Customer Reviews

Closing the Book on Homework: Enhancing Public Education and Freeing Family Time (Teaching/Learning Social Justice)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(18)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

John Buell's book Closing the Book on Homework is a subtly philosophical look at the purpose of homework in education and the utility of the concept of homework in the context of a global economy that emphasizes production and consumption. His main points are to argue against the effectiveness of homework and to highlight the consequences increased time spent on homework has on family life and the quality of public education. Based on a clear lack of homework research to support its efficacy in enhancing education and to make any substantive correlation between many hours spent doing homework and increased performance in the classroom, Buell dispels the arguments favoring homework as a necessary means to broaden a child's education and to build her character.
One of the most surprising yet undeniable connections Buell makes is the corresponding histories of children's rights in public education and the laborer's rights in the workplace. The progressive labor politics of the 1930's were reflected in increased children's rights and reduced homework. By the 1940's-50's in the post-WWII era, the country had a renewed valorization of work. Buell makes a logical case that the US competition with the Soviet Union and the burgeoning economy provoked the implementation of a more strenuous education centered on the "sanctity of homework". During these decades, homework was increasingly viewed as a way to enhance academic productivity, in the same way that longer working hours enhanced production output. Like the progressive philosophies of the 1930's, the politics of the 60's and 70's were concerned with the length and pace of the workday, and likewise with the mental health and "happiness" of children in school. The 1980's were once again a period of economic insecurity and competition with Asian powers, and as a result there was a heightened skepticism about leisure time as and a fear that "mediocre educational performance" would result in the country losing its competitive edge in the global economy. The consumerism of the 90's likewise contributed to the deterioration of the value of "learning for learning's sake," as the rewards for education became material through corporate sponsored incentive programs.
I have recently suspected our society of moving towards a dangerous and consuming trend of "getting and spending," but prior to reading this book, had never made the connection between consumerism, democratic ideals of individualism and hard work, and the increasing demands on school children. Buell delineates this process articulately with sound sociological reasoning. The myth of American society is one of social mobility. Poor and working-class families stress homework to their children in an effort to demonstrate their commitment to these "American" values and hope for a better life. Having taught an after-school program in a working-class urban community, I can confirm the author's conclusions. My class of second-graders often receives more than five worksheets of homework per night, an assignment which commonly takes the students more than one hour, and which their parents always insist firmly that they complete. Not only is the length of the homework long, but the assignment itself is wholly uninteresting, consisting of page after page of addition problems and tedious "activity" sheets demanding that they answer questions about a story they read in class earlier that day. In light of this experience, I can't help but agree with Buell's thesis that "the very stress on homework and long school day is another, and increasingly problematic, form of this preparation process to accustom the student to long working hours." I would simply add to this that stress on boring and unconstructive homework as students know it today, prepares them to accept boring and unfulfilling work later in life.
According to the author, the school's main function is to teach literacy and numeracy. In order to implement homework reform, he asserts that action must be taken on a grass roots level. Parents, students, teachers, and other concerned individuals need to demand restrictions on homework on the local level. Closing the Book on Homework is a revealing book well-deserving of a read from any citizen who suspects that the country is in the grips of corporate leaders dictating the value of consumerism and acquiring material wealth and likewise by anyone who observes a growing lack of family and free time due to increasing demands on the parents in the workplace and children in and outside of the classroom.

Author John Buell challenges in Closing the Book on Homework: Enhancing Public Education and Freeing Family Time the sacredly held notion that homework absolutely benefits students. Buell, conversely, believes that "too much of a good thing" is detrimental. Childhood development is defined by education, but not by academic instruction exclusively. Children also need to learn in the context of family, friends, extra-curricular activities, and part-time employment. Balance is imperative.

Buell emphasizes that teachers who blindly assign homework without considering peripheral variables risk impeding childhood development not only in the classroom, but also in life generally. Every student encounters different environments - many of which are negative - upon dismissal at the end of the school day. Since teachers cannot distribute homework on an individual basis, the most dismal circumstances must carry the greatest weight when teachers design nightly assignments. The child who is forced to complete hours of work on the floor of a shared bedroom using light from only a television set will rapidly lose ground to the student who enjoys the comfort of an expansive desk in a bright, quiet family office. In this case, homework creates disparities among students by negating progress made in the classroom. Sadly, those affected - the children - mainly are unable to prevent or improve the situation.

