A common complaint from students in many classes pertains to the amount of busywork assigned. This mantra inspires an interesting conundrum for teachers...to assign or not to assign those quizzes, supplemental readings, practice problems, writing exercises? On the one hand, we understand the value of students working with information being presented in as many different (appropriate) ways as possible. On the other hand, we risk having students "drop-out" when faced with a steady stream of work that can seem repetitive and oppressive.
Recently, there has been a surge of research in cognitive psychology on the process of learning in the classroom. I think this line of research shows promise for helping educators navigate the pedagogical dilemma of busywork. Studies have shown that practice with material that is distributed over the long run (e.g., over the semester) leads to much longer retention than does mass practice (commonly known as 'cramming'). Research has also found that being repeatedly tested on a topic leads to better performance than does study alone. Futhermore, new data now suggests that (despite the principle of encoding specificity) practice tests do not need to share an identical format with the actual test. Instead, what seems to be of primary importance is the effort required on the part of the learner during the practice measures and that feedback is given by teachers on them.
The short story, from my perspective, is that we seem to have a semantics problem here. Busywork has come to mean something we are asked to do that simply fills the time, but that has no inherent value. Given what we know about the distributed practice of material and the importance of repeated testing to learning, however, busywork should not be abandoned. Instead, I suggest a new interpretation of the word. Busywork should be reconceived as structured, focused work that keeps students busy (read engaged here) with the material to be learned.
Of primary importance will be getting students to see the value of that work so that their motivation to continue remains high. I believe the challenge is for educators to "take-back" this concept and make sure to have conversations with their students regarding its importance to their learning. Perhaps the next research question should be how to ensure that our new busywork achieves these goals.
For a reading list of cognitive research on learning in the class room, read more:
READING LIST
Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2007). Testing improves long-term retention in a simulated
classroom setting. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 514-527.
Kang, S. H. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2007). Test format and corrective
feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention. European Journal of
Cognitive Psychology, 19, 528-558.
Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2007). Repeated retrieval during learning is the key to
long-term retention. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 151-162. Access Abstract Here
McDaniel, M. A., Roediger, H. L., III, & McDermott, K. B. (2007). Generalizing test-enhanced
learning from the laboratory to the classroom. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,
14, 200-206.
Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The power of testing memory: Basic research and
implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1,
181-210. Access Abstract Here
Szpunar, K. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2007). Expectation of a final
cumulative test enhances long-term retention. Memory & Cognition, 35,
1007-1013.