Reflective Homework as a Learning Tool: Evidence from Comparing Thirteen Years of Dual vs. Single Submission

TL;DR

This study analyzes 13 years of data from a computer architecture course, showing that dual-submission homework, which involves revision after feedback, significantly improves student performance and promotes reflection.

Contribution

It provides empirical evidence that dual-submission homework enhances learning outcomes compared to single submission, highlighting its pedagogical benefits over a long-term dataset.

Findings

Dual-submission significantly improves exam performance in most cases.

Reflective resubmission fosters deeper learning and understanding.

Study supports integrating dual-submission strategies in modern education.

Abstract

Dual-submission homework, where students submit work, receive feedback and then revise has gained attention as a way to foster reflection and discourage reliance on online answer repositories. This study analyzes 13 years of exam data from a computer architecture course to compare student performance under single versus dual-submission homework conditions. Using pooled t-tests on matched exam questions, we found that dual-submission significantly improved outcomes in a majority of cases. The results suggest that reflective resubmission can meaningfully enhance learning and may serve as a useful strategy in today's AI-influenced academic environment. This full research paper also discusses pedagogical implications and study limitations.