2012, Science HW, TCR (SSCI)

Making Science Homework Work: The
Perspectives of Exemplary African

American Science Teachers
JIANZHONG XU
LINDA T. COATS
Mississippi State University
MARY L. DAVIDSON
Mississippi School for Mathematics and Science
Background/Context: Despite the best intentions to close the achievement gap, the under-
achievement of African American students in science is a persistent problem. It is surprising
to note, however, that research on science education has often failed to consider students’ cul-
tural diversity as it relates to science education. On the few occasions when efforts were made
to link science disciplines and students’ cultural backgrounds, these studies were largely lim-
ited to classroom learning environments.
Purpose/Research Question: This study examines the perspectives of exemplary African
American teachers toward science homework. Specifically, we address two research questions:
What does science homework mean to exemplary African American science teachers? How do
they approach science homework?
Research Design: A qualitative study was conducted, with data obtained from the follow-
ing sources: (a) three open-ended, in-depth interviews with each exemplary teacher during
the first year of the study, and (b) two focus group interviews with these teachers during the
second year of the study. The participants were 8 exemplary African American science teach-
ers in Grades 3–6 in the southeastern United States.
Findings/Results: Data revealed that these teachers shared a strong sense of urgency to use
homework as an important vehicle in science learning. To help their students be successful
with their homework, these teachers often provided additional provisions and used a variety
of strategies to promote students’ interest in their homework. In addition, the teachers
Teachers College Record Volume 114, 070304, July 2012, 32 pages

Copyright © by Teachers College, Columbia University
0161-4681
1
TCR, 114, 070304 Science Homework
adapted an approach comparable to both Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos (e.g., concerned with
affect, expressive individualism, and verve) and “being a warm demander” (i.e., setting
high expectations and insisting firmly yet respectfully that students meet those expectations).
Conclusions: These findings suggest that there is merit in integrating these two frameworks
to better understand the perspectives of exemplary African American teachers toward science
homework. These findings highlight the need to examine the perspectives of exemplary
African American teachers toward secondary school science homework given that the poor
achievement of African American students becomes more pronounced as they progress
through school, and homework is found to be more strongly associated with secondary school
students than elementary school students.
Despite the best intentions to close the achievement gap, the under-
achievement of African American students in science is a persistent prob-
lem (Parsons, 2008a; Seiler & Elmesky, 2007; Seiler, Tobin, & Sokolic,
2001; Simpson & Parsons, 2009). For example, although the science
achievement gap by race and ethnicity, as measured by the National
Assessment of Educational Progress, is narrowing, the scores of African
American students remain well below those of White students across the
three age levels: 9, 13, and 17 years (Lee, 2005; Parsons, 2008a). Given
that science courses often serve as gatekeepers of the status quo, this
achievement gap has dire consequences for African American students in
school and in life (Seiler & Elmesky).
Science homework has been shown to be positively related to science
achievement (Cooper, Robinson, & Patall, 2006; Mau & Lynn, 2000;
Singh, Granville, & Dika, 2002; Van Voorhis, 2003). Indeed, using a
nationally representative sample of eighth graders drawn from the
National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, Singh et al. found that
science homework is the best predictor of science achievement.
Recently, research on exemplary African American teachers has
received some attention as scholars have begun to fill in a void in the
research on teaching that previously excluded African American teachers
(Delpit, 1986; Stanford, 1997; Ware, 2006). However, most of these stud-
ies focus on African American pedagogy in general, and with reading and
writing in particular (Beauboeuf-Lafontant, 2002; Howard, 2001; Ladson-
Billings, 1995; Stanford, 1998; Ware). Consequently, it would be impor-
tant to examine the perspectives of exemplary African American science
teachers toward science homework because of the lack of research pro-
grams focused on African Americans in the science education literature
(Parsons, 2008b), and as such, an examination may provide new insights
regarding how to use science homework as an important vehicle to pro-
mote student engagement and learning in science.
2
Teachers College Record, 114, 070304 (2012)
In the present study, we address two research questions: What does sci-
ence homework mean to exemplary African American science teachers?
How do they approach science homework? These questions were
informed by two lines of literature: (a) previous research on science
homework and (b) theoretical positioning pertaining to science learning.
RESEARCH ON SCIENCE HOMEWORK
Science homework has been found to have a powerful influence on sci-

ence achievement (Brookhart, 1997; Cooper et al., 2006; Lau & Roeser,
2002; Mau & Lynn, 2000; Singh et al., 2002; Van Voorhis, 2003). Singh et
al., for example, examined the effects of three school-related con-
structs—motivation, interest, and academic engagement—on science
achievement, based on the nationally representative sample of eighth
graders from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988. Data
were analyzed through the use of structural equation models to test the
hypothesized relationships of motivation, science attitude, academic
engagement, and science achievement. The latent construct of academic
engagement was measured by time spent on science homework and by
time spent watching TV on weekdays (which was reverse coded).
Meanwhile, the latent variable of science achievement was measured by
grades earned in science and by scores on standardized science tests. The
results revealed a positive effect of motivation, attitude, and academic
engagement on science achievement. The results further revealed that
“the strongest effect on science learning was that of the academic time (
= .61), which meant that students who spent more time on science home-
work had higher achievement in science” (pp. 329–330). In addition, stu-
dents who were motivated and who had a positive attitude toward science
(e.g., science utility and interest) were more likely to spend more time on
science homework.
Similarly, based on the nationally representative sample of 10th and
12th graders from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988,
Mau and Lynn (2000) examined the relationship between science home-
work and science achievement. The results from multiple regression
analysis revealed that, after controlling students’ gender, the amount of
science homework was positively associated with science test scores in
both the 10th and 12th grades.
In another study, Van Voorhis (2003) examined the effects of interac-
tive science homework on family involvement in homework, student
achievement, and homework attitudes. The participants were 253 sixth-
and eighth-grade science students in 10 classrooms with four teachers in
a middle school. In the 18-week study, students in six classes received
3
weekly science activities with specific guidelines for interacting with fam-
ily members on science experiments and activities. Students in the
remaining four classes received the same homework but without these
guidelines for family involvement. Data revealed that students in the
interactive group earned significantly higher grades than did students in
the noninteractive group, after accounting for their prior science abili-
ties, parent education, and the amount of homework completed. In addi-
tion, more parents in the interactive group than parents in the
noninteractive group reported that their children worked as hard as they
could in science. Finally, interactive or noninteractive, students who
reported liking the science assignments returned more assignments, and
students who completed more of the science assignments earned higher
science grades.
Taken together, research on science homework suggests that (a) sci-
ence homework is positively related to science achievement, (b) student
attitude toward science and science homework (e.g., science interest)
plays a significant role in homework completion and science achieve-
ment, and (c) science teachers may use science homework as an impor-
tant vehicle to promote science learning (e.g., by providing positive
experiences in science and by making science homework more interest-
ing). However, this line of research is largely based on quantitative data
at the secondary level and did not take into account other important fac-
tors that may mediate the effectiveness of science homework on science
achievement, such as specific context and cultural background
(Brookhart, 1997). The need to pay attention to the role of sociocultural
influences on science homework is further illustrated by the finding from
one recent study that, for 10th graders, “time on science homework had
a significant relationship with science achievement in all groups [i.e.,
Caucasian, Hispanic, and Asian] except in the African American group”
(Chang, Singh, & Mo, 2007, p. 364).
THEORETICAL POSITIONING
Cultural practices (e.g., values, experiences, and dispositions) that are

socially acquired in fields outside school can mediate student engage-
ment and learning in science (Fusco, 2001; Lee & Luykx, 2005;
Upadhyay, 2006). Many marginalized students or students from
oppressed groups tend not to identify with school science that is typically
expressed in an authoritative, technical, and depersonalized form
(Elmesky & Seiler, 2007; Lemke, 1990; Roth & Barton, 2004). They often
view it as distant, inaccessible, boring, irrelevant, and alienating (Basu &
Barton, 2007; Fusco; Lee & Luykx) because their cultural practices are
4
different from those of Western modern science (e.g., the dichotomy