Buell logically points to the classroom's successor, the workplace, as a potentially ideal model for maximizing childhood development without relying on homework. Many professionals work from 9 am to 5 pm for a total of 40 hours per week. Once the office lights are turned off for the day, these individuals return home free to engage in leisure activities such as cooking, exercising, reading, and spending time with family. The defined responsibilities facilitate productivity at the former and refresh the spirit at the latter. Adults agree to work diligently on the job, but they in turn expect to receive personal time as a reward. Students are not granted such a luxury. On the busiest day, a given student will spend eight hours learning at school and several hours studying at home, only to repeat the process after limited sleep. How can student energy levels not be expected to decline over the course of a week, month, and semester?

Imagine the possibilities if the United States workweek mirrored that in Europe, where extended vacation time is the norm. Buell theorizes that less obsession with occupational demands would trickle down into less educational burdens. Students and parents, regardless of age, would be able to "play" with unprecedented frequency. Skeptics contend that such a shift will "dumb down" the country. On the contrary, Buell believes that increased opportunities to explore and share unique interests will spur mental, physical, and emotional growth. Eyes may be buried in fewer books, but the human intellect will be stimulated like never before.

Buell's argument is more than distinct - the argument is thoughtful and compelling. Unfortunately, his pleas to reduce the average homework load likely will go unheeded. Out of one side of the mouth, adults will complain that their lives lack relaxing moments. Simultaneously, they will invest overtime hours at the office in the unending quest for promotions and raises. Buell laughs at the idea that more time spent working always equates to more productivity, success, and fulfillment. Until societal leaders pause for a moment to contemplate the logic behind Buell's alternative, students and parents will continue to toil furiously despite the diminishing returns.

I don't know if there has ever been a better time to bring up the clichéd phrase, "don't judge a book by its cover." John Buell's book has sparked a lot of controversy because of its suggestion that homework might not be as beneficial as previously thought. Although Buell makes quite a provocative case for limiting homework assignments, his main argument spans a much greater realm. He is more interested in the cultural dimension of homework and how it, as an institution, as well as the system by which it is implemented, is a reflection of our nation's obsession with business, work, and social mobility. The mixture of education and politics is repeatedly brought up in order to demonstrate the association between cultural and the principle of homework.
The book can seem overwhelming at times, for it inundates the reader with historical background and economic theories. Clearly Buell believes that he is making a case that needs as much factual support as possible in order to be taken seriously. Unfortunately, he is probably right considering the type of audience that he appeals to. However, the book is most influential and insightful when its general themes and questions are considered. He states over and over again through such details that homework cannot be dissociated from the larger cultural context in which it exists. He examined the issue within the United States where the dominant aspiration is finding suitable employment. Buell advances the notion that it is our industrial sense as a nation that imposes the value we place on homework's ability to increase academic and consequently occupational performance.
One of his main problems with homework itself is that it is too rote and focused on insignificant tasks. He employs the metaphor of the school system as preparation for an assembly line. Our culture, unfortunately, values employment to such an extreme that such a job often elicits a sense of pride, often times over another position that requires more creative input. These menial jobs end up consuming an inordinate amount of our time. One of Buell's best points is the fact that free time is culturally underappreciated. The fear of leisure has become a unique American epidemic that parents have spread to their youngest children in elementary schools. It has become such a manifested notion that many schools have completely cut their recess periods.
A related topic that Buell approaches is the role of parents in education. Recent research has consistently exposed that the two parent working household is becoming the norm in the US. The argument that Buell contests is that homework is a way for children and parents to really interact. One would tend to agree with his assertion that the increased workload of parents and children ultimately causes strain and tension within the home. Another consideration, however, is the fact that in most cases the assignments that kids bring to the dinner table will not be made more accessible by collaboration between the two parties. Most of it is not challenging in a creative way, resulting in the attitude that homework is simply a burden. Buell acknowledges this point and calls for a more imaginative atmosphere brought either by the teachers or by the work itself. Yet, one question he does not address is how to attain those teachers who have the rare skills to impart such ideas. In this day and age, the incentives for teachers and students seem to extremely low.
The author clearly does not support standardized testing and the usual motivation for its implementation. Education reform has recently been at the forefront of our nation's political scene, and according to Buell's book, the necessary changes should be about ensuring equality. Not only does he correctly highlight the inherent paradox between standardized testing and establishing equality in our schools, but he also examines the fundamental flaws of such a principle. The overemphasis on standards and grades affect the quality of education that a child receives and ultimately skew his/her view on the value of learning. Our obsession with efficiency is advanced at the expense of the numerous other elements that are necessary to cultivate the personal development that Buell discusses at length in his conclusion. As a college student I can remember the irony of applying to competitive universities who initially claim to be preoccupied with your academic standing, but then stress the necessity of being a "well rounded person" and proceed to judge you on the number and variety of your extracurricular activities, none of which you could possibly devote a significant amount of time to. Though at times a tedious read, the discussion that Buell provokes is very interesting not only because of its complex nature, but also because of the passion with which it is approached in this country.

