommend that you catch your child doing something good and reward her for it.

Make sure you understand the distinction between negative reinforcement and punishment in the following video:

You can view the transcript for “Learning: Negative Reinforcement vs. Punishment” here (opens in new window) .

Still confused? Watch the following short clip for another example and explanation of positive and negative reinforcement as well as positive and negative punishment.

You can view the transcript for “Operant Conditioning” here (opens in new window) .

Query \(\PageIndex{1}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{2}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{3}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{4}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{5}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{6}\)

In his operant conditioning experiments, Skinner often used an approach called shaping. Instead of rewarding only the target behavior, in shaping , we reward successive approximations of a target behavior. Why is shaping needed? Remember that in order for reinforcement to work, the organism must first display the behavior. Shaping is needed because it is extremely unlikely that an organism will display anything but the simplest of behaviors spontaneously. In shaping, behaviors are broken down into many small, achievable steps. The specific steps used in the process are the following: Reinforce any response that resembles the desired behavior. Then reinforce the response that more closely resembles the desired behavior. You will no longer reinforce the previously reinforced response. Next, begin to reinforce the response that even more closely resembles the desired behavior. Continue to reinforce closer and closer approximations of the desired behavior. Finally, only reinforce the desired behavior.

Shaping is often used in teaching a complex behavior or chain of behaviors. Skinner used shaping to teach pigeons not only such relatively simple behaviors as pecking a disk in a Skinner box, but also many unusual and entertaining behaviors, such as turning in circles, walking in figure eights, and even playing ping pong; the technique is commonly used by animal trainers today. An important part of shaping is stimulus discrimination. Recall Pavlov’s dogs—he trained them to respond to the tone of a bell, and not to similar tones or sounds. This discrimination is also important in operant conditioning and in shaping behavior.

Here is a brief video of Skinner’s pigeons playing ping pong.

You can view the transcript for “BF Skinner Foundation – Pigeon Ping Pong Clip” here (opens in new window) .

It’s easy to see how shaping is effective in teaching behaviors to animals, but how does shaping work with humans? Let’s consider parents whose goal is to have their child learn to clean his room. They use shaping to help him master steps toward the goal. Instead of performing the entire task, they set up these steps and reinforce each step. First, he cleans up one toy. Second, he cleans up five toys. Third, he chooses whether to pick up ten toys or put his books and clothes away. Fourth, he cleans up everything except two toys. Finally, he cleans his entire room.

Query \(\PageIndex{7}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{8}\)

Primary and Secondary Reinforcers

Rewards such as stickers, praise, money, toys, and more can be used to reinforce learning. Let’s go back to Skinner’s rats again. How did the rats learn to press the lever in the Skinner box? They were rewarded with food each time they pressed the lever. For animals, food would be an obvious reinforcer.

What would be a good reinforce for humans? For your daughter Sydney, it was the promise of a toy if she cleaned her room. How about Joaquin, the soccer player? If you gave Joaquin a piece of candy every time he made a goal, you would be using a primary reinforcer. Primary reinforcers are reinforcers that have innate reinforcing qualities. These kinds of reinforcers are not learned. Water, food, sleep, shelter, sex, and touch, among others, are primary reinforcers . Pleasure is also a primary reinforcer. Organisms do not lose their drive for these things. For most people, jumping in a cool lake on a very hot day would be reinforcing and the cool lake would be innately reinforcing—the water would cool the person off (a physical need), as well as provide pleasure.

A secondary reinforcer has no inherent value and only has reinforcing qualities when linked with a primary reinforcer. Praise, linked to affection, is one example of a secondary reinforcer, as when you called out “Great shot!” every time Joaquin made a goal. Another example, money, is only worth something when you can use it to buy other things—either things that satisfy basic needs (food, water, shelter—all primary reinforcers) or other secondary reinforcers. If you were on a remote island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and you had stacks of money, the money would not be useful if you could not spend it. What about the stickers on the behavior chart? They also are secondary reinforcers.

Sometimes, instead of stickers on a sticker chart, a token is used. Tokens, which are also secondary reinforcers, can then be traded in for rewards and prizes. Entire behavior management systems, known as token economies, are built around the use of these kinds of token reinforcers. Token economies have been found to be very effective at modifying behavior in a variety of settings such as schools, prisons, and mental hospitals. For example, a study by Cangi and Daly (2013) found that use of a token economy increased appropriate social behaviors and reduced inappropriate behaviors in a group of autistic school children. Autistic children tend to exhibit disruptive behaviors such as pinching and hitting. When the children in the study exhibited appropriate behavior (not hitting or pinching), they received a “quiet hands” token. When they hit or pinched, they lost a token. The children could then exchange specified amounts of tokens for minutes of playtime.

Everyday Connection: Behavior Modification in Children

Parents and teachers often use behavior modification to change a child’s behavior. Behavior modification uses the principles of operant conditioning to accomplish behavior change so that undesirable behaviors are switched for more socially acceptable ones. Some teachers and parents create a sticker chart, in which several behaviors are listed (Figure 1). Sticker charts are a form of token economies, as described in the text. Each time children perform the behavior, they get a sticker, and after a certain number of stickers, they get a prize, or reinforcer. The goal is to increase acceptable behaviors and decrease misbehavior. Remember, it is best to reinforce desired behaviors, rather than to use punishment. In the classroom, the teacher can reinforce a wide range of behaviors, from students raising their hands, to walking quietly in the hall, to turning in their homework. At home, parents might create a behavior chart that rewards children for things such as putting away toys, brushing their teeth, and helping with dinner. In order for behavior modification to be effective, the reinforcement needs to be connected with the behavior; the reinforcement must matter to the child and be done consistently.

Time-out is another popular technique used in behavior modification with children. It operates on the principle of negative punishment. When a child demonstrates an undesirable behavior, she is removed from the desirable activity at hand (Figure 2). For example, say that Sophia and her brother Mario are playing with building blocks. Sophia throws some blocks at her brother, so you give her a warning that she will go to time-out if she does it again. A few minutes later, she throws more blocks at Mario. You remove Sophia from the room for a few minutes. When she comes back, she doesn’t throw blocks.

There are several important points that you should know if you plan to implement time-out as a behavior modification technique. First, make sure the child is being removed from a desirable activity and placed in a less desirable location. If the activity is something undesirable for the child, this technique will backfire because it is more enjoyable for the child to be removed from the activity. Second, the length of the time-out is important. The general rule of thumb is one minute for each year of the child’s age. Sophia is five; therefore, she sits in a time-out for five minutes. Setting a timer helps children know how long they have to sit in time-out. Finally, as a caregiver, keep several guidelines in mind over the course of a time-out: remain calm when directing your child to time-out; ignore your child during time-out (because caregiver attention may reinforce misbehavior); and give the child a hug or a kind word when time-out is over.

Query \(\PageIndex{9}\)

Query \(\PageIndex{10}\)

Think It Over

• Explain the difference between negative reinforcement and punishment, and provide several examples of each based on your own experiences.
• Think of a behavior that you have that you would like to change. How could you use behavior modification, specifically positive reinforcement, to change your behavior? What is your positive reinforcer?

negative punishment:  taking away a pleasant stimulus to decrease or stop a behavior

negative reinforcement:  taking away an undesirable stimulus to increase a behavior

positive punishment:  adding an undesirable stimulus to stop or decrease a behavior

positive reinforcement:  adding a desirable stimulus to increase a behavior

primary reinforcer:  has innate reinforcing qualities (e.g., food, water, shelter, sex)

punishment:  implementation of a consequence in order to decrease a behavior

reinforcement:  implementation of a consequence in order to increase a behavior

secondary reinforcer:  has no inherent value unto itself and only has reinforcing qualities when linked with something else (e.g., money, gold stars, poker chips)

Contributors and Attributions

CC licensed content, Original

• Modification and adaptation, addition of Big Bang Learning example. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Operant Conditioning. Authored by : OpenStax College. Located at : http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]:r470BCFb@7/Operant-Conditioning . License : CC BY: Attribution . License Terms : Download for free at http://cnx.org/content/col11629/latest/ .
• BF Skinner Foundation - Pigeon Ping Pong Clip. Provided by : bfskinnerfoundation. Located at : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGazyH6fQQ4 . License : Other . License Terms : Standard YouTube License
• Learning: Negative Reinforcement vs. Punishment. Authored by : ByPass Publishing. Located at : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imkbuKomPXI . License : Other . License Terms : Standard YouTube License
• Operant Conditioning. Authored by : Dr. Mindy Rutherford. Located at : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSHJbIJK9TI . License : Other . License Terms : Standard YouTube License

Reinforcement vs. Punishment: What Are the Differences?

Categories Behavior

Reinforcement in psychology involves increasing the likelihood of a behavior by introducing a stimulus, whereas punishment decreases the likelihood of a behavior by introducing a consequence. Reinforcement strengthens a behavior, while punishment weakens it.

Reinforcement and punishment are both important concepts in operant conditioning , a behavioral theory of learning introduced by psychologist B.F. Skinner . Operant conditioning suggests that relies on associating consequences with a behavior.

People may confuse reinforcement and punishment because both involve modifying behavior through the introduction of stimuli or consequences, but the key distinction lies in whether the aim is to increase (reinforcement) or decrease (punishment) the likelihood of the behavior occurring again.

Understanding the differences between reinforcement and punishment is crucial in psychology as it allows for effective behavior modification strategies. Proper identification and application of reinforcement and punishment can help shape desired behaviors and reduce unwanted ones, leading to more successful outcomes in various contexts, such as education, parenting, and therapy.

Table of Contents

Reinforcement vs. Punishment: Understanding the Key Differences

To understand the differences between reinforcement and punishment, it is important to first understand how each works and how it affects behavior.

Reinforcement

• Reinforcement aims to increase the likelihood of a behavior recurring.
• It can be positive, involving the addition of a desirable stimulus, or negative, involving the removal of an aversive stimulus.
• Reinforcement strengthens behaviors by associating them with positive outcomes or eliminating unpleasant experiences.
• Punishment seeks to decrease the likelihood of a behavior recurring.
• It can be positive, involving the addition of an aversive stimulus, or negative, involving the removal of a desirable stimulus.
• Punishment discourages behaviors by associating them with negative consequences or the loss of desirable experiences.