between scientific and rational modes of thought, as opposed to everyday
and expressive modes; Lee & Luykx; Moje, Collazo, Carillo, & Marx,
2001). Thus, it is crucial to examine the ways in which cultural practices
contribute to student learning in science (Elmesky & Seiler; Seiler &
Elmesky, 2007).
One conceptual framework that bears direct relevance to the present
study is Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos (Boykin, 1983, 1986, 1994; Boykin,
Tyler, & Miller, 2005; Gay, 2000; Simpson & Parsons, 2009; Tyler, Boykin,
Miller, & Hurley, 2006; Tyler et al., 2008). Boykin (1986) conceptualized
Afrocultural ethos as consisting of nine dimensions, to capture what he
considered the common cultural experience of African Americans: (a)
spirituality (emphasizing the spiritual world instead of the physical
world), (b) harmony (emphasizing the whole rather than the parts that
constitute the whole), (c) movement (valuing physical motion that is dis-
tinguished by a noticeable rhythm), (d) verve (valuing variability and
intensity in activities), (e) affect (e.g., valuing interest and emotion), (f)
expressive individualism (valuing a person’s uniqueness and creativity),
(g) communalism (valuing the importance of the group over the signifi-
cance of the individual), (h) orality (valuing oral and aural communica-
tion), and (i) social perspective of time (valuing social interaction and
the building of relationships). These dimensions are assumed to be
passed on to young African American children through day-to-day inter-
actions with the significant others with whom they have close contact in
their lives, such as parents and extended family members (Boykin &
Allen, 2000; Boykin & Toms, 1985).
Several studies with African American children and parents provide
empirical support to Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos (Boykin et al., 2005;
Boykin, Tyler, Watkins-Lewis, & Kizzie, 2006; Tyler et al., 2006). For exam-
ple, Tyler et al. (2006) examined the presence of specific cultural values
within preferred classroom and home activities, as reported by 81 fourth-
grade African American students. Their study found that these students
had significantly stronger preferences for communal and vervistic activi-
ties at home and at school than for individualistic and competitive activ-
ities. Teachers, however, were viewed as having significantly higher
preferences for individualistic and competitive behaviors than commu-
nally or vervistic behaviors. In addition, students reported that they got
into more trouble with their teachers and less trouble with their parents
by employing communal and vervistic behaviors as compared with indi-
vidualistic and competitive behaviors.
Although no study has investigated African American perspectives
toward science homework, Simpson and Parsons (2009) examined the
5
perspectives of 11 African American parents or guardians who enrolled

their children in an informal science program. Their study found that
what these parents wanted for their children was in line with seven of the
nine dimensions of Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos: harmony, communalism,
orality, movement, verve, affect, and expressive individualism. For exam-
ple, relating to verve and affect, “Parents iterated that students should do
hands-on work. It seemed important to parents that students are engaged
and interactive with science; they believed that this would increase stu-
dent interest and excitement for the subject” (p. 307).
Other studies specifically focus on several dimensions of Boykin’s
Afrocultural ethos in science learning, including verve and social per-
spective of time (Parsons, 2008a), movement (Elmesky & Seiler, 2007;
Parsons, 2008a), and communalism (Seiler & Elmesky, 2007). For exam-
ple, Seiler and Elmesky examined the nature of communalism to under-
stand how the social and cultural experiences of two African American
students affected what happened in science classrooms. Data revealed
that these two students frequently shared collective goals and valued joint
purposes over individual goals of garnering respect or “props,” and they
used their resources to strengthen the bond between them and to learn
science.
Recently, a growing number of researchers have characterized effective
teachers of African American students as “warm demanders” who are per-
sonable, caring, and responsive while simultaneously holding students
accountable for meeting high and rigorous academic standards (Bondy
& Ross, 2008; Bondy, Ross, Gallingane, & Hambacher, 2007; Brown, 2004;
Delpit, 1995; Hartwick & Johnson, 2008; Irvine, 2003; Ladson-Billings,
2009; Ross, Bondy, Gallingane, & Hambacher, 2008; Ware, 2006).
Ware (2006) conducted a comparative case study to examine the ped-
agogy of two African American teachers (one with 30 years of service and
another with 6 years of service). Descriptive data were collected through
interviews and classroom observations. The study found that both teach-
ers were warm demanders and that they interacted with African
American students as authority figures, yet also caregivers who held high
standards and expectations. For example, during one classroom observa-
tion, one teacher expressed her expectations concerning the importance
of doing homework in a loud and clear voice:
I had about half of the class that turned in their homework. I do

not give you homework everyday, but when I do it’s a practice
skill that needs to be done. It’s something that you need: it’s not
just something for you to do. . . . And I expect you to do it. Now
from now on, if you cannot do it, then you need to write me a
6
note of explanation. And the only reason I’ll tell you that you
cannot do your homework is that you are dead—and you won’t
be here then. . . . We are not here to play, I’m getting you ready
for middle school. . . . . I am thoroughly disappointed with you.
. . . excuse me for hollering. (p. 436)
While maintaining high expectations, these teachers cultivated caring

relationships with students and their families, and they “moved beyond a
broad-based care for everyone to [a] care that related to the needs the
teacher identified in each student” (p. 444).
Ware (2006) stated that African American students respond to teachers
as authority figures because they are likely to view teachers as weak if they
do not respond with a level of power that indicates that they are in con-
trol. This is in line with related literature noting that African American
teachers teach with authority (Irvine & Fraser, 1998), influenced by the
life experiences that many African American children sense in their par-
ents, who act as authority figures (Delpit, 1995), and that African
American parents desire their children to respect adults and follow the
directives of strong teachers who show that they are in control of the
classroom (Ladson-Billings, 2009). Indeed, Foster’s (1991) research with
exemplary African American teachers found that students were “proud
of their teachers’ meanness” (p. 56) and viewed it as an effort to push
them to meet high academic expectations.
THE PRESENT STUDY
While one line of literature examined the role of science homework in

science learning, Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos and related empirical stud-
ies suggest that African American students share some cultural disposi-
tions (e.g., communal and vervistic activities). However, no study has
linked Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos to science homework. Although the
study by Ware (2006) included anecdotes about homework, research and
theorizing on warm demanders has not focused on homework, nor sci-
ence homework in particular.
Consequently, there is a critical need to examine the perspectives of
exemplary African American science teachers toward science homework.
This line of research is important because research on science education
has often failed to consider students’ cultural diversity as it relates to sci-
ence instruction (Lee, 2005; Seiler & Elmesky, 2007). On the few occa-
sions when efforts were made to link science disciplines and students’
cultural backgrounds, the studies were largely limited to classroom learn-
ing environments (Lee, Deaktor, Hart, Cuevas, & Enders, 2005; Luykx,
7
Cuevas, Lambert, & Lee, 2005; Moje et al., 2001). Therefore, a study such
as this, with an emphasis on elementary science homework, may provide
new insights regarding how to articulate science disciplines and students’
cultural diversity early in the schooling. This is particularly important
because the effectiveness of science homework may be influenced by cul-
tural knowledge and experience. For example, as one recent study
revealed, unlike other ethnic groups (i.e., Caucasian, Hispanic, and
Asian), science homework as currently practiced was not related to sci-
ence achievement for African American students (Chang et al., 2007).
Thus, the concreteness of this line of research is especially valuable given
that many elementary schools across the country are struggling to find
ways to provide high-quality instructional science activities to an increas-
ingly diverse body of students, and science homework has the potential to
become an important vehicle for addressing the science achievement gap.
METHOD
PARTICIPANTS
The participants were 8 exemplary African American elementary science

teachers in the southeastern United States. The identification of these
exemplary teachers was facilitated by the fact that one of the researchers
was an exemplary African American high school science teacher (a recip-
ient of the National Presidential Award for Excellence in Science
Teaching and the Milken Family Foundation National Teacher Award)
who had known these participants for many years. We identified an ini-
tial list of 12 teachers, based on the following criteria: (a) award-winning
teachers (e.g., recipients of the Milken Family Foundation National
Teacher Award), (b) nomination by administrators, colleagues, and for-
mer students, (c) National Board Certified teachers, and (d) teachers
who made a difference in the science achievement of African American
students (e.g., whose students participated in state science fairs and per-
formed in the upper percentile on state and national assessment).
We ended up with 8 participants for two reasons. First, in two school
districts, the superintendents preferred that their teachers not partici-
pate in this study because they were concerned that it may have taken
time from instructional activities. Second, at the end of the first year, 2
teachers moved to different school districts. As a result, they were unable
to continue to participate in the study.
Of 8 participants, 6 were female and 2 were male. Among them, 5 had
received a master’s degree, 2 had received a bachelor’s degree, and 1 had
received a doctoral degree. Their teaching experience varied between 6
8
years and 35 years (with a mean of 14 years). Half of these teachers taught
fifth grade, 2 of them taught sixth grade, and the remaining 2 taught
third grade and fourth grade, respectively. Two of the 8 participants had
previously taught science classes at the secondary school level.
These 8 teachers were from eight different schools located in predom-
inantly lower income African American communities. Student enroll-
ment in these schools ranged from 289 to 688 students (with a mean of
542 students). The percentage of African American students in these
schools ranged from 45.3% to 97.9% (with a mean of 80.3%). In addition,
the percentage of students qualifying for federal free lunch programs in
these schools ranged from 42.9% to 90.1% (with a mean of 74.4%).
The eight schools in which these teachers worked had limited science
funding, materials, and supplies. For example, only 2 out of 8 teachers
had a science lab in their schools. Consequently, they tried to reach out
to their communities by asking for donations from big companies, seek-
ing donations of science materials from local stores, writing grants to pay
for tickets to science museums, and enlisting community members to pay
for science field trips.
SCIENCE HOMEWORK
These teachers typically assigned science homework about two to three