Everyone might have thought at least once that it would be nice to be free from the burden of everyday homework. However, we have convinced ourselves to do homework because we think of it is an unchangeable fact, without any room for discussion about alternatives. Is homework really needed for students to improve their academic performance? John Buell, in his Closing the Book on Homework, claims that the ways in which homework is assigned in today's society is not effective, useless, and there is a need for homework reform. He emphasizes the need for reducing the burdens of homework in America's public school by discussing roles and consequences of homework and by suggesting limitations and alternatives for homework for efficient education. He insists on his points by explaining the impacts of homework on students and the relation of homework beyond the educational (school) setting: America's culture and social conditions. His argument on homework is multidimensional, convincing, and compelling.
Buell challenges America's high value of homework. Admitting that students who get higher scores and grades engage in doing more homework, he claims homework is not the primary factor of improving students' academic performances. He says that homework does not work efficiently without adequate educational environment, such as parenting and well support of teachers to individuals. This is a good point because today's homework is assigned mostly as "one-size-fits all" assignments which puts responsibilities on only children. Furthermore he claims that homework also has negative impacts for children such as causing low motivation and attitudes, endangers health, and is a violation of parents and children by taking away time to spend together. The way he criticizes negative aspects of homework over its positive impacts effectively supports his position, why homework should be eliminated or limited. Thus, his opponents' perspective of homework reform seems too simplistic about assigning more homework without any regards of alternative consequences of it.
Buell depicts the roles of homework in a larger picture that suggests other perspectives of homework. He explains the historical background of homework in America's public education and says that the roles of homework have changed depending on social conditions. This suggests a role of school is to produce potential workers for the country's future. It is interesting to know that there was a homework reform and even agendas to limit homework in the history. This historical background of homework is not known well in today's society, which values heavy homework. His mention of this history is good because it not only shows his call for homework-free classroom and limitation of homework are not extremely pointless or overly optimistic idea, but also induces readers in the discussion of homework reform.
Buell greatly connects a high value of homework in American society with the cultural, traditional and moral value of hard work and the potentials of youth. In addition to his explanation of the historical shift of value of homework, this point explains well why there is a tendency that emphasizes more and more homework on children. He also makes a strong point that there is a strong tendency of parents of low-income families' longing for more homework for their children, because their academic success will lead them to upward social mobility. From his points, readers may gain a perspective that children have huge burdens of expectations from their family and society on their shoulders and those expectations perpetuate the high value of homework and more work on children. This implies an irony of homework when we consider his early critique that claims homework does not directly lead students to successful academic performance.
This book is good especially for teachers, school boarders, educational policy makers, and parents, whether they are against homework reform or not. It provides readers with rich perspectives of the value of homework, and allows them to rethink about its purpose. Buell's claim of home-free-classroom and reducing homework sounds idealistic and optimistic at first glance without knowing his evidence supports, but it is worth rethinking the value of homework in regards to his points because he does not merely suggest reducing all homework with a simple approach. If we go beyond the "norm" of hard work and try to reform today's procedures of assigning homework, we would get best outcome of education from fewer but well efficient and qualified procedures, as he suggests. This book suggests changes and provides room for discussion.