It can be helpful to look at the key differences between the two types of reinforcement (positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement) and the two types of punishment (positive punishment and negative punishment):

How Reinforcement Works

Reinforcement is a fundamental concept in psychology that involves the modification of behavior through the use of stimuli or consequences. Essentially, reinforcement works by either increasing or decreasing the likelihood of a specific behavior occurring again in the future. 

Positive Reinforcement

In the context of positive reinforcement , a desirable stimulus is added following the occurrence of a behavior, thereby increasing the probability of that behavior being repeated. For example, praising a child for completing their homework may lead to an increase in the likelihood of the child continuing to complete their assignments promptly.

Negative Reinforcement

On the other hand, negative reinforcement involves removing an aversive stimulus to reinforce a behavior. When a behavior results in the termination or avoidance of an unpleasant situation, the likelihood of that behavior recurring is heightened. An example of negative reinforcement is turning off a loud alarm by waking up promptly in the morning, thereby increasing the likelihood of waking up early in the future to avoid the unpleasant noise.

In both cases, reinforcement aims to strengthen behaviors by associating them with either desirable outcomes (positive reinforcement) or the removal of undesirable circumstances (negative reinforcement), ultimately shaping future actions.

Reinforcement strategies are widely used in various fields, such as education, therapy, and parenting, to encourage desired behaviors and discourage undesirable ones.

How Punishment Works

Punishment, like reinforcement, is a fundamental concept in psychology used to modify behavior. It works by introducing consequences following a behavior, with the aim of decreasing the likelihood of that behavior recurring in the future.

Positive Punishment

In positive punishment, an aversive stimulus is added or presented following the occurrence of a behavior, resulting in a decrease in the probability of that behavior happening again. For instance, scolding a child for misbehaving adds an undesirable consequence to discourage the behavior from reoccurring.

Negative Punishment

Conversely, negative punishment involves the removal of a desirable stimulus following a behavior, leading to a decrease in the likelihood of that behavior being repeated. Taking away a privilege, such as screen time, as a consequence for not completing homework is an example of negative punishment. The removal of the enjoyable activity acts as a deterrent to discourage the behavior in the future.

Punishment serves as a form of consequence to discourage unwanted behaviors, helping individuals learn to avoid actions that lead to negative outcomes. However, it’s essential to use punishment judiciously and in conjunction with positive reinforcement to promote desired behaviors effectively while minimizing undesirable ones.

Overreliance on punishment alone can sometimes lead to unintended consequences such as increased aggression or avoidance behaviors.

Reinforcement vs. Punishment: How to Tell the Difference

Differentiating between reinforcement and punishment is crucial in understanding how behaviors are shaped and modified. Here are some key factors to consider when distinguishing between the two:

Effect on Behavior

Reinforcement aims to increase the likelihood of a behavior recurring, while punishment seeks to decrease its likelihood. When assessing the consequence’s impact, observe whether the behavior is becoming more frequent (reinforcement) or less frequent (punishment).

Type of Stimulus or Consequence

In reinforcement, a stimulus is either added (positive reinforcement) or removed (negative reinforcement) to encourage the behavior. In contrast, punishment involves adding (positive punishment) or removing (negative punishment) a stimulus to deter the behavior.

Identifying whether the consequence adds or removes something desirable or aversive is crucial in distinguishing between the two.

Intent and Outcome

Consider the intention behind the consequence and its subsequent effect on behavior. Reinforcement is intended to reward or strengthen desired behaviors, leading to their repetition. Conversely, punishment is intended to discourage unwanted behaviors, resulting in a decrease.

Observation of Behavior Change

Observe how the behavior changes in response to the consequence over time. If the behavior increases, it is likely being reinforced, whereas a decrease indicates punishment.

Consistency and Contingency

To be effective, both reinforcement and punishment must be consistently applied and contingent upon the target behavior. Ensure that the consequence occurs immediately following the behavior to establish a clear association between the two.

By considering these factors and observing the impact of consequences on behavior, individuals can effectively differentiate between reinforcement and punishment. This understanding enables the strategic application of behavior modification techniques to promote desired behaviors and discourage undesirable ones.

Key Points to Remember

In summary, reinforcement and punishment are two fundamental psychological concepts that modify behavior. Understanding the distinctions between reinforcement and punishment is essential for effectively shaping behaviors and promoting desired outcomes while minimizing unwanted behaviors. Proper application of reinforcement and punishment techniques can lead to successful behavior modification in various contexts, such as education, therapy, and parenting.

Alexander, J.M., Valdovinos, M.G. (2011). Punishment . In: Goldstein, S., Naglieri, J.A. (eds) Encyclopedia of Child Behavior and Development . Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79061-9_2321

Kim, S. (2013). Reinforcement . In: Volkmar, F.R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders . Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1698-3_134

Sanabria, F. (2022). Operant conditioning . In: Vonk, J., Shackelford, T.K. (eds) Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55065-7_777

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

14.1: A BRIEF HISTORY OF PUNISHMENT

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 66375

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

CHAPTER 14 - PUNISHMENT AND SENTENCING

A BRIEF HISTORY OF PUNISHMENT [135]

Feeling safe and secure in person and home is arguably one of the most discussed feelings in our nation today. The “fear of crime” influences how we think and act day to day. This has caused great fluctuation in the United States in regard to how we punish people who are convicted of violating the law. In part, punishment comes from the will of the people, which is then carried out through the legislative process, and converted into sentencing practices. People have differing views on why people should be punished, and how much punishment they should receive. These correctional ideologies, or philosophical underpinnings of punishment, have been prevalent throughout history, and are not brand new in the United States. This section details basic concepts of some of the more frequently held punishment ideologies, which include retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation.

THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT [136]

When it comes to criminal sanctions, what people believe to be appropriate is largely determined by the theory of punishment to which they subscribe. That is, people tend to agree with the theory of punishment that is most likely to generate the outcome they believe is the correct one. This system of beliefs about the purposes of punishment often spills over into the political arena. Politics and correctional policy are intricately related. Many of the changes seen in corrections policy in the United States during this time were a reflection of the political climate of the day. During the more liberal times of the 1960s and 1970s, criminal sentences were largely the domain of the judicial and executive branches of government. The role of the legislatures during this period was to design sentencing laws with rehabilitation as the primary goal. During the politically conservative era of the 1980s and 1990s, lawmakers took much of that power away from the judicial and executive branches. Much of the political rhetoric of this time was about “getting tough on crime.” The correctional goals of retribution, incapacitation, and deterrence became dominate, and rehabilitation was shifted to a distant position.

It has been a popular notion throughout the ages that fear of punishment can reduce or eliminate undesirable behavior. This notion has always been popular among criminal justice thinkers. These ideas have been formalized in several different ways. The Utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham is credited with articulating the three elements that must be present if deterrence is to work: The punishment must be administered with celerity, certainty, and appropriate severity. These elements are applied under a type rational choice theory . Rational choice theory is the simple idea that people think about committing a crime before they do it. If the rewards of the crime outweigh the punishment, then they do the prohibited act. If the punishment is seen as outweighing the rewards, then they do not do it. Sometimes criminologists borrow the phrase cost-benefit analysis from economists to describe this sort of decision-making process.

When evaluating whether deterrence works or not, it is important to differentiate between general deterrence and specific deterrence. General deterrence is the idea that every person punished by the law serves as an example to others contemplating the same unlawful act. Specific deterrence is the idea that the individuals punished by the law will not commit their crimes again because they “learned a lesson.”

Critics of deterrence theory point to high recidivism rates as proof that the theory does not work. Recidivism means a relapse into crime. In other words, those who are punished by the criminal justice system tend to reoffend at a very high rate. Some critics also argue that rational choice theory does not work. They argue that such things as crimes of passion and crimes committed by those under the influence of drugs and alcohol are not the product of a rational cost-benefit analysis.

As unpopular as rational choice theories may be with particular schools of modern academic criminology, they are critically important to understanding how the criminal justice system works. This is because nearly the entire criminal justice system is based on rational choice theory . The idea that people commit crimes because they decide to do so is the very foundation of criminal law in the United States. In fact, the intent element must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in almost every felony known to American criminal law before a conviction can be secured. Without a culpable mental state , there is no crime (with very few exceptions).

INCAPACITATION

Incapacitation is a very pragmatic goal of criminal justice. The idea is that if criminals are locked up in a secure environment, they cannot go around victimizing everyday citizens. The weakness of incapacitation is that it works only as long as the offender is locked up. There is no real question that incapacitation reduces crime by some degree. The biggest problem with incapacitation is the cost. There are high social and moral costs when the criminal justice system takes people out of their homes, away from their families, and out of the workforce and lock them up for a protracted period. In addition, there are very heavy financial costs with this model. Very long prison sentences result in very large prison populations which require a very large prison industrial complex. These expenses have placed a crippling financial burden on many states.

REHABILITATION

Rehabilitation is a noble goal of punishment by the state that seeks to help the offender become a productive, noncriminal member of society. Throughout history, there have been several different notions as to how this help should be administered. When our modern correctional system was forming, this was the dominate model. We can see by the very name corrections that the idea was to help the offender become a non-offender. Education programs, faith-based programs, drug treatment programs, anger management programs, and many others are aimed at helping the offender “get better.”

Overall, rehabilitation efforts have had poor results when measured by looking at recidivism rates. Those that the criminal justice system tried to help tend to reoffend at about the same rate as those who serve prison time without any kind of treatment. Advocates of rehabilitation point out that past efforts failed because they were underfunded, ill-conceived, or poorly executed. Today’s drug courts are an example of how we may be moving back toward a more rehabilitative model, especially with first time and nonviolent offenders.

RETRIBUTION

Retribution means giving offenders the punishment they deserve. Most adherents to this idea believe that the punishment should fit the offense. This idea is known as the doctrine of proportionality . Such a doctrine was advocated by early Italian criminologist Cesare Beccaria who viewed the harsh punishments of his day as being disproportionate to many of the crimes committed. The term just desert is often used to describe a deserved punishment that is proportionate to the crime committed.

In reality, the doctrine of proportionality is difficult to achieve. There is no way that the various legislatures can go about objectively measuring criminal culpability. The process is one of legislative consensus and is imprecise at best.

A RACIST SYSTEM?

