Homework is a standard, yet controversial, component of the American educational system. Unfortunately, research on parent perceptions of the efficacy of homework has been limited by a lack of reliable, valid measurement. The present study assessed the structural validity of an electronic version of a newly developed homework performance scale. Participants were 126 parents of students in a rural Illinois school district. A common factor analysis with principal axis extraction and promax rotation was employed. Three salient factors resulted: Student Task Engagement/Efficiency; Student Competence; and Teacher Support. These results indicate that scores on the electronic Homework Performance Questionnaire–Parent Scale (HPQ-PE) have a factor structure similar to the factor structure found previously with the paper-and-pencil version. Given these results, the HPQ-PE has the potential to become a useful tool for improving research on homework and informing the development of homework policies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of psychiatric disorders, fourth edition, text revision.Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
2.
AneskoK. M.SchoiockG.RamirezR., & LevineF. M. (1987). The homework problem checklist: Assessing children's homework difficulties. Behavioral Assessment, 9, 179–185.
3.
BartlettM. S. (1950). Tests of significance in factor analysis. British Journal of Psychology (Statistical Section), 3, 77–85.
4.
BriggsN. E., & MacCallumR. C. (2003). Recovery of weak common factors by maximum likelihood and ordinary least squares estimation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38, 25–56.
5.
BryanT.BursteinK., & BryanJ. (2001). Students with learning disabilities: Homework problems and promising practices. Educational Psychologist, 36, 167–180.
6.
CattellR. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276.
7.
CooperH.RobinsonJ. C., & PatallE. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76, 1–62.
8.
EdwardsJ. R., & BagozziR. P. (2000). On the nature and direction of relationships between constructs and measures. Psychological Methods, 5, 155–174.
9.
EpsteinJ. L., & Van VoorhisF. L. (2001). More than minutes: Teachers' roles in designing homework. Educational Psychologist, 36, 181–193.
10.
FabrigarL. R.WegenerD. T.MacCallumR. C., & StrahanE. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272–299.
11.
GarbH. N. (2007). Computer-administered interviews and rating scales. Psychological Assessment, 19, 4–13.
12.
GillB. P., & SchlossmanS. L. (2003). Parents and the politics of homework: Some historical perspectives. Teachers College Record, 105, 846–871.
13.
GoldbergL. R., & VelicerW. F. (2006). Principles of exploratory factor analysis. In StrackS. (Ed.), Differentiating normal and abnormal personality (2nd ed.; pp. 209–237). New York: Springer.
14.
GorsuchR. L. (2003). Factor analysis. In SchinkaJ. A. & VelicerF. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Volume 2, Research methods in psychology (pp. 143–164). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
15.
GreenwaldA. G.PratkanisA. R.LeippeM. R., & BaumgardnerM. H. (1986). Under what conditions does theory obstruct research progress?Psychological Review, 93, 216–229.
16.
HabbousheD. F.Daniel-CrottyS.KarustisJ. L.LeffS. S.CostiganT. E.GoldsteinS. G. (2001). A family school homework intervention program for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 8, 123–136.
17.
HaigB. D. (2005). Exploratory factor analysis, theory generation, and scientific method. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 303–329.
18.
Hoover-DempseyK. V.BattiatoA. C.WalkerJ. M. T.ReedR. P.DeJongJ. M., & JonesK. P. (2001). Parental involvement in homework. Educational Psychologist, 36, 195–209.
19.
HornJ. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185.
20.
International Test Commission. (2006). International guidelines on computer-based and internet-delivered testing. International Journal of Testing, 6, 143–171.
KaiserH. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36.
23.
KeithT. Z., & KeithP. B. (2006). Homework. In BearG. G. & MinkeK. M. (Eds.), Children's needs III: Development, prevention, and intervention (pp. 615–630). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
24.
KohnA. (2006). The homework myth: Why our kids get too much of a bad thing.Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press.
25.
KralovecE., & BuellJ. (2000). The end of homework: How homework disrupts families, overburdens children, and limits learning.Boston: Beacon Press.
26.
KuncelN. R.CredeM., & ThomasL. L. (2005). The validity of self-reported grade point averages, class ranks, and test scores: A meta-analysis and review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 75, 63–82.
27.
LeeD.ReynoldsC. R., & WillsonV. L. (2003). Standardized test administration: Why bother?Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 3, 55–81.
28.
McDonaldR. A.ThurstonP. W., & NelsonM. R. (2000). A Monte Carlo study of missing item methods. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 70–91.
29.
McQuittyS., & BishopJ. W. (2006). Issues in multi-item scale testing and development using structural equation models. Journal of Applied Measurement, 7, 117–128.
30.
MundfromD. J., & ShawD. G. (2005). Minimum sample size recommendations for conducting factor analyses. International Journal of Testing, 5, 159–168.
31.
PowerT. J.DombrowskiS. C.WatkinsM. W.MautoneJ. A., & EagleJ. W. (2007). Assessing children's homework performance: Development of multi-dimensional, multi-informant rating scales. Journal of School Psychology, 3, 333–348.
32.
PowerT. J.WerbaB. E.WatkinsM. W.AngelucciJ. G., & EiraldiR. B. (2004, August). Patterns of homework problems among general education and ADHD-referred students. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, HI.
33.
PowerT. J.WerbaB. E.WatkinsM. W.AngelucciJ. G., & EiraldiR. B. (2006). Patterns of parent reported homework problems among ADHD referred and non-referred children. School Psychology Quarterly, 21, 13–33.
34.
SchwarzN. (1999). Self-report: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54, 93–105.
35.
SmithS. R. (2007). Making sense of multiple informants in child and adolescent psycho-pathology. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 25, 139–149.
36.
StevensJ. P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
TatarynD. J.WoodJ. M., & GorsuchR. L. (1999). Setting the value of k in promax: A Monte Carlo study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 384–391.
39.
ThurstoneL. L. (1947). Multiple factor analysis.Chicago: University of Chicago.
40.
TrautweinW. F.LudtkeO. L.SchnyderI., & NiggliA. (2006). Predicting homework effort: Support for a domain specific, multi-level homework model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 438–456.
41.
VelicerW. F. (1976). Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 41, 321–327.
42.
XuJ. (2007). Middle school homework management: More than just gender and family involvement. Educational Psychology, 27, 173–189.