The author primarily convinces us that homework is a tool supported by global corporations to serve as a predecessor to the arduous fifty to sixty hour work weeks expected in many professional careers. Homework is often viewed by school-aged children as a burden due to its usual stipulations of longer hours away from their friends and familial responsibilities. It can promote difficult situations within one's home, and ultimately sever family ties. For example: a child is forced by his or her parents to work on additional assignments after school, that child sometimes becomes rebellious or obnoxious in the attempt to resist the work because it is not generally seen by youngsters as a means to an end. Parents and schools are allegedly a part of an `unspoken conspiracy" to simply inflict unnecessary challenges and inconvenience on its children; rather than enrich them in academic pursuits.
John Buell's assertions substantiate the argument that homework allows organized mega-businesses such as Microsoft, IBM and Coke to acclimate future workers and even future consumers whom fit into the adult world whose mantra is "Hard Work Pays off." Does it really? Will all those extra hours of worksheets and repetitive readings adding to my wealth of knowledge or a time/space filler to minimize the number of hours spent with one's family during the week. Each product for sale is potential bait for the naïve student to develop loyalty to brand names in addition to learning the technology and programming necessary to operate the item.
Although inundation of advertisements and great deals influence the desire for high-performing gadgets and gizmos, increased dependence on technology promotes people to second guess their innate gifts and abilities and start to depend heavily on calculators and other instruments to perform simple mathematic equations. Buell also suggests that documented studies have proven that after a specific percentage of review, a child's ability to retain information is not that impressive. The distinct declaration deviates from the commonly used analogy of "children" and "sponges." This analogy demonstrates that the minds of children have an unlimited capacity for knowledge, just as a sponge retains a substantial amount of water.
This book raises good concerns about the effects of too much homework and the future roles of the students as contributors to the global economy and society. However, more thorough evidence is essential in proving that the liabilities of assigning homework outweigh the benefits.

Through tracing the history of homework in U.S. society, John Buell, in his book Closing the Book on Homework, critiques the high importance placed on homework in the U.S. and its resulting negative impact on available family time and opportunities for learning outside the academic sphere. He identifies increasing consumerism and the desire on the part of businesses and corporations to encourage long working hours as reasons for the emphasis placed on homework.

For those who have long seen homework as essential to a child's growth and the educational process, Buell's analysis of the negative impact of homework on children seems startling. If homework encourages long working hours outside of the "office" or "factory" that is school, then the mentality that drives teachers to give more homework and some parents to encourage it is the same mentality which will encourage adults to spend longer hours at the job. All in all, however, Buell's critique on homework goes deeper, and is, essentially, a critique on the consumerist and workaholic culture of the U.S.

Because U.S. society is individualistic in nature given its capitalistic economic system, the notion that individual merit, perseverance and bootstrap pulling equal success is an unspoken belief. Many parents and teachers believe that encouraging children to work overtime from a very early age will produce citizens who appreciate the value of hard work and will ensure the future success of U.S. society over others in the world.

Buell argues that this frame of thinking erodes the importance of family bonding, community involvement and learning outside of academia. He advocates the development of a full individual instead of merely someone who is shut-in reading books and figuring out mathematical equations. By writing this book, he reveals the importance of striking a balance between the individualism and consumerism that encourage homework and which homework encourages, and the community and family bonds that less homework which means more free time, would encourage. To him, this balance is intrinsically important to the success of U.S. society.

Buell's argument ties in nicely to Pierre Bourdieu's theory of cultural capital. With homework taking up hours and hours of a child's time at home, the opportunity for cultural capital to be passed down generationally through social reproduction would be limited. More homework equals less civic interaction and more difficulty in the task of teaching children important concepts of society that they cannot learn from their textbooks or an unlimited number of hours of homework.

A critique of Buell's analysis of homework is that he fails to acknowledge that homework may in fact help children who are not able to, at first, understand the concepts presented during a short period of time at school. By giving homework, teachers are able to reinforce what was learned during the day and to allow students to practice what was learned so that they can gain a deeper understanding. Buell dismisses the arguments that children who do homework score better on tests based on the notion that a direct causal correlation has not been established between homework and test scores and moreover, that better test scores do not necessarily indicate greater propensity for success. His obvious distaste for homework and its arguably eroding effect on family life cause him to overlook and dismiss these possible benefits.

Nevertheless, Buell's book allows for debate in the context of the knee-jerk cultural acceptance of homework. By questioning the usefulness of homework, we are better able to analyze its goals and benefits and to reform its use. The ultimate goal would be the ability to instill a work-ethic without the sacrifice of family and community interaction.