The United States today can be described as both multiracial and multiethnic. This has led to racism . Racism is the belief that members of one race are inferior to members of another race. Because white Americans of European heritage are the majority, racism in America usually takes on the character of whites against racial and ethnic minorities. Historically, these ethnic minorities have not been given equal footing on such important aspects of life as employment, housing, education, healthcare, and criminal justice. When this unequal treatment is willful, it can be referred to as racial discrimination . The law forbids racial discrimination in the criminal justice system, just as it does in the workplace.

Disproportionate minority contact refers to the disproportionate number of minorities who come into contact with the criminal justice system. Disproportionate minority contact is a problem in both the adult and juvenile systems at every level of those systems. As the gatekeepers of the criminal justice system, the police are often accused of discriminatory practices.

Courts are not immune to cries of racism from individuals and politically active groups. The American Civil Liberties Union (2014), for example, states, “African-Americans are incarcerated for drug offenses at a rate that is 10 times greater than that of whites.”

The literature on disproportionate minority sentencing distinguishes between legal and extralegal factors . Legal factors are those things that we accept as legitimately, as a matter of law, mitigating or aggravating criminal sentences. Such things as the seriousness of the offense and the defendant’s prior criminal record fall into this category. Extralegal factors include things like class, race, and gender. These are regarded as illegitimate factors in determining criminal sentences. They have nothing to do with the defendant’s criminal behavior, and everything to do with the defendant’s status as a member of a particular group.

One way to measure racial disparity is to compare the proportion of people that are members of a particular group (their proportion in the general population) with the proportion or that group at a particular stage in the criminal justice system. In 2013, the Bureau of the Census (Bureau of the Census, 2014) estimated that African Americans made up 13.2% of the population of the United States. According to the FBI, 28.4% of all arrestees were African American. From this information we can see that the proportion of African Americans arrested was just over double what one would expect.

The disparity is more pronounced when it comes to drug crime. According to the NAACP (2014), “African Americans represent 12% of the total population of drug users, but 38% of those arrested for drug offenses, and 59% of those in state prison for a drug offense.”

There are three basic explanations for these disparities in the criminal justice system. The first is individual racism . Individual racism refers to a particular person’s beliefs, assumptions, and behaviors. This type of racism manifests itself when the individual police officer, defense attorney, prosecutor, judge, parole board member, or parole officer is bigoted. Another explanation of racial disparities in the criminal justice system is institutional racism . Institutional racism manifests itself when departmental policies (both formal and informal), regulations, and laws result in unfair treatment of a particular group. A third (and controversial) explanation is differential involvement in crime. The basic idea is that African Americans and Hispanics are involved in more criminal activity. Often this is tied to social problems such as poor education, poverty, and unemployment.

While it does not seem that bigotry is present in every facet of the criminal and juvenile justice systems, it does appear that there are pockets of prejudice within both systems. It is difficult to deny the data: Discrimination does take place in such areas as use of force by police and the imposition of the death penalty. Historically, nowhere was the disparity more discussed and debated than in federal drug policy. While much has recently changed with the passage of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 , federal drug law was a prime example of institutional racism at work.

Under former law, crimes involving crack cocaine were punished much, much more severely than powder cocaine. The law had certain harsh penalties that were triggered by weight, and a provision that required one hundred times more powder than crack. Many deemed the law racist because the majority of arrests for crack cocaine were of African Americans, and the majority of arrests for powder cocaine were white. African American defendants have appealed their sentences based on Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claims.

SENTENCING [137]

In most jurisdictions, the judge holds the responsibility of imposing criminal sentences on convicted offenders. Often, this is a difficult process that defines the application of simple sentencing principles. The latitude that a judge has in imposing sentences can vary widely from state to state. This is because state legislatures often set the minimum and maximum punishments for particular crimes in criminal statutes. The law also specifies alternatives to incarceration that a judge may use to tailor a sentence to an individual offender.

PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION

Many jurisdictions require that a presentence investigation take place before a sentence is handed down. Most of the time, the presentence investigation is conducted by a probation officer, and results in a presentence investigation report . This document describes the convict’s education, employment record, criminal history, present offense, prospects for rehabilitation, and any personal issues, such as addiction, that may impact the court’s decision. The report usually contains a recommendation as to the sentence that the court should impose. These reports are a major influence on the judge’s final decision.

VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENTS

Many states now consider the impact that a crime had on the victim when determining an appropriate sentence. A few states even allow the victims to appear in court and testify. Victim impact statements are usually read aloud in open court during the sentencing phase of a trial. Criminal defendants have challenged the constitutionality of this process on the grounds that it violates the Proportionality Doctrine requirement of the Eighth Amendment, but the Supreme Court has rejected this argument and found the admission of victim statements constitutional.

THE SENTENCING HEARING

Many jurisdictions pass final sentences in a phase of the trial process known as a sentencing hearing . The prosecutor will recommend a sentence in the name of the people or defend the recommended sentence in the presentence investigation report, depending on the jurisdiction. Defendants retain the right to counsel during this phase of the process. Defendants also have the right to make a statement to the judge before the sentence is handed down.

INFLUENCES ON SENTENCING DECISIONS

The severity of a sentence usually hinges on two major factors. The first is the seriousness of the offense. The other, which is much more complex, is the presence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances. In general, the more serious the crime, the harsher the punishment.

TYPES OF SENTENCES

A sentence is the punishment ordered by the court for a convicted defendant. Statutes usually prescribe punishments at both the state and federal level. The most important limit on the severity of punishments in the United States is the Eighth Amendment.

THE DEATH PENALTY

The death penalty is a sentencing option in thirty-eight states and the federal government. It is usually reserved for those convicted of murders with aggravating circumstances. Because of the severity and irrevocability of the death penalty, its use has heavily circumscribed by statutes and controlled by case law. Included among these safeguards is an automatic review by appellate courts.

INCARCERATION

The most common punishment after fines in the United States is the deprivation of liberty known as incarceration . Jails are short-term facilities, most often run by counties under the auspices of the sheriff’s department. Jails house those awaiting trial and unable to make bail, and convicted offenders serving short sentences or waiting on a bed in a prison. Prisons are long-term facilities operated by state and federal governments. Most prison inmates are felons serving sentences of longer than one year.

Probation serves as a middle ground between no punishment and incarceration. Convicts receiving probation are supervised within the community and must abide by certain rules and restrictions. If they violate the conditions of their probation, they can have their probation revoked and can be sent to prison. Common conditions of probation include obeying all laws, paying fines and restitution as ordered by the court, reporting to a probation officer, not associating with criminals, not using drugs, submitting to searches, and submitting to drug tests.

The heavy use of probation is controversial. When the offense is nonviolent, the offender is not dangerous to the community, and the offender is willing to make restitution, then many agree that probation is a good idea. Due to prison overcrowding, judges have been forced to place more and more offenders on probation rather than sentencing them to prison.

INTENSIVE SUPERVISION PROBATION (ISP)

Intensive Supervision Probation (ISP) is similar to standard probation but requires much more contact with probation officers and usually has more rigorous conditions of probation. The primary focus of adult ISP is to provide protection of the public safety through close supervision of the offender. Many juvenile programs, and an increasing number of adult programs, also have a treatment component that is designed to reduce recidivism.

Convicts, often young men, sentenced to boot camps live in a military style environment complete with barracks and rigorous physical training. These camps usually last from three to six months, depending on the particular program. The core ideas of boot camp programs are to teach wayward youths discipline and accountability. While a popular idea among some reformers, the research shows little to no impact on recidivism.

HOUSE ARREST AND ELECTRONIC MONITORING

The Special Curfew Program was the federal courts’ first use of home confinement. It was part of an experimental program-a cooperative venture of the Bureau of Prisons, the U.S. Parole Commission, and the federal probation system-as an alternative to Bureau of Prisons Community Treatment Center (CTC) residence for eligible inmates. These inmates, instead of CTC placement, received parole dates advanced a maximum of 60 days and were subject to a curfew and minimum weekly contact with a probation officer. Electronic monitoring became part of the home confinement program several years later. In 1988, a pilot program was launched in two districts to evaluate the use of electronic equipment to monitor persons in the curfew program. The program was expanded nationally in 1991 and grew to include offenders on probation and supervised release and defendants on pretrial supervision as those who may be eligible to be placed on home confinement with electronic monitoring (Courts, 2015).

Today, most jurisdictions stipulate that offenders sentenced to house arrest must spend all or most of the day in their own homes. The popularity of house arrest has increased in recent years due to monitoring technology that allows a transmitter to be placed on the convict’s ankle, allowing compliance to be remotely monitored. House arrest is often coupled with other sanctions, such as fines and community service. Some jurisdictions have a work requirement, where the offender on house arrest is allowed to leave home for a specified window of time in order to work.

Fines are very common for violations and minor misdemeanor offenses. First time offenders found guilty of simple assaults, minor drug possession, traffic violations and so forth are sentenced to fines alone. If these fines are not paid according to the rules set by the court, the offender is jailed. Many critics argue that fines discriminate against the poor. A $200 traffic fine means very little to a highly paid professional but can be a serious burden on a college student with only a part-time job. Some jurisdictions use a sliding scale that bases fines on income known as day fines . They are an outgrowth of traditional fining systems, which were seen as disproportionately punishing offenders with modest means while imposing no more than “slaps on the wrist” for affluent offenders.

This system has been very popular in European countries such as Sweden and Germany. Day fines take the financial circumstances of the offender into account. They are calculated using two major factors: The seriousness of the offense and the offender’s daily income. The European nations that use this system have established guidelines that assign points (“fine units”) to different offenses based on the seriousness of the offense. The range of fine units varies greatly by country. For example, in Sweden the range is from 1 to 120 units. In Germany, the range is from 1 to 360 units.

The most common process is for court personnel to determine the daily income of the offender. It is common for family size and certain other expenses to be taken into account.

RESTITUTION

When an offender is sentenced to a fine, the money goes to the state. Restitution requires the offender to pay money to the victim. The idea is to replace the economic losses suffered by the victim because of the crime. Judges may order offenders to compensate victims for medical bills, lost wages, and the value of property that was stolen or destroyed. The major problem with restitution is actually collecting the money on behalf of the victim. Some jurisdictions allow practices such as wage garnishment to ensure the integrity of the process. Restitution can also be made a condition of probation, whereby the offender is imprisoned for a probation violation is the restitution is not paid.