times a week, each time requiring approximately 20–30 minutes to com-
plete. For example, one teacher stated that she would assign science
homework whenever they finished a lesson. Because a science lesson usu-
ally took 2 days to finish, she would then assign science homework
“maybe 2 days out of the week, but no more than 3.”
A range of science homework assignment included (a) reviewing sci-
ence concepts or completing end-of-chapter questions (e.g., distinguish-
ing between animal and plant cells); (b) allowing students to choose their
own means of showing that they understood basic science concepts (e.g.,
by writing, drawing, or completing a concept map); (c) involving “hands-
on homework” or “outside assignments” (e.g., constructing one’s own
ecosystem or collection of different kinds of leaves); and (d) interviewing
family members or relatives about certain diseases in the community.
DATA COLLECTION
The findings reported in this article are part of a larger data set collected
during a 3-year research project of exemplary African American elemen-
tary science teachers. The primary aim of the project was to examine how
these exemplary science teachers articulated students’ culture as related
9
to the science disciplines. This article focuses on findings related to the

science homework.
Data for this article were primarily based on two sources: (a) three
open-ended, in-depth interviews with each exemplary teacher (each
about 120 minutes in duration) during the first year of the study and (b)
two focus group interviews with these teachers (each about 90 minutes in
duration) in one location convenient to them during the second year of
the study.
Informed by previous homework studies (Brock, Lapp, Flood, Fisher, &
Han, 2007; Van Voorhis, 2003; Xu, 2005, 2010; Xu & Corno, 1998, 2003;
Xu & Yuan, 2003), the first round of interviews focused on the perceived
purpose of science homework, types of science assignments, expectations
for students and their families in the homework process, and homework
feedback. Examples of questions are: “What are the purposes of assigning
science homework in your classes? What is your expectation of students
in the homework process? What do you do once you get science home-
work back?”
Based on what we learned from the first round of interviews, the fol-
low-up interviews asked the participants to elaborate on their previous
responses (e.g., “How would you compare the purposes of science home-
work with homework assignments in other subject areas, say, mathemat-
ics and English? Suppose a first-year science teacher comes to ask your
advice about science homework, what would you tell him or her?”). They
were further asked about relevant strategies and successful examples
(e.g., “What strategies do you use to make sure that students do their
homework properly? Can you give some successful examples of science
homework over the last several years?”). In addition, they were asked
about challenges associated with designing and monitoring science
homework (e.g., “What do you see some of the challenges being that are
related to science homework? What specific strategies, if any, do you use
to deal with these challenges?”).
Finally, focus group interviews asked these participants, as a group, to
reflect on their homework practices. Examples of questions are: “What is
the role of homework in science learning, as you see it? And for African
American students in particular? What are your expectations for stu-
dents? What are your expectations for parents? How do you follow up
with your science homework?”
DATA ANALYSIS
Audiotaped interviews were transcribed, and the transcriptions were

checked for accuracy against original recordings. Data analysis followed
10
established forms of qualitative inquiry, with both inductive and deduc-

tive components (Erickson, 1986; Graue, Hatch, Rao, & Oen, 2007;
Graue & Walsh, 1997). With the support of the qualitative research soft-
ware NVivo 8, we analyzed our data using the constant comparative
method (Charmaz, 2005; Glaser & Strauss, 1967). For example, we exam-
ined several excerpts that were similar in language before labeling a cat-
egory (e.g., promoting students’ interest in science homework). We then
examined whether the inclusion of other related excerpts would change
its meaning. In addition, we stayed close to participants’ own language in
our descriptions and interpretations (e.g., changing from the initial cat-
egory of promoting students’ interest in science homework, to one par-
ticipant’s own words: Get them interested in moving even farther than
they have already gone).
Other initial codes used in NVivo 8 were informed by relevant empiri-
cal studies discussed earlier (e.g., homework interest) as well as relevant
dimensions noted in Boykin’s (1983, 1986, 1994) Afrocultural ethos (e.g.,
affect and communalism) and warm demander pedagogy (e.g., Bondy &
Ross, 2008; Ware, 2006). Because some questions (e.g., “Suppose a first-
year science teacher comes to ask your advice about science homework,
what would you tell him or her?”) elicited a response that tapped into sev-
eral constructs (e.g., homework expectation, homework interest, home-
work challenge, homework feedback, and dimensions in Boykin’s
Afrocultural ethos), they often required multiple codes. These codes
continued to be revised and expanded during our interaction with data
(Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Miles & Huberman, 1994). For example,
within the category of homework interest (i.e., “Get them interested in
moving even farther than they have already gone”), we further classified
four subcategories (i.e., relevance, “hands-on homework,” student
choice, and sharing)—four strategies that these teachers used to pro-
mote student interest in science homework.
NVivo 8 allowed us to create and maintain an audit trail—a detailed
record of how and when data are collected, and comments made during
each step of the data analysis. For the present study, this trail included
coded interview transcripts, memos, links, and annotations made during
coding, and data matrices and queries. This digital system helped to
make the process of data analysis more transparent, thereby engendering
confidence that the findings were warranted.
Relevant findings were shared with the participants to solicit their
responses during the course of the study (e.g., in the follow-up and focus
group interviews). For example, feedback from the participants during
two subsequent focus group interviews was used to revise the text in
instances where they wanted to clarify, elaborate, and expand informa-
11
tion they shared during the initial interview (e.g., additional strategies
they used to promote student interest in science homework) and where
they wanted to offer rival explanations (e.g., the linkage among home-
work purpose, their own backgrounds as African American science edu-
cators, and the No Child Left Behind Act). This strategy, member check
(Lather, 1986; Lincoln & Guba, 1985), serves to better represent the par-
ticipants’ voices (Lincoln, 1995; Merriam, 1998) and to better capture
the voices and perspectives of these exemplary African American science
teachers.
FINDINGS
“SCIENCE HOMEWORK IS A MUST; IT IS NOT A CHOICE THAT

YOU HAVE”
These exemplary teachers shared a strong sense of urgency toward stu-

dents doing science homework (e.g., “Science homework is a must; it is
not a choice that you have”; “Homework in my opinion is very important.
It is a must; we have to preach that it is a must and make the kids under-
stand why it is a must”). The sense of urgency (e.g., “Black students are
going to have to turn off the TV, step up the pace, and try to do better”),
to a large extent, has to do with their personal responsibility as African
American science educators. One teacher framed his sense of urgency
this way:
As an African American teacher we are dealing basically with

race. With a lot of our kids, their parents are either divorced or
deceased or whatever. They are living with grandparents who are
old and really can’t take care of them like they should. A lot of
times, we are the only parents that these kids see. So we are not
just dealing with our own biological children but we’re dealing
with race. . . . They would have to come along and because if you
look at it, they’ve fallen far behind, and they need to catch up, in
order to be competent. Times are changing, and science plays a
big part in this world that we’re living in.
Another teacher elaborated:
Our focus needs to be on where we really want to be. There is

something in our culture that we need to hold onto, that we
need to pass on to those who are coming along after, so that they
understand their roots, so that they can understand where
12
they’ve come from. But they don’t need to hold onto those
things as excuses. The past is the past; the present is all we have
now. We can sit here and stay grounded in the past, we can stay
angry about the past, or we can use the opportunities that we
have right now to move forward— not to forget the past, but to
use it as motivation to show that we can do better, that the world
can be better than it is right now.
The sense of urgency was further heightened in the context of the No