Should parents stand up and say no large amounts of homework given to their children? Is homework helping or hurting our nation's children? Should we ultimately rethink the value placed on homework in American school systems? In his book, Closing the Book on Homework, John Buell addresses these questions and provides persuading evidence that homework only burdens many students without improving their education, intelligence, and overall academic performance. In reality, the author reveals that homework only isolates students from low-income backgrounds because many do not have parents to assist them (who are burden by the stress of their own jobs), computers, or the required educational materials to successfully complete the assignments. Therefore through constructive alternatives to homework and debunking homework proponents' arguments, John Buell successfully makes an effective case against the burdensomeness of homework, and how it is not needed in our nation's schools.
Closing the Book on Homework opens up a relevant point that leisure is critical for children and adults. Many readers, including myself, probably would have never considered this idea as a compelling defense of getting rid of homework. Buell contends homework is a serious barrier to leisure, and thus creativity and interests will be eventually lost as children are continually deprived of play or free time. Although proponents argue that homework has promising academic benefits, readers begin to see based on the author's analysis that homework fails to foster good study habits or work habits. The only promising benefit that can be proved is that homework is only an unnecessary demand placed on children. Buell examines the reasons why homework exists, but takes his readers a step farther by critiquing the logic for homework, which only thwarts the intellectual and emotional development for children by depriving them of play.
In the beginning of the book, the author not only analyzes his proponents' position on homework, but uses this as a foundation to understand how children learn. After understanding how children learn, he is able to support his argument by exposing the holes of the proponent's argument and then presents a compelling case why homework essentially does not work. Placing homework within a larger cultural, global, and political context, the author forces readers to understand how our perception of work is truly connected to our value of homework within modern society.
In the final section and conclusion, Buell closes his argument by asserting that real educational reform and change will come when schools foster a more equalized education that emphasizes more free time, which will eventually improve the quality of life of children. Ultimately, Closing the Book on Homework presents a compelling argument because it does more than analyze both sides of the issues, but rather it points out evidence that reflects the uselessness and the detrimental effects homework has on school children. Therefore, homework fails to alleviate any problems in education and only adds more division within families. Moreover, in his closing remarks, the author solidifies his position even more by bringing in how democracy should be sustained other than through homework (like smaller classes, better teachers, and pre-kindergarten training). Only by closing the book on homework will we then achieve far better results in the classroom and in student's academic performance.

Closing the Book on Homework is an impressive read for anyone interested in understanding education policy. It is also a necessity for parents, who are involved and who should be concerned with their child's education. Buell provides three chapters in his book, focusing on analysis of research he conducted, the historical and cultural context for education and potential reforms for the education system. He uses these chapters to assert his position on limiting homework. However, throughout the book he seems to become repetitive and even stray away from the topic at hand-homework.
In Chapter 1, Buell takes the right step in first establishing an argument against the value of homework. His research consists of looking at the correlation between more homework and better test scores. However, his research also states it is unclear whether or not more homework affects performance. Furthermore, he relates his research to cultural aspects and misconceptions of the importance of homework. At the end of Chapter 1, he sets the stage for the rest of the book by stating the need for redesigned homework, theorizing that "Any educational agenda that fails to leave space for [cultural] enrichment slights the long-term development and potential creativity of the student-learner" (Buell, p.26).
Buell writes further of the historical connection between homework and modern capitalism in Chapter 2. He discusses the importance of hard work to the American way of life which would establish homework as a necessity for future endeavors. In this view, homework is a crucial element that should not be understated, but Buell believes that in order to be fully efficient, the system of homework needs to be redesigned. Homework is important for future job placement because it prepares students for their upcoming workload. This then better prepares students for the working life, as he states in the next chapter. In addition, he expands his focus to the global workforce, which creates confusion. However, this seems a little misleading simply because this chapter was originally intended to focus on educational reform. This takes away from his argument just because he moves away from his original point, confusing the reader.
Unfortunately, his increasing repetition undermines what would be a powerful point. In the remainder of the book, he returns his focus to the American education system, where he talks about the disadvantages of homework between richer and poorer areas. By looking at these inequalities, he prescribes solutions to get rid of homework in primary schools and make it minimal in secondary school. Furthermore, he believes in developing the students' creativity and potential, and increasing parental involvement as well.
Overall, Buell poses a number of relevant and interesting views toward changing homework. However, by detracting from his focus throughout the book, he has the potential of losing the reader. Fortunately the message of reducing the amount of homework and freeing the student to increase creativity is received in spite of the confusion