COMMUNITY SERVICE

As a matter of legal theory, crimes harm the entire community, not just the immediate victim. Advocates see community service as the violator paying the community back for the harm caused. Community service can include a wide variety of tasks such as picking up trash along roadways, cleaning up graffiti, and cleaning up parks. Programs based on community service have been popular, but little is known about the impact of these programs on recidivism rates.

“SCARLET-LETTER” PUNISHMENTS

While exact practices vary widely, the idea of scarlet-letter punishments is to shame the offender. Advocates view shaming as a cheap and satisfying alternative to incarceration. Critics argue that criminals are not likely to mend their behavior because of shame. There are legal challenges that of kept this sort of punishment from being widely accepted. Appeals have been made because such punishments violate the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Others have been based on the idea that they violate the First Amendment by compelling defendants to convey a judicially scripted message in the form of forced apologies, warning signs, newspaper ads, and sandwich boards. Still other appeals have been based on the notion that shaming punishments are not specifically authorized by State sentencing guidelines and therefore constitute an abuse of judicial discretion (Litowitz, 1997).

ASSET FORFEITURE

Many jurisdictions have laws that allow the government to seize property and assets used in criminal enterprises. Such a seizure is known as forfeiture . Automobiles, airplanes, and boats used in illegal drug smuggling are all subject to seizure. The assets are often given over to law enforcement. According to the FBI, “Many criminals are motivated by greed and the acquisition of material goods. Therefore, the ability of the government to forfeit property connected with criminal activity can be an effective law enforcement tool by reducing the incentive for illegal conduct. Asset forfeiture takes the profit out of crime by helping to eliminate the ability of the offender to command resources necessary to continue illegal activities” (FBI, 2015).

Asset forfeiture can be both a criminal and a civil matter. Civil forfeitures are easier on law enforcement because they do not require a criminal conviction. As a civil matter, the standard of proof is much lower than it would be if the forfeiture was a criminal penalty. Commonly, the standard for such a seizure is probable cause. With criminal asset forfeitures, law enforcement cannot take control of the assets until the suspect has been convicted in criminal court.

An appeal is a claim that some procedural or legal error was made in the prior handling of the case. An appeal results in one of two outcomes. If the appellate court agrees with the lower court, then the appellate court affirms the lower court’s decision. In such cases the appeals court is said to uphold the decision of the lower court. If the appellate court agrees with the plaintiff that an error occurred, then the appellate court will overturn the conviction. This happens only when the error is determined to be substantial. Trivial or insignificant errors will result in the appellate court affirming the decision of the lower court. Winning an appeal is rarely a “get out of jail free” card for the defendant. Most often, the case is remanded to the lower court for rehearing. The decision to retry the case ultimately rests with the prosecutor. If the decision of the appellate court requires the exclusion of important evidence, the prosecutor may decide that a conviction is not possible.

SENTENCING STATUTES AND GUIDELINES

In the United States, most jurisdictions hold that criminal sentencing is entirely a matter of statute. That is, legislative bodies determine the punishments that are associated with particular crimes. These legislative assemblies establish such sentencing schemes by passing sentencing statutes or establishing sentencing guidelines . These sentences can be of different types that have a profound effect on both the administration of criminal justice and the life of the convicted offender.

INDETERMINATE SENTENCES

Indeterminate sentencing is a type of criminal sentencing where the convict is not given a sentence of a certain period in prison. Rather, the amount of time served is based on the offender’s conduct while incarcerated. Most often, a broad range is specified during sentencing, and then a parole board will decide when the offender has earned release.

DETERMINATE SENTENCES

A determinate sentence is of a fixed length and is generally not subject to review by a parole board. Convicts must serve all of the time sentenced, minus any good time earned while incarcerated.

MANDATORY SENTENCES

Mandatory sentences are a type of sentence where the absolute minimum sentence is established by a legislative body. This effectively limits judicial discretion in such cases. Mandatory sentences are often included in habitual offender laws, such as repeat drug offenders. Under federal law, prosecutors have the powerful plea-bargaining tool of agreeing not to file under the prior felony statute.

THE SENTENCING REFORM ACT OF 1984

The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 was passed in response to congressional concern about fairness in federal sentencing practices. The Act completely changed the way courts sentenced federal offenders. The Act created a new federal agency, the U.S. Sentencing Commission, to set sentencing guidelines for every federal offense. When federal sentencing guidelines went into effect in 1987, they significantly altered judges’ sentencing discretion, probation officers’ preparation of the presentence investigation report, and officers’ overall role in the sentencing process. The new sentencing scheme also placed officers in a more adversarial environment in the courtroom, where attorneys might dispute facts, question guideline calculations, and object to the information in the presentence report. In addition to providing for a new sentencing process, the Act also replaced parole with “supervised release,” a term of community supervision to be served by prisoners after they completed prison terms (Courts, 2015).

When the Federal Courts began using sentencing guidelines, about half of the states adopted the practice. Sentencing guidelines indicate to the sentencing judge a narrow range of expected punishments for specific offenses. The purpose of these guidelines is to limit judicial discretion in sentencing. Several sentencing guidelines use a grid system, where the severity of the offense runs down one axis, and the criminal history of the offender runs across the other. The more serious the offense, the longer the sentence the offender receives. The longer the criminal history of the offender, the longer the sentence imposed. Some systems allow judges to go outside of the guidelines when aggravating or mitigating circumstances exist.

INDETERMINATE-INDEFINITE SENTENCING APPROACH

For much of the twentieth century, statutes commonly allowed judges to sentence criminals to imprisonment for indeterminate periods. Under this indeterminate sentencing approach, judges sentenced the offender to prison for no specific time frame and the offenders’ release was contingent upon getting paroled or released by a parole board after a finding that the person was rehabilitated. Because some criminals would quickly be reformed but other criminals would be resistant to change, indeterminate sentencing’s open-ended time frame was deemed optimal for allowing treatment and reform to take its course, no matter how quickly or slowly. The decline of popular support for rehabilitation has led most jurisdictions to abandon the concept of indeterminate sentencing. Indefinite sentences give judges discretion, within defined limits, to set a minimum and maximum sentence length. The judge imposes a range of years to be served, and a parole board decides when the offender will ultimately be released.

DETERMINATE-DEFINITE SENTENCING APPROACH

Under determinate sentencing, judges have little discretion in sentencing. The legislature sets specific parameters on the sentence, and the judge sets a fixed term of years within that time frame. The sentencing laws allow the court to increase the term if it finds aggravating factors and reduce the term if it finds mitigating factors. With determinate sentencing, the defendant knows immediately when he or she will be released. In determinate sentencing, offenders may receive credit for time served while in pretrial detention and “good time” credits. The discretion that judges are allowed in initially setting the fixed term is what distinguishes determinate sentencing from definite sentencing.

Definite sentencing completely eliminates judicial discretion and ensures that offenders who commit the same crimes are punished equally. The definite sentence is set by the legislature with no leeway for judges or corrections officials to individualize punishment. Currently, no jurisdiction embraces this inflexible approach that prohibits any consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors in sentencing. Although mandatory minimum sentencing embraces some aspects of definite sentencing, judges may still impose longer than the minimum sentence and therefore retain some limited discretion.

PRESUMPTIVE SENTENCING GUIDELINES

In the 1980s, state legislatures and Congress, responding to criticism that wide judicial discretion resulted in great sentence disparities, adopted sentencing guidelines drafted by legislatively established commissions. These commissions proposed sentencing formulas based on a variety of factors, but the two most important factors in any sentencing guideline scheme were the nature of the crime and the offenders’ criminal history. Some states enacted advisory sentencing guidelines that gave suggestions to judges statewide of what was considered an appropriate sentence that should be followed in most cases. Some states enacted mandatory sentence guidelines that required judges to impose presumptive sentences, the length or type of sentence that was presumed appropriate unless mitigating or aggravating factors were identified on the record.

Sentencing guidelines generally differentiate between presumptive prison sentences and presumptive probation sentences. Judges who depart , or (select a different sentence, from the presumptive sentences can do a dispositional departure and impose prison when probation was the presumptive sentence or impose probation instead of prison. Judges may also do a durational departure in which they sentence the offender to a term length different than the presumptive term length, for example, giving an 18-month sentence rather than a 26-month sentence.

Guideline sentencing allows for judicial discretion, but at the same time, limits that discretion. Judges must generally make findings when sentencing the offender to a term of incarceration that is different from the presumptive sentence. The judge must indicate which aggravating factors (factors indicating the offender or offense is worse than other similar crimes) or mitigating factors (factors indicating the offender or offense is less serious than other similar crimes). The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 (18 U.S. C.A. §§ 3551 et. seq. 28 U.S.C.A. §§991-998) first established federal sentencing guidelines. The Act applied to all crimes committed after November 1, 1987, and its purpose was “to establish sentencing policies and practices for the federal criminal justice system that will assure the ends of justice by promulgating detailed guidelines prescribing the appropriate sentences for offenders convicted of federal crimes.” Scheb, at 681. It created the United States Sentencing Guideline Commission and gave it the authority to create the guidelines. The Commission dramatically reduced the discretion of federal judges by establishing a narrow sentencing range and required that judges who departed from the ranges state in writing their reason for doing so. The Act also established an appellate review of federal sentences and abolished the U.S. Parole Commission.

Most states have adopted some version of sentencing guidelines, from the very simple to the very complex, and many states restrict their guidelines to felonies. Although limiting judicial discretion, state sentencing guideline schemes all allow some wiggle room if the judge finds that the case differs from the run of the mill case. In a series of cases, the Court has found that federal and state sentencing guidelines schemes that do not require the jury to make findings of aggravating factors which justify a harsher sentence imposed by the judge violate the defendant’s right to a jury trial (found in the Sixth Amendment). See, Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000); United States v. Booker-United States v. Fanfan , 543 U.S. 220 (2005); Blakeley v. Washington , 542 U.S. 296 (2004). Accordingly, some of the sentencing guideline schemes have been invalidated and some modified.