Child Left Behind Act, as one teacher noted that “homework is the sec-
ond phase of trying to make sure that they advance as far as that law
intends for them to advance.”
Given this urgency, one purpose for doing science homework was to
“review” and “digest” what students learned in class. One teacher said, “I
see the purpose of science homework as a means to see and review the
important concepts in one’s mind. Students need time to digest their
learning, and homework can be a way to do this.” Another teacher stated:
I usually try to assign homework that is based on the concepts we

have discussed in class. I have maybe 40 or 50 different books,
anything that relates to what we are covering in class, that pro-
vides something they can do at home, something they can get
parents to help them with. . . . We do ecosystem in a bottle,
ecosystem in a jar, and ecosystem in a box, whichever appeals to
each student, so that they can extend their understanding of
what we’re covering in class.
In addition, these teachers noted that homework needs to be some-

thing that makes students “stretch” (e.g., making them think about the
assignment before they actually get started, then taking them beyond
where they already are), something that helps them “think critically
about the contents that they are being asked about” and “apply the con-
cepts that we are learning in class.” One teacher elaborated:
What do you think about robots? How can they help make our
lives easier? After we’ve talked about how they can help make our
lives easier, they would explain how a robot that they [already]
use, like some type of electronic device that they use on a daily
basis, that makes their life easier.
Finally, these teachers viewed science homework as an important vehi-

cle for involving families and informing them about what their children
13
were learning and for fostering communication between children and

their families (e.g., “Homework teaches the parents and helps them
understand what is going on in the classroom”). One teacher commented:
I’ve had some parents come, and I gave them a lesson after
school because they did not understand some things. They were
trying to show their children what to do but couldn’t. But when
I showed them what to do, they’d say, “I don’t understand why
they don’t understand? That’s easy.” I then say, “Go home and
help them understand, so that when they come to school tomor-
row they’ll know what to do.”
Another teacher noted:
I always invite the parents to come to my classroom so they can

sit in on a lesson. Or if they just come to school with questions
about science homework, I take time to explain to them what
we’re doing in class and give them some tips they can use at
home to help their child do the science homework. I also try to
connect science with some of the jobs they do to assist them to
become teachers at home while I’m the teacher in the classroom.
As a result, the teacher observed, “I’ve had some students come back
and tell me that when they do their homework, their parent is learning
right along with them. So it’s a win-win for both of them.”
BEING A WARM DEMANDER
These exemplary African American teachers identified themselves as

being warm demanders (e.g., “I can talk to them just like their moms, but
when it comes time for their academics, I’m firm enough to tell them
what they need to do”; “I’m just tough in content areas as I am warm and
cordial to talk to”). One teacher explained the importance of being both
warm and demanding:
My expectations are quite high. I tell my kids all the time, “You
can do the work; it’s just a matter of you putting forth the effort.”
. . . . Like I said, Obama becoming president has made some
change, but a lot of African Americans have been oppressed for
so long, it’s like a lot of times they feel like they just don’t want
to try. I’ve even heard some students say, “Nobody is going to do
anything for me, nobody is going to help me with anything, so
14
why should I even try?” That’s a big problem. So I try to steer

them in a better direction than the one that they allow them-
selves to go in. I let them know they’re my children. I talk to
them like a parent, father to son, father to daughter. . . . The
majority of them, they listen to me. . . . I think that when kids see
that the teacher is genuinely concerned about them, that makes
a real difference, I really do.
Similarly, another teacher noted:
It takes a village to raise a child. So from an African American

standpoint, when I have students come to my classroom, I
assume a certain level of responsibility for them. I become a pos-
itive father figure for some of them who do not have fathers at
home. I try to go the extra mile to help them to understand they
have a wonderful opportunity in front of them, and that is to get
an education. If they have an education, they can improve the
quality of their life a whole lot more than if they did not have an
education. This affects the way that I teach science, and every-
thing else in between, because when I have a majority of African
American students in my classroom, like I’ve had for the past few
years that I’ve been teaching, I try to make sure that I try to go
the extra mile and do everything that I can to let them know that
their getting an education is important and that they have to take
what they are learning seriously. They have to be the first ones to
get excited about what they are doing, because they will face
some challenges in their lives just by virtue of the way they look,
the way they talk, and the way they dress. I want them to be pre-
pared for all these things.
In line with their perceived purposes of science homework, these

teachers set high expectations and held students responsible for timely
homework completion, along with ongoing support. One teacher noted:
I expect my students to perform at the level that I believe they

can. Sometimes I have to dismiss what their previous test scores
were and what previous teachers have said about them. I expect
them to come to my class, follow instructions, pay attention, and
learn how to do the work, and then I assist them in helping get
to where I think they should be. For the most part, they rise to
the occasion.
15
Similarly, another teacher stated:
I try to explain to them as much as I can so that when they do get

home they will understand how to do their homework and they
can even teach their parents how to do it. I review the informa-
tion in class so that they understand what they are required to
do. We also have a system of accountability. I let them know that
they are not doing this just to feel good, but it will be for a
grade—and they’ll be responsible for learning it.
Addressing homework challenges. One major challenge with science home-

work is how to address the issue of reading comprehension and back-
ground knowledge. One teacher noted, “Sometimes students don’t
understand the information that they’re reading. Sometimes they lack
the background knowledge that’s necessary for them to understand. So
while we’re in the classroom, I try to provide them with as many exam-
ples as I can.”
In addition, these teachers tried to “make assignments relevant to the
students’ lives, so they can use prior experience and knowledge when
explaining science concepts.” They also paid special attention to helping
students understand the science assignments in class (e.g., asking them
to write notes or providing them with sticky notes) so that students could
refer back to these when they had questions at home doing their home-
work.
Another challenge relates to resources that the students can access for
help when they get home, something that “you’ve always got to take into
consideration when you’re making homework assignments.” For example,
“Sometimes you assign something when you know they are not going to
have access to a computer at home or printed materials or other resources
that they may need to complete their assignment at home.” To address
this challenge, several teachers tried to offer useful accommodations:
If I know that they don’t have access to a computer at home and

we have extra time in the classroom, I’ll allow them to use com-
puters in the classroom or to go and sit in the school library and
work on the assignment there, to get a jumpstart. I may even
allow them extra time to complete the assignment if they have no
one at home to work with them or they don’t have access to a
computer or other things of that nature that would help them
with the assignment.
Other teachers tried to be “extra supportive to students who lack the
16
resources at home that are needed to perform adequately on homework

assignments.”
Sometimes you have to provide extra resources that they can use at
home. It can take a lot of time to get these extra materials, even if it’s just
scissors and crayons or arranging part of the time so a certain portion of
the homework can be done there in the classroom, in the computer lab,
or in the school library, where they can access the things that they need.
Homework feedback. When students brought in their homework assign-
ments, these teachers went over it in class to make sure that students
grasped the basic concepts in their assignments. One teacher stated, “I
tell them I read every sentence you put down because I really need to
know how much you understand. This lets me know whether I need to go
over a topic again, whether we need to do another assignment, or
whether it’s OK to move on.”
Another teacher explained:
Sometimes questions come up where students want to learn

more about what we’ve been talking about, so I encourage them
to do a Google search, or go to the local library and find a book
or encyclopedia about that particular topic . . . . [Later] I give
them an opportunity to share that information with the class so
that we all can learn and get interested in.
In addition, some teachers checked homework assignments by allowing

students to present their homework in class or by going over any ques-
tions that they had on something that was difficult or confusing for them.
In other cases, it also meant providing extra support for some students.
One teacher explained, “Sometimes I’ll go over a homework assignment
and say, ‘You just don’t really understand this.’ So I may not grade it, but
go over the material again with them, and let them do the work again,
before I actually assign a grade.”
In some cases, students would be asked to redo their assignments to
make sure they understand science concepts. At the same time, having
them redo homework sent an important message that “assigned work
should be taken seriously” and “you have to be accountable.” In either
case, as one teacher noted:
My expectations are high for all my students. But in reality I

know if I want all of them to meet those expectations, then I have
to do more for some than others. Some students don’t have the
support they need at home, or they lack the necessary skills. So I
17
have to find other ways to help them. My expectations for them

in the end are not lower, but I have to find ways to assist them so
that they can meet our goals. Sometimes I have to be harsh with
my students in the process, so they learn that when something is
due, it is due.
“GET THEM INTERESTED IN MOVING EVEN FARTHER THAN THEY

HAVE ALREADY GONE”
It is one thing to externally set high expectations; it is quite another to

get students internally interested in doing the science homework assign-
ments. In line with previous findings that students often considered
homework routine and mundane (holding a little interest), particularly
when compared with other after-school activities (e.g., Xu & Corno,
1998; Xu & Yuan, 2003), these exemplary teachers observed that a lot of
students wanted to go home and play video games or talk on the cell
phone and that many times, they were not interested in what teachers
were trying to teach them or in learning what they needed to know. Thus,
a big issue is to make science homework more interesting and to help stu-
dents get “motivated” during the homework process.
Relevance. Instead of just giving “busy work,” these teachers stated the
importance of making science homework more meaningful and relevant
to a student, so “that it will further engage the child.” One teacher noted
that science homework needed to help students “put science in the con-
text of their everyday lives.” He explained:
The robot in the science textbook is called a “labor saving

device,” but the students may not know what that means. After I
clarified what a “labor saving device” was, I asked, “So what
devices do you and your parents use at home that makes your
lives a lot easier?” From there, they were able to identify a whole
list of devices that they use, like the microwave, dishwasher, wash-
ing machine, and cell phones. These are some examples of
labor-saving devices that they can look for and find in the real
world.
Likewise, to help students “see the relevance of an assignment and how

it affects them on a personal level,” another teacher asked students to
conduct “interviews with relatives about diseases known among family
members” or to learn about “the students’ daily caloric intake and the
Recommended Daily Allowances for carbohydrates, proteins, fats, and
specific vitamins.”
18
“Hands-on homework.” “As opposed to just sitting there and looking at a

book and answering questions,” “hands-on homework” is often an exten-
sion of what students have learned in the classroom, something that stu-
dents can do at home (e.g., constructing their own ecosystem, collecting
different kinds of leaves and insects, making a solar system model, or
recording the weather for a week). Another teacher recalled:
At the beginning of the year we talked a lot about decomposers.