In Closing the Book on Homework John Buell argues that homework as a device is ineffective in that it does not necessarily increase performance, gives a social and historical context for the debate on homework, describes how this topic affects us in the modern day, and offers his own thoughts and alternatives on and to homework.
Firstly, Buell does a sufficient job of showing homework's inadequacy in increasing actual performance, citing inconclusive and often contradictory statistical and empirical studies as evidence. His discussion of the more recent findings in such scientific fields as neurobiology, neurophysiology, and psychology in reference to our understanding of methods and speed by and which children learn, as well as the observation that at young ages the alleged viability of homework in helping future chances of success is not even understood by children, strengthen the case he makes against homework. I also found Buell's discussion of the historical and social context of the homework discussion to be quite interesting and helpful. In this section, Buell discusses how the insistence on homework is propagated by business leaders and the business elite and affluent, to acclimate the emerging workforce to the industrial societies' demands for increased and rigid work time, while associating homework with "American" values of hard work and thus material success. The detriments of this mindset are mentioned in detail: the detriment to health, both physical and mental, the stress, the lack of leisure time and `play' with which to cultivate creative and fulfilling pursuits. It is at heart an indictment of the American mindset of which the insistence on the importance of homework is a part, a mindset that breeds a one-minded and materially driven culture. I find it interesting that in today's day and age, where we lament the fact that children are being `raised' by the schools, and parents are not spending enough time with children, depression is on the rise, that we insist on the importance of homework; this causes the school to be involved in the child's life even after they are gone from it, forces the child to do hours of extra work every day-work the parents are often expected to help with, further decreasing free and constructive time they may have been able to spend with their children after long hour days at their own respective jobs, jobs that demand such long hours based on a system partly brought about by the insistence of homework to begin with.
Buell also helpfully discusses the inequity in the American public education system, which makes homework in many areas not only un-but-counter productive, in that the poorer schools districts and families often do not have the resources to effectively complete or make use of homework, casting doubt on the claim that homework is a successful tool used by the poor to lift their children up to better living situations. Also, Buell makes suggestions on what to do with this problem; he suggests that homework should be eliminated in the early grades and be quite light in the higher grades (being no more than an hour to an hour and a half in secondary schools), with the focus being on independent work done individually between teacher and student. He espouses the importance of extracurricular and leisure activities, activities that would promote the creative stimulation of children (trips and time spent with parents, visiting museums, seeing plays) instead of the indoctrinating and unnecessary force of homework, and further feels that more control over decisions regarding these matters should be left to parents individually.
In the end, Buell's book is a healthy discussion that broaches questions I feel are integral into any analysis of our modern experience and culture: what are we as a society going to value most, material success and wealth, or well-rounded and happy individuals? Is education's purpose to be a system of arbitrary tests and rewards, or a system of cultivation, nurturing and personal growth? Are we a after a system that promotes our indoctrination or our freedom?

Author John Buell, a leader in the movement to limit homework in America's schools, expands on his previous research in his book Closing the Book on Homework: Enhancing Public Education and Freeing Family Time. In this book, Buell communicates a clear, focused argument for limiting the homework assigned to youth in public schools today. To develop this argument, he analyzes data from research he conducted previously, provides historical and cultural context, and discusses the alternatives to the current homework system. The position is unique and stimulates many questions, but some of Buell's arguments lack the force to convince the reader of the importance and urgency of the issue. Ultimately, the style and content make this book an interesting exploration for the reader, but the piece may fail to convince many.
Buell's divisions of Closing the Book on Homework allow for a smooth transition through his argument's main points. The historical and statistical evidence are important foundations for understanding the anti-homework movement. In the beginning parts of the book, his arguments are clear and strong-homework eliminates family time, poses potential threats to a child's health, lessens the love of learning, limits time for extra-curricular and cultural development, and often has little correlation with higher testing scores. Understanding the historical development of homework and the educational system is important for the reader's perspective on the modern structure. However, these same arguments are repeated throughout the book. The repetition eventually weakens the points, as it seems as though they are the only positive attributes of a homework-free classroom.
Later in the book, Buell progresses into a cultural criticism of the corporate, free-market society of the United States. Again, he clearly examines the harms of forcing children into a constant "rat-race" and the effects of over-worked parents on familial relationships. While he is quick to criticize his critics for using biased language in publications such as A Nation at Risk, Buell later commits the same mistake in discussions of the global economy, describing jobs as "lost" rather than re-distributed to economies that are more capable of specializing in that product. This bias, as well as others, may exclude members of the audience. In another example, Buell outlines possible actions for parents, but he addresses only the "progressive" audience. Throughout the criticism of the free-market culture, Buell becomes so involved in economies and globalization that he occasionally loses the connection to homework.

Overall, Buell's position is a creative and interesting approach to the educational system. In the conclusion of his book, he offers several valid solutions to the problem. He recognizes the time and effort required by these actions, but ends with a hope that education can move toward a system that is ultimately most beneficial for the development of the child. Despite some flaws in the construction of his argument, Buell's writing is clear and at times very powerful. This book is a must-read for anyone interested in educational policy, but it should also be read by parents and teachers everywhere.