“There is still considerable uncertainty about the efficacy of sentencing guidelines. There is evidence that they have reduced sentencing disparities, but they clearly have not eliminated this problem altogether. There is also concern that sentencing guidelines have promoted higher incarceration rates and have thus contributed to the problem of prison overcrowding. It is fair to say that to be successful, sentencing guidelines must be accompanied by policies designed to effectively manage prison populations.” [1]

The following is a link to video showing the Senate Vote on the First Step Act on December 18 th, 2018 -

https://d2hpjte286tc4h.cloudfront.net/wp-raycom/(Source_%20Senate%20TV/Twitter/@realDonaldTrump/KCAL/KCBS/CNN/Pool)/2018/12/19/5c1a0dfbe4b0dcad7654b1db/t_cc7087e930cd408498ddba6821c2a690_name_BHDN_PY_02WE_SENATE_PASSES_CRIMINAL_JUSTICE_REFORM_BILL__4AME_CNNA_ST1_1000000004ee5b22_120_2/file_640x360-600-v3.mp4

http://HTTPS://WWW.REGISTER-HERALD.COM/CNHI_NETWORK/IN-BIPARTISAN-ACT-SENATE-PASSES-CRIMINAL-JUSTICE-REFORM-BILL-WITH/VIDEO_115833EC-71D2-5FC3-89BA-980428D75367.HTML

CONCURRENT VERSUS CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES [138]

It is not uncommon for a person to be indicted on multiple offenses. This can be several different offenses, or a repetition of the same offense. In many jurisdictions, the judge has the option to order the sentences to be served concurrently or consecutively . A concurrent sentence means that the sentences are served at the same time. A consecutive sentence means that the defendant serves the sentences one after another.

FACTORS THAT AFFECT SENTENCING [139]

OFFENDER’S PRIOR CRIMINAL RECORD

EFFECT OF CRIMINAL RECORDS IN SENTENCING

A criminal record will be an aggravating factor in sentencing. The criminal record can show that the offender is a "scofflaw", is not rehabilitated or has not "learned from past mistakes".

An offender who has demonstrated an exemplary life since a prior offence and demonstrates remorse may be considered for a reduced sentence and reduce the need for specific deterrence.

It is an error in principle to determine a sentence based only on the sentence from a previous conviction. It is a "relevant consideration” but the sentence must be driven by the facts of the case.

A person who has received a discharge can still be considered a "first time offender".

OVER-WEIGHING CRIMINAL RECORD

The record "should not be given so much weight such that it becomes more influential than the circumstances of the offence.”

It is important that the prior criminal record not be over-emphasized such that it amounts "to a re-sentencing of the accused for the previous offence(s).”

TIMING OF PRIOR RECORD

A criminal record can only be considered where the offender had one at the time of the index offence (this is known as the Coke Rule).

However, when a judge sentences for a convicted offence, the judge may take into consideration other criminal acts, and in a limited fashion, such as offences admitted in an agreed statement of facts or pending charges.

AGE AND YOUTHFULNESS

Age is relevant to sentencing as a mitigating factor. A youthful person is seen as having a greater chance of reforming and maturing over time. The courts in certain cases recognize young adults as sometimes foolish, inexperienced, irresponsible, immature and have a "greater prospects for rehabilitation". This diminishes their level of responsibility and moral blameworthiness. [1]

Likewise, the principle of restraint is a prominent factor for young offenders. [2]

Youthfulness as a factor is of primary importance for first time offenders. [3] The factor becomes less important when the youthful offender has "considerable amount of experience in the criminal justice system, has been subject to various forms of probationary and correctional supervision, and has not only breached those conditions but has also re-offended". [4]

Where not otherwise required, a judge sentencing of a youthful offender should put more weight on rehabilitation over general deterrence. [5]

The objectives for youthful first offenders should primarily be on rehabilitation and specific deterrence. [6]

The "length of a penitentiary sentence for a youthful offender should rarely be determined solely by the objectives of denunciation and general deterrence". [7]

For an older accused, age can factor against rehabilitation and reform. [8]

At a certain age there is a recognized category of offender for which imprisonment would be considered "pointless or an unreasonable burden". [9] However, some cases have also pointed to advanced age being an inappropriate reason for sentence reduction as it should be dealt with during sentence administration. [10]

ADVANCED AGE OFFENDERS

An offender of advanced age can "in some circumstances" be considered a mitigating feature. [11] This has been justified on the basis that prison time is tougher on older persons and that they will have less life expectancy after release.

In general, a good work history is mitigating as it indicates a prior good character. [1]

The offender's "opportunity for employment" is an important factor to determine if there is a "reasonable prospect for rehabilitation".

POLICE OFFICERS

Offences committed by persons who are "sworn to uphold the law" such as police officers have a "special duty to be faithful to the justice system" and so sentences require the objectives of denunciation has heightened significance. [1]

Police officer offenders who commit a breach of trust will be subject to "severe sentences" absent exceptional mitigating factors. [2]

A peace officer being sentenced to a period of incarceration is at risk from the general population and will inevitably serve much of the sentence in protective custody, which should warrant mitigating the punishment.

EFFECT ON EMPLOYMENT AND STATUS

Loss of professional or social status is not generally a mitigating factor nor is the ability to do a particular job well a mitigating factor. [1]

However, it has been said that the "ruin and humiliation" brought upon the accused and his family as well as the loss of professional status can provide denunciation and deterrence

Degree of Remorse and Attitude

Remorse is a mitigating factor. [1] Remorse is demonstrated by the acceptance of responsibility through word or action as well as demonstrated insight into the offender's actions. A lack of remorse, however, does not make for an aggravating factor, but simply does not allow for the mitigating effect of remorse. [2]

The courts should have "restraint...for persons who spontaneously acknowledge their culpability, have genuine remorse and seek voluntarily to make reparations." [3]

A lack of remorse or acceptance of responsibility generally cannot be taken as an aggravating factor, but rather can only be taken as an absence of mitigating factors. [4] Only in exceptional circumstances can the lack of remorse be taken as aggravating. [5]

Remorse is a "one-way street" and can only have the effect of providing reduction to sentence. [6]

An offender who "continues to maintain his innocence" cannot be found by that fact alone to lack "remorse or insight". [7]

Strong Case

Remorse has little importance when the case is so strong that "guilt is inevitable". [8]

Misconduct Negating Remorse

Where there is misconduct on the part of the accused during the course of proceedings, it will be "much more difficult to perceive the existence of remorse". [9]

Mistake of Law

While not strictly a defense at trial, a mistake of law can be medicating for sentence. Where the accused honestly but mistakenly believe in the lawfulness of their actions they are therefore less morally blameworthy.

Shame and Embarrassment

The resultant shame and scorn suffered by an offender as a result of the offence should generally not warrant a lighter sentence. [1]

When it comes to offences committed in the course of professional work, there should be little impact on sentence as the offender had "consciously chosen [to commit the offence while] they enjoyed a good reputation and a position of trust and status, which they abused to commit their crimes."

REPAYMENT AND RESTITUTION

Where there has been "full restitution" made in a property offence, this might be a "special circumstance" justifying a conditional sentence where a jail sentence was otherwise appropriate. [1]

It should still take "secondary role" to denunciation and deterrence in large scale frauds involving breach of trust.

A mitigating factor that may be considered is whether the offence is "out of character".

"Stressors" that "precipitated" the offence rendering the offence "out of character" will have a mitigating effect. [1]

Letters from members of the community and family of the offender can be put into evidence at sentencing. However, the weight may be limited where there is no indication that the writers knew about the circumstances of the offence or prior record

RISK TO RE-OFFEND

The risk that the accused poses to re-offend is a valid factor for sentencing. [1]

A greater the risk to re-offend the more consideration there will be upon a custodial sentence. [2]

In sexual abuse against children, the fact that an accused is unlikely to re-offend is not a significant consideration. The emphasis should be on general deterrence and denunciation

POST OFFENCE CONDUCT

Efforts at rehabilitation and career advancement post-offence is a mitigating factor. [1]

Rehabilitation, while the accused has fled to avoid sentencing, is not a mitigating factor. [2]

Post-offence bad behavior is generally not an aggravating factor. [3] Criminal offences committed after the offence will not be aggravating. [4] However, efforts in attempting to frustrate the investigation, such as telling a victim not to report the offence or attempting to commit further offences, can be used as aggravating. [5]

Failure to Assist in the Investigation

Where an accused fails or refuses to assist police in an investigation it can at best neutralize mitigating factors. It cannot be an aggravating factor.

OFFENDER'S HISTORY OF TRAUMA

The presence of relevant abuse in the offender's history is sometimes found to be mitigating. This is particularly notable in child sexual offences where the offender had a history of abuse upon themselves.

ADDICTION AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE

Substance abuse, by itself, is not ordinarily a mitigating factor. [1] Nor is a history of addiction a mitigating factor to sentence. However, it can suggest a lower level of moral culpability and otherwise good character but for the addiction. It is also helpful for the court to know about to determine whether rehabilitation is a possibility when crafting an appropriate sentence.

Gambling addiction is not generally a mitigating factor. [2] However, some courts have treated it as a reduction to moral culpability as it has the effect of reducing the accused's free will and power of control due to a mental disease. [3]

An offender with issues with substance abuse may be subject to probationary terms requiring them to abstain absolutely from the possession or consumption of the substances. However, some courts will take the view that such restrictions can be counter-productive where there is no belief that they will comply with the conditions.

MENTAL HEALTH

Mental health can be a mitigating factor to sentence even where it is not so severe to remove criminal responsibility.

Reduction of sentences due to psychiatric grounds fall into two categories. The mental illness contributed to or caused the commission of the offence or the effect of imprisonment or penalty would be disproportionately severe because of the offender's condition.

An offender's emotional condition due to the personal circumstances of the accused should not be conflated with "mental health problems" that should accord some special treatment in sentence.

Causal Connection

Mental disorders, such as schizophrenia, can be a mitigating factor even when there is not a direct causal connection between the offence and the illness. This is also true where the offender was not suffering from delusions at the time. It is sufficient that the illness contributed in some way to the offence. However, the offender's mental health condition is not a factor in sentencing where there is no connection at all between the offence and the condition.

By contrast, a person who commits a crime of violence "while in a sane and sober condition, unaffected by mental impairment of any kind, has the highest level of responsibility, or moral culpability."

Incarceration

Treatment in the community is generally preferred over incarceration. However, this is less so for serious offences.

Mental illness is often considered a basis to order treatment and supervision over punishment.

Deterrence and Denunciation

General deterrence should be given "very little, if any, weight" since it is not an appropriate manner of making an example to others.

Where mental health plays "a central role in the commission of the offence ... deterrence and punishment assume less importance".

However, at times mental illness will be considered an aggravating factor that will increase sentence where it is necessary to protect the public from a dangerous person who has committed a dangerous offence. Mental illness reduces the importance of denunciation and deterrence and increases the importance of treatment. This includes situations where rehabilitation or cure is impossible.