I told them to get some soil, put some food in it, like lettuce or
other small items, then put it in the ground. After 3–5 days, they
then dug up the dirt and found that there were earthworms
there, earthworms that helped decompose those materials. That
was a lesson that we used to show how earthworms, no matter
how small they are, are significant to the environment, because
they return nutrients back into the environment. So they all play
a role in the food chain.
These teachers observed that students wanted to do hands-on home-

work, which tended to elicit more excitement and stimulated them to do
a better job (e.g., “When they have a chance to experience the hands-on
part of it, the written homework really turns out to be a lot better”).
Indeed, they noted that “hands-on is a very explicit key to African
American children to learn science.” As one teacher explained:
From the way that we grew up, we basically had to learn about life
and how life operates—and as I said before, science is life. It
exposes you to everything that’s in life. Growing up and being
outdoors most of the time having to work for everything that you
have, experiencing the outdoors—all of that becomes a part of
you. A big part of science is being exposed to the outdoors and
seeing nature as it really is, looking for patterns and looking for
ways to make things better. All of that is what science is grounded
and rooted in.
Student choice. Another approach to get students interested in science

homework is to provide them with choices and “a sense of ownership
related to what they are studying.” One teacher noted:
If it’s a project that I can give them some leeway on, to choose
what they want to do, I’ll try to encourage them to pick an area—
not something that they already know a lot about, but one they
would want to know more about. I give them the opportunity to
19
try to pick a project or a topic of interest to them, if they can

decide something that would make them work through the sci-
entific methods. In the meantime, I also develop a list of topics
that they can easily pick from, they can take some variation and
still give them some input in what they select, so that they learn
some extra things outside of what we’re doing in class.
Likewise, another teacher stated:
I find if students are interested in the topic, they will do their

homework and they may go above and beyond what is asked of
them to do. For example, when we discussed the unit on life sci-
ences and talked about crustaceans and mammals and different
types of living organisms, I had a couple of students bring in
their pets. One brought in a hermit crab, and another an ant . .
. . They brought those for a show and tell.
Sharing. These teachers further observed that African American stu-

dents tended to “do their best when they can interact with someone . . . .
or when they can ask questions.” They tried to engage students in the
homework process by promoting sharing and discussion among students
in class. For example, one teacher noted:
Some of the shows on TV, like CSI, sometimes have things in

them that you can have them watch and incorporate questions.
That can be a homework assignment. Kids can learn a lot from
watching a TV show with relevant information that you can ques-
tion them and ask them to think about. So the homework assign-
ment now is not paper and pencil, it’s a class discussion.
Other teachers tried to make science homework more interesting by

encouraging students to share with their families what they have learned
in class, because “many science concepts can foster great discussions
among family members.” In doing so, this further helps students to link
important science concepts to their everyday lives. One teacher
explained:
I try to emphasize that a lot of times, they [their families] know

a lot more than you might think they know about things. The
more they work with you on an assignment, the more they’re able
not only to help you but others who come along in your family.
20
Teachers also encouraged students to take the initiative “to share with
siblings and parents what we are doing.” One teacher elaborated:
I try to get them to make it a kind of family affair and not just
something, “OK, I’ve done my homework.” . . . . [Instead] talk to
somebody at home about it, even if it’s with a younger brother
and sister. We just covered flowers in class, and I went to Kroger’s
and bought some flowers. Each one actually had his or her own
flowers that he or she dissected. So the next time that you and
your family are talking about flowers, or you have flowers out in
the yard, stop and point out some of the things you’ve learned.
The more you can use what you’re learning, the better you will
know it.
THEMES RELATING TO BOYKIN’S AFROCULTURAL ETHOS
This section highlights the study’s findings and examines them with
respect to Boykin’s nine dimensions. Data revealed that the majority of
the values highlighted in Boykin’s dimensions were reflected in the find-
ings: expressive individualism, affect, verve, harmony, communalism, and
orality.
Expressive individualism places value on developing a distinctive style
or unique way of being (Boykin, 1986; Simpson & Parsons, 2009), includ-
ing students’ freedom to determine and implement ways to demonstrate
their understanding of content. In the case of science homework, these
exemplary teachers valued personal autonomy, uniqueness, and creativ-
ity by giving students the freedom and opportunity to either choose a
topic or have input into choosing a topic that they liked and wanted to
know more about (to motivate them to learn more, outside of what they
were learning in class).
Closely related to expressive individualism is affect, which is concerned
with feelings, emotions, interests, and personal importance. Affect is con-
sidered as important as cognition, in content and context, because it is
believed to connect thoughts and behaviors (Boykin, 1983; Boykin et al.,
2005). The teachers held positive emotions toward their students (e.g.,
caring about their students and being responsive to their needs). Their
emphasis on affect (e.g., personal importance and interests) is evident in
terms of homework content, in their making homework assignments
more interesting and relevant, and in their providing students with a
sense of autonomy and choice. Teachers’ emphasis on affect is further
evident in terms of the homework process through their incorporation
of hands-on homework and their encouraging students to share their
21
learning with their families or other students in class.

Verve refers to a special receptiveness to relatively high levels of physi-
cal or sensate simulation (Boykin, 1986; Boykin et al., 2005). Boykin
(1979) observed that “Black children are bored primarily because school
is a relatively unstimulating, constraining, and monotonous place” (p.
354). As captured in the findings from the present study, these teachers
designed and implemented a variety of science homework assignments,
including hands-on science homework (e.g., constructing ecosystem in a
bottle), interviews with relatives about diseases seen among family mem-
bers, sharing with peers and family members, and classroom discussions
and presentations.
Harmony values the whole rather than the parts that constitute the
whole. It is concerned with the development of the whole child and the
real-life context of teaching and learning (Boykin, 1986; Simpson &
Parsons, 2009). In the case of science homework, these teachers placed
emphasis on the meaningful and real-world contexts for doing science
homework (i.e., learning taking place in context within the children’s
surroundings and their everyday lives) that help engage and motivate stu-
dents in the learning process. This focus on harmony is further illus-
trated in the following comment:
As science educators, we are in a unique position not only to

influence science learning but to influence learning in every
other subject area based on how things are done in science.
Communication is a big part of science. Most people would
think, “OK, communication is writing, it’s speaking so that’s
speech, that’s language arts.” But it’s just as important in science.
Most people would say that being able to figure, to work with
numbers, “OK, that’s math.” But you have to do as much math in
science as in math. So science educators are in a very unique
position and they need to use every opportunity and every
advantage they have to make sure that they are working to
develop the whole child and to integrate what they teach with the
other subject areas as much as they can.
Communalism is described as an emphasis on social connectedness,

mutuality, and a sense of belonging in daily life; affiliation with a group
is a significant part of individual identity, social bonds and responsibili-
ties transcend individual privilege, and collective goals outweigh personal
goals (Boykin et al., 2005; Seiler & Elmesky, 2007; Simpson & Parsons,
2009). With respect to science homework, these teachers attempted to
promote and honor communalism by encouraging students to work with
22
and learn from their peers and their families, by helping and encourag-
ing parents to learn right along with their children, and by sharing their
experiences with other students in their classes so that “we can all learn
and get interested in.”
Closely associated with communalism is orality, which refers to a special
receptiveness to the spoken word and a reliance on oral expression to
carry meaning and feeling (Boykin et al., 2005). In terms of science
homework, these exemplary teachers valued oral and aural modes of
communication, whether they were urging students to talk to family
members or to share with their peers what they were learning from their
assignments.
DISCUSSION
The present study examined the perspectives of exemplary African

American science teachers toward science homework. Data revealed that
these teachers engaged in some typical homework practices, such as
assigning homework to reinforce school learning (Brock et al., 2007; Xu
& Corno, 1998; Xu & Yuan, 2003).
Data further revealed that these teachers felt a strong sense of urgency
toward science homework (e.g., science homework is a must, not a
choice), which was not evident in previous studies on homework. This
sense of urgency “may reflect an attitude among African American teach-
ers that African American students need to be twice as prepared as the
average European American students to achieve in school” (Boykin et al.,
2006, p. 170). This was heightened in the context of the No Child Left
Behind Act (e.g., homework is viewed as the second phase of making sure
that students advance as far as they can). In addition, in line with the
sense of urgency, these exemplary teachers stressed the importance of
using homework to help their students think critically about science con-
tent (e.g., to stretch the students’ thinking and help them go further
than they already have).
In their study of homework practices for students from nondominant
backgrounds, Brock et al. (2007) found it “encouraging” to learn that
many teachers made provisions to help their students be successful with
literacy-based homework (e.g., materials and assistance). It was equally
“encouraging” to learn that the exemplary teachers in the present study
made special provisions to help their students be successful with science
homework (e.g., students who lacked science resources and had difficulty
with reading comprehension). In addition, consistent with self-determi-
nation theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan,
1991), and research and theorizing on student engagement (Corno &
23
Mandinach, 1983, 2004) and achievement motivation (Bempechat, 2004;

Weiner, 1994), our findings revealed the importance of providing a sense
of autonomy and affiliation, as well as guidance, feedback, and support,
in making science homework work.
The present study extends previous research on science homework in
several important ways. First, it is informative to learn that these exem-
plary African American teachers paid close attention to foster student
interest in science homework by providing a sense of autonomy and
choice, by incorporating “hands-on homework,” by placing science
homework in the context of students’ everyday lives, and by encouraging
them to share with their families what they were learning in class in order
to promote great discussions among family members. These findings are
important, given that student interest in science homework is positively
related to science achievement (Singh et al., 2002; Van Voorhis, 2003).
Yet, few studies have focused on what teachers do to make homework
more interesting for their students (Brock et al., 2007; Xu & Yuan, 2003),
despite increasing calls to reexamine the homework process in order to
make homework more engaging and interesting (Corno, 2000; Corno &
Xu, 2004; Epstein & Van Voorhis, 2001; Leone & Richards, 1989; Van
Voorhis, 2001; Warton, 2001; Xu, 2004, 2008; Xu & Corno, 1998).
Second, data further revealed that science homework advocated by
these exemplary teachers corresponded to six of nine dimensions in
Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos: expressive individualism, affect, verve, har-
mony, communalism, and orality. These findings provide empirical sup-
port to the theoretical claim of the importance of student autonomy,
interest, and motivation to African American students in science learning
(Elmesky, Olitsky, & Tobin, 2006; Seiler, 2001, 2005), particularly given
that school science tends to avoid references to figurative language, emo-
tional expression, and human experience (e.g., desire, choice, and moti-
vation; Lemke, 1990; Seiler, 2001). Given that previous empirical studies
relating to Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos are either focused on classroom
settings (e.g., Boykin et al., 2005; Tyler et al., 2006) or informal programs
(e.g., Simpson & Parsons, 2009), the findings from present study further
suggest Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos dimensions are relevant to home-
work situations as well.
Third, it is interesting to note that these exemplary teachers employed
an approach corresponding to warm demander pedagogy (Bondy &
Ross, 2008; Delpit, 1995; Hartwick & Johnson, 2008; Irvine, 2003;
Ladson-Billings, 2009; Ross et al., 2008; Ware, 2006). This is evident in
that (a) they set high expectations for students’ performance in science
homework (e.g., expecting students to rise to the occasion, urging them
go further than they had before); (b) they made personal connections to
24
help students succeed (e.g., drawing on their experiences and interests);

(c) they provided students with the necessary scaffolding to help them
meet high expectations (e.g., giving extra individual support to improve
reading comprehension and providing students with science resources);
and (d) they insisted that students put forth efforts to perform at a high
level (e.g., to take their homework seriously). Thus, the present study
extends previous research on warm demander pedagogy in the classroom
setting to homework. This is particularly revealing given that these 8
exemplary African American teachers were from eight different loca-
tions, and their teaching experience varied from 6 years to 35 years—yet,
their homework approach was remarkably similar.
When Seiler (2011) discussed the importance of science teaching for
marginalized students, she argued that science has greater potential than
other subjects for student engagement because the nature of science is
built on curiosity about, and understanding of, the surrounding world. A
related argument could be made here: Science homework, compared
with homework in other subject areas, has greater potential for student
engagement.
Closely grounded in the data, the present study showed how to capital-
ize on this potential from the perspectives of exemplary African
American science teachers. Specifically, these teachers adopted a posi-
tion comparable to both warm demander pedagogy and Boykin’s
Afrocultural ethos. Whereas Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos focuses on some
shared cultural dispositions of African Americans to make science home-
work more meaningful and interesting, warm demander pedagogy places
emphasis on the role of teachers as authority figures who are both warm
and demanding. It is one thing to pay attention to African American cul-
tural dispositions when designing science assignments; it is quite another
to expect students to realize that they will be held accountable for timely
completion. While the exemplary teachers in the present study used an
approach corresponding to Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos, they found it
necessary to keep an eye on their students to help them follow through
with their science assignments by being warm (e.g., making personal con-
nections and being responsive to individual needs, such as reading com-
prehension and science materials) as well as demanding (e.g., sometimes
being “harsh” and making sure that students have learned from their
assignments). Consequently, there is a need to integrate both warm
demander pedagogy and Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos to make science
homework work for African American students, particularly given that
students from oppressed groups tend not to identify with school science
that is typically expressed in a rational, technical, distant, and deperson-
alized form (Basu & Barton, 2007; Elmesky & Seiler, 2007; Lee & Luykx,
25
2005; Roth & Barton, 2004).

Homework is found to be more strongly associated with achievement
for secondary school students than for elementary school students
(Cooper et al., 2006; Cooper & Valentine, 2001). Cooper et al. have pro-
vided four possible explanations for the weak relationship between
homework and achievement in elementary grades: (a) younger students
are less able to ignore irrelevant information in their environment, which
makes homework less effective for them than for older students; (b)
younger students have less effective study habits, which diminishes the
amount of improvement in achievement that might be expected from
their homework; (c) teachers in earlier grades assign homework more
often to develop students’ management of time, a skill rarely measured
on standardized achievement tests; and (d) younger students who are
struggling with schoolwork take more time to complete homework
assignments. Although these explanations are plausible, they are largely
influenced by research in cognitive psychology relating to age differences
(e.g., attention span and study habits). The present study raises an impor-
tant question about whether the relationship between homework and
achievement in elementary grades is more nuanced. For example, the
typically solitary nature of the homework task and the separation of
homework from social aspects of learning (Coutts, 2004) and “social
aspects of motivation” (Wentzel & Wigfield, 2007, p. 262), as opposed to
communalism advocated by these exemplary teachers, may further con-
tribute to the weak relationship between homework and achievement in
early grades, particularly given that younger students have less effective
study habits.
The present study has important practical implications. First, it pro-
vides nuanced views and illustrative examples regarding how to make sci-
ence homework work for African American students. It points the way to
others who recognize such a need but are unsure how to make it happen.
The systematic in-depth study of the perspectives of these African
American exemplary teachers also has the potential to reframe the larger
conversation about science homework, science learning, and the science
achievement gap. In addition, it would be beneficial to incorporate rele-
vant findings from the present study into preservice teacher education
courses to better prepare preservice teachers to address the various chal-
lenges associated with science homework (e.g., homework interest, cul-
tural values, and timely homework completion). Furthermore, because
the knowledge base for science-related examples, analogies, beliefs, and
practices from a range of cultures is limited (Lee & Buxton, 2008), a
study such as this can provide a springboard for new ideas about how
to promote science learning for students from diverse backgrounds by
26
recognizing and incorporating culturally relevant ways of thinking, inter-