It is suggested it should be given little if any weight since the punishing of the offender will not make an example to others by way of general deterrence.

The mental condition will attenuate the relative importance of deterrence and denunciation.

Degree of Responsibility

A mental illness diminishes the offender’s degree of responsibility.

Impact of Jail

Incarceration of persons with mental health issues can create a disproportionate impact upon them, which can be a mitigating factor.

An Offenders mental illness can make a jail sentence more severe.

Cognitive Deficits

Diminished intellectual capacity is not a mitigating factor warranting a lesser sentence.

The cognitive deficit from Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) results in limited restraints as well as an appreciation of the immorality of their actions. This reduces the impact on deterrence and denunciation and increases the mitigation on sentence.

Systemic failures to treat the offender's mental health are mitigating factors.

CAPITOL PUNISHMENT [140]

WHAT IS CAPITAL PUNISHMENT?

Capital punishment is a legal process whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime. Crimes that can result in a death penalty are known as “capital crimes” or “capital offenses. ” Capital punishment has in the past been practiced by most societies. Currently, only 58 nations actively practice it, and 97 countries have abolished it. Although many nations have abolished capital punishment, over 60% of the world’s population live in countries where executions take place–the People’s Republic of China, India, the United States, and Indonesia–the four most-populous countries in the world, that continue to apply the death penalty.

Execution of criminals and political opponents has been used by nearly all societies–both to punish crime and to suppress political dissent. In most places that practice capital punishment, it is reserved for murder, espionage, treason, or as part of military justice. In some countries, sexual crimes, such as rape, adultery, incest, and sodomy, carry the death penalty, as do religious crimes, such as apostasy in Islamic nations. In many countries that use the death penalty, drug trafficking is also a capital offense. In China, human trafficking and serious cases of corruption are punished by the death penalty. In militaries around the world courts, martial have imposed death sentences for offenses, such as cowardice, desertion, insubordination, and mutiny.

ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST

IN SUPPORT OF CAPITOL PUNISHMENT

Supporters of the death penalty argue that the death penalty is morally justified when applied in murder, especially with aggravating elements, such as multiple homicide, child murder, torture murder, and mass killing including terrorism or genocide. Some even argue that not applying the death penalty in latter cases are patently unjust. Supporters of the death penalty, especially those who do not believe in the deterrent effect of the death penalty, say the threat of the death penalty could be used to urge capital defendants to plead guilty, testify against accomplices, or disclose the location of the victim’s body.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST CAPITOL PUNISHMENT [142]

Capital punishment is often opposed on the grounds that innocent people will inevitably be executed. Between 1973 and 2005, 123 people in 25 states were released from death row when new evidence of their innocence emerged. Abolitionists believe capital punishment is the worst violation of human rights, because the right to life is the most important, and judicial execution violates it without necessity and inflicts to the condemned to a psychological torture. In addition, opponents of the death penalty use the argument that executing a criminal costs more than life imprisonment does. Many states have found it cheaper to sentence criminals to life in prison than to go through the time-consuming and bureaucratic process of executing a convicted criminal.

Horrendous crimes are committed and will continue to be committed. Even before clear legal systems existed, people wanted to see perpetrators properly punished for the crimes they committed, and the more heinous the crime, the worse the punishment. Rape, murder, torture, and molestation will always be at the top of the list of crimes that are intolerable, as they are all gross violation of another’s autonomy. I could describe a crime that would make anyone’s blood boil and ignite a rage for vengeance on the criminal that had the coldness to carry out such a depraved act. I will spare the reader such a story, but you can imagine the types of crimes I am referring to. Once we catch a person that would do such a thing, the next issue we are faced with is clear: What do we do with this person? How do we punish them? Historically, execution, also known as capital punishment, has been used widely for many crimes. Today, it is reserved for the worst of the worst crimes and criminals in countries where it is used. However, many countries (notably, all of Europe except for Belarus) have either outlawed the punishment or chosen not to implement it. We thus ought to consider whether, in today’s world, we should ever execute criminals.

While some crimes and criminals might deserve to be executed for their crimes, it is not a penalty that we should continue to implement, especially in the United States of America. There are four reasons for this: 1) the justice system is flawed, and with the finality of death, we should avoid punishments that cannot be properly compensated for; 2) on top of variations in prosecutors in seeking the death penalty, there are worrisome geographic and racial variations in the implementation of capital punishment that mean it is not applied fairly; 3) it is sought and carried out infrequently; and, 4) the United States is one of the few “Western” countries to still have it, and abolishing it would put the USA in-step with its closest allies and provide an important expression of moral fortitude.

My arguments will hinge on one major claim: a life behind bars would appear to be an equally just punishment when compared to the death penalty. While one has actual life, there is no freedom to go with it. The value of living might be completely removed if one is behind bars forever, making this punishment on equal footing to death. The Spanish phrase for life imprisonment is the poetic cadena perpetua , which literally translates to “perpetual chain,” a reminder that the focus of such punishment isn’t on living but being imprisoned. In both prison and death freedom is removed, and never living free again is a fate that is akin to death, as any semblance of a quality life can only be a farce. On top of this, should there be good reason to do so, we can always lessen the term of the punishment and release the prisoner. Additionally, as the Dread Pirate Roberts told Westley in The Princess Bride , “Good night, Westley. Good work. Sleep well. I'll most likely kill you in the morning,” there would remain the possibility of execution in the future if justice demands it (notwithstanding potential legal problems with altering a punishment); but we can’t bring someone back to life (yet) if we execute them and regret it. This doesn’t illustrate that execution is wrong but shows a technical way that life imprisonment can be advantageous. In any event, it is unclear to me that execution is the only appropriate punishment for the crimes that it is a potential punishment for.

I have not mentioned anything about costs. My reasoning is simple: it is unclear whether life in prison or the death penalty is more costly overall, as the likelihood of a shorter time spent in prison is offset by the increased costs of housing the prisoner and the longer court processes (such as multiple appeals) required for capital punishment. Of the many studies that have occurred and the analyses of the studies, there is no clear answer to the question of which one costs more, as costs per trial vary greatly based upon the details of the trial, and where it is carried out, as well as the overall costs of housing or executing an individual prisoner in a specific prison. Even if there were an answer, it is beside the point: if the death penalty is the only just punishment, then we ought to implement it since it would be appropriate to do so. It is very costly to put a car thief into prison, and a lot cheaper to implement the religious punishment of removing a hand. But it is often deemed inappropriate to do the latter, as mutilation is a permanent disfigurement that is particularly cruel. A few years of lost freedom (and maybe a monetary fine) are now deemed to be much more just.

Why should we execute people and for what crimes? There are three main reasons that hold philosophical value: justice, deterrence, and the impossibility of rehabilitation. The first, and most important, reason is that the criminal deserves to die. The act they have committed is so depraved and caused such harm, execution is the only way we can fairly punish the offender. If we kill people for awful crimes, then the threat of punishment also can function as a deterrent. If you might be killed for doing something awful, perhaps you’ll refrain from doing it. Lastly, what should we do with those people that are so depraved they are beyond rehabilitation? Some people will just continue to do bad things, and will not, by their own admission, stop. Experts can interview them and concur. They are lost, there is no hope, and they may even see death as just and preferable. Certainly, these people should be executed. On top of all of this, it gives the families of victims justice and satisfies our primal hunger for revenge.

To turn back to my primary reasons for advocating for the abolition of the death penalty in the United States, my first claim is that given the finality of the punishment and the potential of executing innocent individuals, we ought to avoid it. Let’s assume this occurs, and an innocent person was executed. Let’s also assume that execution is appropriate for certain crimes. Would executing one innocent person be worth executing all of the actually guilty individuals that would come to have the punishment of execution? After all, we allow emergency vehicles to violate all sorts of traffic laws, resulting in the occasionally fatal, and likely avoidable, accident. We believe this cost is worth it because it means that more people, on the whole, are saved. Is execution so appropriate and so important that there are no suitable alternatives or that the only alternatives are actually, all-things-considered, significantly less just?

To alleviate this concern, someone might be quick to point out that no person has been executed and later been found to be innocent since the United States restarted capital punishment in 1977. As of this writing, 161 people have been exonerated before execution (out of approximately 7,800) making the wrongful sentencing rate at least 2% (for updated information on this and all of the statistics mentioned in this work, visit http://deathpenaltyinfo.org ). Of course, there is little reason to find out if someone was actually innocent after they have died, so those sentenced to death that die before, or as a result of, execution are unlikely to be exonerated, should they actually be innocent. All crimes carry the chance of wrongful convictions, but most of the punishments can, at least in theory, be compensated for, assuming that the value of money can be comparable to the value of time. There is no compensation for a dead person that the person will directly benefit from. As such, the risk of executing an innocent person is too great, especially when life in prison would appear to be a fitting alternative.

There is extreme variation on the implementation of the death penalty across racial and geographic lines and its application is very dependent on the prosecutor. Where the death penalty is allowed, if you are a black male that killed a white female during a robbery, the odds of receiving the death penalty over a white male that tortured a black female before death are significant, and both are much greater than a white woman that tortured then killed a black man (I don’t know the exact number since no one has crunched the numbers on all of these, but consider that less than 2% of all death row inmates are women despite committing roughly 10% of eligible homicides and that black males are 97% more likely to get the death penalty when they kill a white person over a black person). The race of the perpetrator and the victim both influence whether the death penalty is sought and applied. Justice is supposed to be blind, and even if everyone who got the death penalty deserved it, the application of it is unfair. This should be concerning.

The death penalty is sought in less than 1% of eligible cases. This statistic speaks for itself: capital punishment is rarely sought as a punishment even in cases where it can be used. Capital punishment will work as a deterrent if it actually deters, but since it is rarely used, it would be reasonable for criminals to believe they would not be executed if they commit capital crimes, and thus unlikely to work as a deterrent. For the threat of capital punishment to clearly work as a deterrent, it should be implemented a lot more frequently than it is. As there is no consensus in the research on whether it is effective as a deterrent, relying upon this reason to support maintaining the death penalty is problematic.

Finally, abolishing the death penalty in the United States would send a very important symbolic and humanitarian message: we stand with the rest of the NATO countries and majority of the world (and move away from being the country with the third most executions behind China and Saudi Arabia) in deciding not to systematically execute people in the name of justice. European countries did not disavow the death penalty because it was inappropriate, but rather many did so because of all the practical concerns I have laid out. If it is unfair in how it is used, then it shows the legal system disrespects its own desire for impartiality. It undermines the integrity of the legal and justice system itself.

Yet, there is still something to be said for keeping the death penalty in light of all of my reasons for abolishing it. 26 Despite my claims that life in prison is just as bad as execution, many people disagree with this. Importantly, many criminals that face these punishments might disagree with it. The threat of execution could motivate criminals to cooperate and accept guilt more frequently, sparing us both the costs of seeking conviction and avoiding the possibility that they are found innocent (this is assuming that they really are guilty). Beyond this, people spending life in prison might not have anything other than their lives to lose, so keeping capital punishment gives them one final thing to fear and thereby prevent them from continuing to do awful things behind bars. Lastly, there might not be any value to the positive expression of our moral fortitude that abolishing the death penalty might bring with it. In fact, keeping it might be more expressive by saying that we will never tolerate extremely depraved acts.

I concede that each of these arguments provides a good reason to keep the death penalty on the table. Indeed, the fact it is rarely used is irrelevant for each of these arguments: it’s on the table as a possible punishment, and that’s what matters. However, the finality of the death penalty doesn’t necessarily have to be the goalpost. We do not chain people to walls until they die in prison: inmates in prison for life are afforded some amount of pleasure and freedom behind walls, at the very least, in hopes of reform and an existence that contributes positively to society. We are also not heartless and can recognize the humanity in even the most hardened criminals. Thus, there can be (and are) varying degrees of freedom one may be privileged to while imprisoned, and the threat of continued loss of freedoms could be used as motivating factors in lieu of execution. To the last objection, that we do not need to show anything to our Western allies or make any statements on punishment (and that having the death penalty might even be the statement we should be making), I’d like to point out that execution is the only punishment we have that intentionally inflicts direct physical harm on a criminal. We no longer lash people, use medieval torture devices, or otherwise use methods with the intention of inflicting physical harm. While we restrain and restrict, the purpose of all other types of punishments and incarcerations are not to physically harm. If physical harm comes, it is an unintended consequence. Abolishing the death penalty, the last bastion of physical violence as a punishment, illustrates that we have moved beyond intentionally inflicting physical harm as a form of punishment.

On March 12, 2019, the governor of California, Gavin Newsom, issued a moratorium on executions during his governorship. This means that while he is governor, no one will be executed and everyone on death row will be treated as if they are in prison for life. Future governors can restart executions, however. This move was met some anger, with the loudest shouting two things: (1) voters have constantly reiterated the desire for the death penalty and the governor disregarding this is overreaching on his part, and (2) that certain people deserve to die as a result of their crimes, and the justice system has confirmed this. The former argument is one about the political structure of the state and where powers lie, and while I can be sympathetic to this viewpoint, the facts are that the governor has the power to take the actions he did, an ability he has in order to maintain a proper system of checks and balances. Whether the system is actually balanced is a separate issue and not one I need to tackle right now. The second reason had people advocating for the killing of other human beings. It struck me as odd that the cause they are getting riled up about is one that involves such an act of violence. It feels as if we have lost our humanity if we scream and fight so that we may kill another person in the name of the law, because there is no other action that could possibly bring justice. It might be the only way to get revenge, but the law should not be used for revenge. I do believe that some crimes are worthy of such a sentence, but it is not something worth fighting for, especially when the alternative of life in prison is a sufficient proxy. I fully sympathize with the families of victims and in no way want to ignore the awfulness of the crimes these people committed, but fighting for someone else to die in the name of justice does not promote the values we ought to promote as a modern society.

To summarize, while some crimes are heinous enough that the offender can be deserving of capital punishment, implementing execution is riddled with too many problems and complications to be morally appropriate in today’s world. It should thus be abolished because the alternative of life in prison is an acceptable replacement.

REFUTING CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN AMERICA [143]

Ray Krone came home after finishing his mail route on New Year’s Eve, 1991, planning a fun evening to ring in the new year with some of his friends. His night would go nothing as planned. Instead, a dozen police officers were waiting in his driveway. Ray was immediately apprehended and charged for the kidnapping, sexual assault, and murder of a 26-year-old woman who worked at the local bar. Ray is an African American man. The murdered woman was white. (The significance of race will be discussed later in this essay.) At trial, he was convicted of first-degree murder and kidnapping; he was later sentenced to death (Krone).

The Death Penalty Information Center showed that at the time of Ray’s sentencing, around 80% of Americans supported the death penalty and saw no problem with this conviction. This position would argue that Krone committed an act of murder; therefore, he should be executed. However, Ray Krone was wrongly convicted. An innocent, honorable man was to be deprived of his life because of an act of injustice he didn’t even commit. On April 8th, 2002, after serving 5 years on death row and another 5 years waiting for his innocence to be proven, Ray was exonerated (Krone). His case is one of the many that readily shows the flaws in the legal system and problems with capital punishment, such as innocence, lack of access to adequate counsel, racial disparities, and deterrence, which I will further explore to prove that the death penalty should be illegal in the United States.

Ray Krone is not the only person to be exonerated after serving time on death row. In fact, he was the 100th person, and as of 2016, there have been 156 death row exonerees (Dejong 325). Published in the scholarly journal, Criminal Justice Ethics , Hon-Lam Hi’s research from the 1980s showed that around 3.3 to 5% of all convictions in U.S. capital rape-murder cases were erroneous. So, since erroneous convictions are inevitable because humans make mistakes, is it acceptable to execute around 4 innocent people out of every 100 executions?

Although this question seems to only have one morally acceptable answer, it can be answered in two very different ways, either using Li’s principle of contractualism or the opposing principle of utilitarianism. People who hold the view of utilitarianism agree with the death penalty, as this position holds that if the benefits of an act outweigh its harm, then the act is permissible. In answering the question, the principle of utilitarianism would state that the cost of killing these 4 individuals is outweighed by the benefits the community receives for the incapacitation of the other 96 murderers and the deterrence of further crime. However, if one of those 4 people were you, a friend, or a family member, would you still hold a utilitarian perspective? It is very doubtful. The more intuitive reasoning, contractualism, holds that an act is permissible if and only if it is justifiable to everyone affected by it. This view would say that the killing of these 4 wrongfully convicted persons cannot be justified to the innocent people, their friends, or their families. Therefore, the act of killing is not permissible (Li 152). In itself, according to this view, rates of erroneous convictions, leading to possible executions of innocent people, are enough to make the death penalty unjustifiable and morally unacceptable.

Along with the way that Ray’s innocence reveals moral issues regarding the death penalty, his status as an indigent defendant raises significant legal issues. Indigent defendants do not have enough money to pay for representation in court, so, per the 6th Amendment, “the accused shall enjoy the right to . . . have the assistance of counsel for his defense,” meaning the state had to provide an attorney for Ray ( U.S. Constitution ). The 1984 case Strickland v. Washington extends the 6th Amendment because the Supreme Court ruled that defendants in capital cases have the right to effective representation that meets an “objective standard of reasonableness.” However, little pay is given to defense attorneys who are hired to represent indigent defendants, and, in most cases, this attracts the least skilled and unexperienced attorneys.

A large number of attorneys assigned to represent the accused have little to no experience in criminal law, let alone litigating capital cases. They have no idea as to how they should proceed with the cases, which leads to a large number of death row sentences. In 1999, an extensive investigation into capital punishment in Illinois was conducted by the Chicago Tribune , and it found that 33 defendants who were sentenced to death were represented by attorneys who had been, or were later, disbarred or suspended for conduct that was “incompetent, unethical, or criminal” (Dejong 329). Moreover, a 2002 study conducted by the Texas Defender Service found that Texas death row inmates face a 1 in 3 chance of being executed without having had proper case investigations or a competent attorney to argue for them ( Death Penalty Info Center ). Although the Strickland v. Washington case should eliminate the problem many indigent defendants have with inadequate representation, the ruling stated that the defendant has to prove ineffective counsel by showing that in absence of this assistance, the results would have been different. And here lies the problem many indigent defenders have; not only is this objective standard of reasonableness quite ambiguous and hard to prove, but the state hires these attorneys, so it is highly unlikely states will rule that their provided counsel is ineffective. Therefore, indigent defenders in capital cases are not fully protected by the 6th Amendment, yet another reason the death penalty is an unjust punishment.

Another major issue with imposing the death penalty is racial disparity, an aspect relevant to Ray’s case. Section one of the 14th Amendment states that “No state shall . . . deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” ( U.S. Constitution ). For many years now, some people have believed problems with racial discrimination in the U.S. are nearing an end, yet evidence is readily available in our criminal justice system that these problems persist. A U.S. military study conducted from 1984 to 2005 examined all of the 105 potentially death-eligible cases during that time. Fifteen of those cases resulted in a death sentence, and from the data, evidence of three types of racial disparities was found. The most common of the race-based effects is known as “race of the victim discrimination,” which shows that capital-offense charging and sentencing decisions are applied more punitively in cases involving white victims than in similarly situated cases involving victims of color. Of the 15 cases that received the death penalty, 14 had white victims.

The second form of disparity is known as “minority-defendant/white-victim” discrimination. In these cases, there is more punitive treatment when a case involves a minority defendant and a white victim than any other race combination. Nine of the 15 executions showed this form of racial discrimination. The last identified disparity is known as “main effect” racial discrimination. In these cases, there was more punitive treatment with a minority defendant than a white defendant, and of the 15 people sentenced to death, 10 were minorities (Baldus 1229, 1265).

Although this study was conducted over a decade ago, similar trends appear in capital cases today. Since the death penalty was declared constitutional in 1976 with the Supreme Court ruling in Gregg v Georgia , the “race of the victim discrimination” has been very prominent. According to Baldus, only around 50% of the victims in murder cases overall are white, but this percentage is much higher for death penalty cases, around 76%. In Ray’s case, if the woman who was murdered had not been white, it would have been much less likely that the prosecution against him would have sought the death penalty as a punishment. All these stats reveal continuing signs of racial disparities in the criminal justice system, giving another reason the death penalty should be illegal. As Ray’s case sadly demonstrates, the phrase, “equal protection of the laws,” from the 14th Amendment does not rightfully and equally protect racial minorities in our country.