acting, being, and knowing.
Given that the present study is the first to examine the perspectives of
exemplary African American teachers related to elementary science
homework, future research is needed on several fronts. Because no study
has been conducted previously with exemplary science teachers regard-
ing their views of homework, it would be important to examine to what
extent and why the views of exemplary African American science teach-
ers on homework differ from the views of exemplary science teachers in
general. It is also important to examine the perspectives of exemplary
African American science teachers toward secondary school science
homework because (a) the poor achievement of African American stu-
dents in science surfaces in the early grades and becomes more pro-
nounced as they progress through school (Parsons, 2008a), and (b)
homework is found to be more strongly associated with secondary school
students than elementary school students (Cooper et al., 2006; Cooper &
Valentine, 2001). Furthermore, because findings from the present study
suggest that there is a need to integrate Boykin’s Afrocultural ethos and
warm demander pedagogy, it would be important to examine how this
might play out in the case of secondary school science homework. Finally,
future research would benefit from more systematic theorizing about
conditions that make science homework work for secondary school stu-
dents (e.g., the role of personal autonomy, interest, and importance;
social connectedness and a sense of belonging; family and community
engagement; and teacher expectation, insistence, and collaboration).
Acknowledgments
We would like to dedicate this article to our colleague and coauthor, Dr. Mary L. Davidson, who lost
her life to cancer in the summer of 2010. Dr. Davison dedicated her entire life to preparing her students
for the future by teaching her students the principles of problem solving through scientific application
and by encouraging them to apply this approach to their own lives.
This research was supported by a grant from National Science Foundation. The perspectives expressed
here represent the authors’ views.
References
Basu, S. J., & Barton, A. C. (2007). Developing a sustained interest in science among urban
minority youth. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 466–489.
Beauboeuf-Lafontant, T. (2002). A womanist experience of caring: Understanding the ped-
agogy of exemplary Black women teachers.Urban Review, 34, 71–86.
Bempechat, J. (2004). The motivational benefits of homework: A social-cognitive perspec-
tive. Theory Into Practice, 43, 189–196.
27
Bondy, E., & Ross, D. D. (2008). The teacher as warm demander. Educational
Leadership, 66(1), 54–58.
Bondy, E., Ross, D. D., Gallingane, C., & Hambacher, E. (2007). Creating environments of
success and resilience: Culturally responsive classroom management and more. Urban
Education, 43, 326–348.
Boykin, A. W. (1979). Psychological/behavioral verve: Some theoretical explorations and
empirical manifestations. In A. W. Boykin, A. Franklin, & J. Yates (Eds.), Research directions
of Black psychologists (pp. 351–367). New York: Russell Sage.
Boykin, A. W. (1983). The academic performance of Afro-American children. In J. Spence
(Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 323–371). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Boykin. A. W. (1986). The triple quandary and the schooling of Afro-American children. In
U. Neisser (Ed.), The school achievement of minority children: New perspectives (pp. 57–92).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Boykin, A. W. (1994). Harvesting talent and culture: African American children and educa-
tional reform. In R. J. Rossi (Ed.), Schools and students at risk: Context and framework for pos-
itive change (pp. 116–138). New York: Teachers College Press.
Boykin, A. W., & Allen, B. (2000). Beyond deficit and difference: Psychological integrity in
developmental research. In C. Yeakey (Ed.), Edmond W. Gordon: Producing knowledge, pur-
suing understanding (pp. 135–142). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
Boykin, A. W., & Toms, F. (1985). Black child socialization: A conceptual framework. In H.
McAdoo & J. McAdoo (Eds.), Black children: Social, educational, and parental environments
(pp. 133–151). London: Sage.
Boykin, A. W., Tyler, K. M., & Miller, O. (2005). In search of cultural themes and their
expressions in the dynamics of classroom life. Urban Education, 40, 521–549.
Boykin, A. W., Tyler, K. M., Watkins-Lewis, K., & Kizzie, K. (2006). Culture in the sanctioned
classroom practices of elementary school teachers serving low-income African American
students. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 11, 161–173.
Brock, C. H., Lapp, D., Flood, J., Fisher, D., & Han, K. T. (2007). Does homework matter?
An investigation of teacher perceptions about homework practices for children from
nondominant backgrounds. Urban Education, 42, 349–372.
Brookhart, S. M. (1997). Effects of the classroom assessment environment on mathematics
and science achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 90, 323–330.
Brown, D. F. (2004). Urban teachers’ professed classroom management strategies:
Reflections of culturally responsive teaching. Urban Education, 39, 266–289.
Chang, M., Singh, K., & Mo, Y. (2007). Science engagement and science achievement:
Longitudinal models using NELS data. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13, 349–371.
Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century: Applications for advancing
social justice studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualita-
tive research (3rd ed., pp. 507–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic
achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76, 1–62.
Cooper, H., & Valentine, J. C. (2001). Using research to answer practical questions about
homework. Educational Psychologist, 36, 143–153.
Corno, L. (2000). Looking at homework differently. Elementary School Journal, 100, 529–548.
Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom
learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88–108.
Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (2004). What we have learned about student engagement in
the past twenty years. In D. M. McInerney & S. V. Etten (Eds.), Big theories revisited: Vol. 4.
Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning (pp. 299–328). Greenwich, CT:
Information Age.
28
Corno, L., & Xu, J. (2004). Doing homework as the job of childhood. Theory Into Practice,
43, 227–233.
Coutts, P. M. (2004). Meanings of homework and implications for practice. Theory Into
Practice, 43, 182–188.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and
the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and educa-
tion: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26, 325–346.
Delpit, L. (1986). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people’s
children. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280–298.
Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children. New York: New Press.
Elmesky, R., Olitsky, S., & Tobin, K. (2006). Forum: Structure, agency, and the development
of students’ identities as learners. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1, 767–789.
Elmesky, R., & Seiler, G. (2007). Movement expressiveness, solidarity and the (re)shaping
of African American students’ scientific identities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2,
73–103.
Epstein, J. L., & Van Voorhis, F. L. (2001). More than minutes: Teachers’ roles in designing
homework. Educational Psychologist, 36, 181–193.
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. Wittrock
(Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.
Foster, M. (1991). “Just got to find a way”: Case studies of the lives and practices of exem-
plary Black high school teachers. In M. Foster (Ed.),Qualitative investigation into schools
and schooling (pp. 273–309). New York: Aims.
Fusco, D. (2001). Creating relevant science through urban planning and gardening. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 860–877.
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative
research. Chicago: Aldine.
Graue, E., Hatch, K., Rao, K., & Oen D. (2007). The wisdom of class-size reduction. American
Educational Research Journal, 44, 670–700.
Graue, E., & Walsh, D. J. (1997). Studying children in context: Theory, methods, and ethics.
Thousands, CA: Sage.
Hartwick, J. M. M., & Johnson, E. C. (2008). Transformative multiculturalism and the super-
vision of social studies student teachers: A critical look at one university supervisor’s
approach. Social Studies Research and Practice,3(3), 26–38.
Howard, T. C. (2001). Powerful pedagogy for African American students: A case of four
teachers. Urban Education, 36, 179–202.
Irvine, J. J. (2003). Education teachers for diversity: Seeing with a cultural eye. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Irvine, J. J., & Fraser, J. (1998, May 13). “Warm demanders”: Do national certification stan-
dards leave room for the culturally responsive pedagogy of African American teachers?
Education Week, p. 56.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2009). “Who you callin’ nappy-headed?” A critical race theory look at
the construction of Black women. Race Ethnicity and Education, 12, 87–99.
Lather, P. (1986). Research as praxis. Harvard Educational Review, 56, 257–277.
Lau, S., & Roeser, R. W. (2002). Cognitive abilities and motivational processes in high
school students’ situational engagement and achievement in science. Educational
Assessment, 8, 139–162.
29
Lee, O. (2005). Science education and student diversity: Synthesis and research agenda.
Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10, 433–440.
Lee, O., & Buxton, C. (2008). Science curriculum and student diversity: A framework for
equitable learning opportunities. Elementary School Journal, 109, 123–137.
Lee, O., Deaktor, R. A., Hart, J. E., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2005). An instructional inter-
vention’s impact on the science and literacy achievement of culturally and linguistically
diverse elementary students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 857–887.
Lee, O., & Luykx, A. (2005). Dilemmas in scaling up innovations in elementary science
instruction with nonmainstream students. American Educational Research Journal, 42,
411–438.
Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Leone, C. M., & Richards, M. H. (1989). Classwork and homework in early adolescence:
The ecology of achievement. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 18, 531–548.
Lincoln, Y. S. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretative
research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1, 275–289.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Luykx, A., Cuevas, P., Lambert, J., & Lee, O. (2005). Unpacking teachers’ “resistance” to
integrating students’ language and culture into elementary science instruction. In A.
Rodriguez & R. S. Kitchen (Eds.), Preparing prospective mathematics and science teachers to
teach for diversity: Promising strategies for transformative action (pp. 119–141). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Mau, W., & Lynn, R. (2000). Gender differences in homework and test scores in mathemat-
ics, reading and science at tenth and twelfth grade. Psychology, Evolution and Gender, 2,
119–125.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994).Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook.
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moje, E. B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R. W. (2001). “Maestro, what is ‘quality’?”:
Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 38, 469–498.
Parsons, E. C. (2008a). Learning contexts, Black cultural ethos, and the science achieve-
ment of African American students in an urban middle school. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 45, 665–683.
Parsons, E. C. (2008b). Positionality of African Americans and a theoretical accommoda-
tion of it: Rethinking science education research.Science Education, 92, 1127–1144.
Ross, D. D., Bondy, E., Gallingane, C., & Hambacher, E. (2008). Promoting academic
engagement through insistence. Childhood Education, 84, 142–146.
Roth, W. M., & Barton, A. C. (2004). Rethinking scientific literacy. New York: Routledge
Falmer.
Seiler, G. (2001). Reversing the “standard” direction: Science emerging from the lives of
African American students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 1000–1014.
Seiler, G. (2005). All my life I been po’: Oral fluency as a resource for science teaching and
learning. In K. Tobin, R. Elmesky, & G. Seiler (Eds.), Improving urban science education:
New roles for teachers, students, and researchers (pp. 113–130). Lanham, MD: Rowman and
Littlefield.
Seiler, G. (2011). Becoming a science teacher: Moving toward creolized science and an
ethic of cosmopolitanism. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6, 13–32.
Seiler, G., & Elmesky, R. (2007). The role of communal practices in the generation of cap-
ital and emotional energy among urban African American students in science class-
rooms. Teachers College Record, 109, 391–419.
30
Seiler, G., Tobin, K., & Sokolic, J. (2001). Design, technology, and science: Sites for learn-
ing, resistance, and social reproduction in urban schools. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 38, 746–767.
Simpson, J. S., & Parsons, E. C. (2009). African American perspectives and informal science
educational experiences. Science Education, 93, 293–321.
Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects
of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 95,
323–332.
Stanford, G. C. (1997). Successful pedagogy in urban schools: Perspectives of four African
American Teachers. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 2, 107–119.
Stanford, G. C. (1998). African-American teachers’ knowledge of teaching: Understanding
the influence of their remembered teachers. Urban Review, 30, 229–243.
Tyler, K. M., Boykin, A. W., Miller, O., & Hurley, E. (2006). Cultural values in the home and
school experiences of low-income African-American students. Social Psychology of
Education, 9, 363–380.
Tyler, K. M., Uqdah, A. L., Dillihunt, M. L., Beatty-Hazelbaker, R., Conner, T., Gadson, N.,
et al. (2008). Cultural discontinuity: Toward a quantitative investigation of a major
hypothesis in education. Educational Researcher, 37, 280–297.
Upadhyay, B. R. (2006). Using students’ lived experiences in an urban science classroom:
An elementary school teacher’s thinking. Science Education, 90, 94–110.
Van Voorhis, F. L. (2001). Interactive science homework: An experiment in home and
school connections. NASSP Bulletin, 85(627), 20–32.
Van Voorhis, F. L. (2003). Interactive homework in middle school: Effects on family involve-
ment and science achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 96, 323–338.
Ware, F. (2006). Warm demander pedagogy: Culturally responsive teaching that supports a
culture of achievement for African American students. Urban Education, 41, 427–456.
Warton, P. M. (2001). The forgotten voices in homework: Views of students. Educational
Psychologist, 36, 155–165.
Weiner, B. (1994). Integrating social and personal theories of achievement strivings. Review
of Educational Research, 64, 557–573.
Wentzel, K. R., & Wigfield A. (2007). Motivational interventions that work: Themes and
remaining issues. Educational Psychologist, 42, 261–271.
Xu, J. (2004). Family help and homework management in urban and rural secondary
schools. Teachers College Record, 106, 1786–1803.
Xu, J. (2005). Purposes for doing homework reported by middle and high school students.
Journal of Educational Research, 99, 46–55.
Xu, J. (2008). Models of secondary school students’ interest in homework: A multilevel
analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 45, 1180–1205.
Xu, J. (2010). Homework purposes reported by secondary school students: A multilevel
analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 103, 171–182.
Xu, J., & Corno, L. (1998). Case studies of families doing third-grade homework. Teachers
College Record, 100, 402–436.
Xu, J., & Corno, L. (2003). Family help and homework management reported by middle
school students. Elementary School Journal, 103, 503–518.
Xu, J., & Yuan, R. (2003). Doing homework: Listening to students’, parents’, and teachers’
voices in one urban middle school community. School Community Journal, 13(2), 25–44.
31
JIANZHONG XU is a professor in the Department of Leadership and

Foundations at Mississippi State University. His research interests focus
on teaching and learning in the school and home setting, in
home–school relationships, and in partnerships with culturally diverse
families. Recent publications include “Models of Secondary School
Students’ Interest in Homework: A Multilevel Analysis” inAmerican
Educational Research Journal and “Validation of Scores on the Homework
Management Scale for Middle School Students” in Elementary School
Journal.
LINDA T. COATS is an associate professor in the Department of

Leadership and Foundations at Mississippi State University. Her research
focuses on effective teaching—learning styles, experiences of African
American students, and Jeanes teachers (African American teachers in
the South during the middle 1950s and 1960s). A recent publication is
“The Way We Learned: African American Students’ Memories of
Schooling in the Segregated South” in Journal of Negro Education.
MARY L. DAVIDSON is a biology and genetics instructor for the

Mississippi School for Mathematics and Science located in Columbus,
Mississippi. She is the recipient of the Presidential Award for Excellence
in Mathematics and Science Teaching, the nation’s highest honor for
teachers of mathematics and science. In addition, she is the recipient of
the Christa McAuliffe Fellowship grant for excellence in teaching.
32

2012, Science HW, TCR (SSCI)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

2012, Science HW, TCR (SSCI)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2012, Science HW, TCR (SSCI)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Making Science Homework Work: The

Perspectives of Exemplary African

Teachers College Record Volume 114, 070304, July 2012, 32 pages

RESEARCH ON SCIENCE HOMEWORK

Science homework has been found to have a powerful influence on sci-

Cultural practices (e.g., values, experiences, and dispositions) that are

different from those of Western modern science (e.g., the dichotomy

perspectives of 11 African American parents or guardians who enrolled

I had about half of the class that turned in their homework. I do

While maintaining high expectations, these teachers cultivated caring

THE PRESENT STUDY

While one line of literature examined the role of science homework in

The participants were 8 exemplary African American elementary science

These teachers typically assigned science homework about two to three

to the science disciplines. This article focuses on findings related to the

Audiotaped interviews were transcribed, and the transcriptions were

established forms of qualitative inquiry, with both inductive and deduc-

“SCIENCE HOMEWORK IS A MUST; IT IS NOT A CHOICE THAT

These exemplary teachers shared a strong sense of urgency toward stu-

As an African American teacher we are dealing basically with

Another teacher elaborated:

Our focus needs to be on where we really want to be. There is

The sense of urgency was further heightened in the context of the No

I usually try to assign homework that is based on the concepts we

In addition, these teachers noted that homework needs to be some-

Finally, these teachers viewed science homework as an important vehi-

were learning and for fostering communication between children and

Another teacher noted:

I always invite the parents to come to my classroom so they can

BEING A WARM DEMANDER

These exemplary African American teachers identified themselves as

why should I even try?” That’s a big problem. So I try to steer

Similarly, another teacher noted:

It takes a village to raise a child. So from an African American

In line with their perceived purposes of science homework, these

I expect my students to perform at the level that I believe they

Similarly, another teacher stated:

I try to explain to them as much as I can so that when they do get

Addressing homework challenges. One major challenge with science home-

If I know that they don’t have access to a computer at home and

Other teachers tried to be “extra supportive to students who lack the

resources at home that are needed to perform adequately on homework

Another teacher explained:

Sometimes questions come up where students want to learn

In addition, some teachers checked homework assignments by allowing

My expectations are high for all my students. But in reality I

have to find other ways to help them. My expectations for them

“GET THEM INTERESTED IN MOVING EVEN FARTHER THAN THEY

It is one thing to externally set high expectations; it is quite another to

The robot in the science textbook is called a “labor saving

Likewise, to help students “see the relevance of an assignment and how

“Hands-on homework.” “As opposed to just sitting there and looking at a

At the beginning of the year we talked a lot about decomposers.

These teachers observed that students wanted to do hands-on home-

Student choice. Another approach to get students interested in science

try to pick a project or a topic of interest to them, if they can

Likewise, another teacher stated:

I find if students are interested in the topic, they will do their