As mentioned earlier, at the time of Ray’s conviction, around 80% of the population agreed with capital punishment. Most advocates supported it because they believed a combination of the following three factors: it is a sufficient deterrent, it is a form of proper retribution, or it is less costly than life in prison. However, there are proven flaws with each of these factors.

First of all, capital punishment has not been statistically or scientifically proven to be a deterrent of future crime. Many criminals act on impulse and do not consider the consequences before committing a crime. As stated in Charles Manski and John Pepper’s article, published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology , “the outcomes of counterfactual policies are unobservable” (Manski and Pepper 124-26). Referring to deterrence, Manski and Pepper attribute this statement to the research that has been conducted around the effectiveness of deterrence. The research has found vastly different results for this effectiveness, due to the biased assumptions researchers hold about deterrence. In turn, these individual assumptions about deterrence, as either seeing deterrence as effective or ineffective, have impacted the findings. In both cases, the results sway toward the beliefs of the particular researchers, as the researchers are cognitively biased, failing to account for factors that may stop them from reaching their desired outcome. Furthermore, Manski and Pepper argue there is too much ambiguity to properly measure the deterrent effects of capital punishment, so a conclusion cannot be drawn to determine if the death penalty increases or decreases homicide rates (Manski and Pepper 124-26).

The main reason we, as a society, seek to use the death penalty is not because of deterrence, but for retribution purposes. It is in our nature to want revenge against someone who wronged us, and the death penalty, as an ultimate punishment, seems like a proper way to make criminals suffer. Nonetheless, this is very hypocritical. We value human life and believe murder is wrong, yet we murder criminals to supposedly uphold our beliefs against murder; but two wrongs do not make a right. Ray would also argue that the death penalty should not be used as a form of retribution because – after his experience of 10 years locked up in prison – he found that many convicts would rather die than spend the rest of their lives, slowly rotting away in their cells. To them, death is the easy way out (Krone).

Overall, the death penalty is not morally correct or as strong a form of punishment as life in prison. Life in prison, contrary to many beliefs, is less costly than seeking the death penalty. Many people look at the wrong stats when deciding which punishment costs the government less in tax dollars. They see that the drugs used for lethal injections, the most used form of execution, only cost a total of $346.51 per execution, while life in prison costs around $1 million per person (Banner 295). However, litigating capital cases and reaching the point of execution, takes a lot of time and resources. Capital cases may take many years, as they must go through trial and, most times, several appeals before reaching a final sentencing decision. In capital cases, most of the accused are indigent defenders so the government has to pay for the defense attorneys, along with the judges, prosecutors, other court employees, and expert witnesses. After all that, the price of obtaining a conviction and execution can range anywhere from $2.5 to $5 million (Banner 295). So not only is the death penalty immoral, it also costs citizens and the government a large amount of money for such an ineffective form of punishment.

Today, 31 states, Washington D.C., the U.S. Military, and the federal government have authorized the use of the death penalty within their jurisdictions. Since 1976, a total of 1,465 executions have been performed ( Death Penalty Info Center ). I am proposing we ban the death penalty as a form punishment and make it illegal throughout the Unites States, as many developed nations have done before us.

In proposing this, I am not saying we should allow criminals to get away with murder and remain in society. Rather, I believe we should sentence these criminals to life in prison without parole. This form of punishment allows for retribution and eliminates major legal and discriminatory issues that arise in capital cases. Of those 1,465 persons that have been executed, we are not sure how many of them have had their rights violated or were wrongly convicted. In the words of the late Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, “no matter how careful courts are, the possibility of perjured testimony and human error remain all too real. We have no way of judging how many innocent persons have been executed, but we can be certain that there were some” (qtd in Li 152). Ray Krone could have easily been one of these innocent persons executed. Due to all the legal issues that arise and the amount of potential error in capital cases, which suggests we cannot apply the death penalty with fairness and certainty, the death penalty should be illegal.

Withholding Recess as a Punishment Declines

• Share article

It’s not uncommon for elementary school teachers to take away recess time to discipline students. Withholding cherished playtime clearly communicates to children that their misbehavior is unacceptable, they argue.

But more and more, schools are doing away with withholding recess for disciplinary reasons, pointing to research findings that unstructured play and exercise benefit students both inside and outside the classroom.

“That physical activity and unstructured play, those things are not luxuries for kids,” said Sara Zimmerman, the technical-assistance director of the Oakland, Calif.-based Safe Routes to School National Partnership, which advocates increased physical activity for students. “That’s a key part of how kids learn and how they grow.”

Schools around the country have implemented policies that limit or eliminate teachers’ ability to take away recess time, their efforts bolstered by district policies and state laws that place renewed emphasis on physical activity and by increased public involvement in the creation of district wellness policies.

In Minnesota, for example, lawmakers are considering a bill that would prohibit schools from withholding recess time as a form of punishment. A separate bill in that state would require schools to set clear policies on how much recess time they provide to students and to publish those policies online.

At least 11 states have similar prohibitions, according to the Reston, Va.-based National Association for Sport and Physical Education.

In a 2013 analysis of wellness policies in more than 600 school districts around the country, researchers from the University of Illinois at Chicago found that 68 percent of elementary schools had no policy in place prohibiting the use of withholding of physical activity as a form of discipline during the 2010-11 school year. That’s a decline from 79 percent in 2006-07.

Supporters of those changes say it’s counterproductive to punish defiant or overly active children by taking away the “time to get their wiggles out,” and that recess is often withheld for unrelated behaviors, like incomplete homework.

Free time also supports students’ cognitive functioning by giving them a “reset button” for their brain, researchers have found.

And districts that have made the policy switch say recess gives children a chance to explore social and emotional concepts that are increasingly emphasized in the classroom—like self-awareness and respect for others.

National Momentum

“A lot of times the kids who lose physical activity are the ones who need it most,” said Emily O’Winter, the wellness coordinator for Jefferson County schools in Colorado. “It can have a snowball effect.”

The 85,000-student district leaves it up to its schools to decide if recess can be withheld, Ms. O’Winter said. Many follow a model school wellness policy promoted by the district that recommends not allowing such discipline, she said.

The push for change gained momentum nationally in 2012, when the American Academy of Pediatrics released a position paper saying recess “should not be withheld for punitive or academic reasons.”

“A growing trend toward reallocating time in school to accentuate the more academic subjects has put this important facet of a child’s school day at risk,” that paper said.

“Recess serves as a necessary break from the rigors of concentrated, academic challenges in the classroom,” the paper continued. “But equally important is the fact that safe and well-supervised recess offers cognitive, social, emotional, and physical benefits that may not be fully appreciated when a decision is made to diminish it. Recess is unique from, and a complement to, physical education—not a substitute for it.”

After reviewing existing research, the American Academy of Pediatrics found that many schools had lessened recess time to comply with increased academic demands, and that children attending high-poverty and urban schools are less likely than their peers in middle- and upper-income schools to receive adequate playtime.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that all elementary school students get at least 20 minutes of recess time each day.

Child-health advocates fear schools have used the implementation of new, more rigorous learning expectations, such as the Common Core State Standards, as justification for reducing the amount of time for physical activity students have during the school day.

“We have the science that shows the importance of moving throughout the day and the impact that can have on focus, concentration, and academic performance, but, increasingly, we’re having kids sit for long stretches of the day,” said Laurie Whitsel, the director of policy research at the American Heart Association.

That organization and others promote research that shows the academic and emotional benefits of recess, alongside data about child obesity and fitness.

When schools limit children’s time for play, “it’s deleterious for their health, and it’s also bad for their academic performance,” Ms. Whitsel said.

“They’re kind of shooting themselves in the foot.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics position paper highlights research that shows young students have improved literacy scores and better cognitive functioning when they get breaks for physical activity.

Researchers have also found school climate and social-emotional benefits.

Researchers at the University of Colorado in Boulder and the University of Denver found in a 2014 study that 6-year-olds who spent more time in unstructured play showed more signs of strong executive functioning and decisionmaking skills. Those skills are supportive of strong social relationships, which researchers have linked to academic success throughout a student’s school career.

Champions of child exercise expect more schools to consider revising their policies related to physical activity, including recess, as they upgrade school wellness plans to comply with the federal Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010.

Since 2004, all schools that participate in the National School Lunch program have been required to have wellness plans that outline how they handle student nutrition and physical education.

That requirement was updated under the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act to add more chances for public participation and transparency in crafting and updating wellness plans. A proposed rule, drafted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to comply with the act, is expected to be finalized soon.

Teacher Resistance

Model school wellness policies drafted by several advocacy organizations include prohibitions on withholding physical activity for disciplinary reasons. Supporters hope that increased input from parents will lead schools to adopt that recommendation.

Such input has already influenced many communities.

In New Haven, Conn., for example, district leaders updated their policies to provide a minimum amount of required recess time and a rule against using recess for discipline after parents spoke up.

But, even as parents have pushed for such changes, some teachers have resisted them.

Eliminating restrictions on recess come as many schools are implementing other changes to their discipline policies to reduce the use of suspensions and other forms of exclusionary discipline.

When parents in Berkeley, Calif., pushed for a policy to eliminate withholding recess last year, teachers pushed back.

There are times when taking away recess time “is the logical and natural response to behavior,” Cathy Campbell, the president of the Berkeley Federation of Teachers, told the school board at a November meeting.

“We don’t want it to be impossible for teachers to use this tool,” she said, “because there are times when it is absolutely the right tool.”

The board eventually passed a policy that maintains the ability of teachers to restrict recess time for a maximum of 10 minutes per day after first considering other disciplinary alternatives and providing a verbal warning.

Ms. O’Winter of the Jefferson County district said she understands that some schools may be reluctant to take a discipline option off the table.

But “there’s a growing understanding that it’s damaging to withhold physical activity from children, for disciplinary reasons or for makeup work,” she said.

After the USDA finalizes its new regulations for school wellness plans, she hopes to update Jefferson County’s plan, possibly considering a ban on withholding recess in the process.

“I see it,” she said, “as an opportunity for a big change.”

Coverage of school climate and student behavior and engagement is supported in part by grants from the Atlantic Philanthropies, the NoVo Foundation, the Raikes Foundation, and the California Endowment. Education Week retains sole editorial control over the content of this coverage. A version of this article appeared in the April 15, 2015 edition of Education Week as Withholding Recess as Discipline in Decline

Sign Up for The Savvy Principal

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In