According to media reports recently, in a notice given to parents by a school, students are required to stop doing homework after 9 o'clock in the evening and do not have to make up for unfinished homework. "Operation circuit breaker" soon made the list of hot topics and caused heated discussion. In fact, the "circuit breaker mechanism" of homework is not a new thing, which has been mentioned in the previous notices sent to schools by education administrative departments in many places. Every "appearance" also caused a lot of controversy. The main points of contention are two points. On the one hand, almost all parents hope that their children can finish their homework. Since the school now requires that they can't and don't do homework after 9 o'clock, then parents have to let themselves and their children put aside their other tasks before 9 o'clock in the evening and finish their homework first. The result is that they disrupt the normal pace of life, such as the reduction of outdoor activities, which is not conducive to the normal development of children. On the other hand, some places have implemented the "circuit breaker mechanism" for homework to ensure students' adequate sleep, but parents will not calm down after finding that their children are behind in school, or can not continue to implement the "circuit breaker", or even increase their children's homework, which is contrary to the original intention of the "circuit breaker" mechanism. Another point is that children who can finish their homework before 9 p.m. under normal circumstances do not need or use the "circuit breaker mechanism", and those who can't finish their homework at this time are actually children with more learning difficulties, including children with problems in learning attitudes, methods, habits, etc., which can not be excluded from using this mechanism to deliberately delay and avoid homework. For such students, timing means efficiency reduction, which conflicts with the requirement of "double reduction" to improve quality and efficiency. According to some schools, the implementation of this measure is mainly to expect teachers to improve classroom efficiency and select homework after class. But in fact, the time for students to finish their homework is decided by both teachers and students. Just asking students not to do their homework after 9 o'clock in the evening can really play a binding role on teachers? Moreover, different students finish their homework at different speeds. If the students who finish their homework the latest in the class take precedence, most students will inevitably face the problem of insufficient homework, which will have a greater impact. Obviously, the action of unconditionally stopping homework after 9 p.m. can be said to have different functions, advantages and disadvantages for students and parents. How to implement this mechanism needs to vary from person to person, and it is difficult for parents and teachers to set a good standard, and the operability is low. In short, stipulating that students can't do homework after what time can't solve the fundamental problem of "reducing burden" in essence. The "circuit breaker mechanism", which rigidly requires that work be stopped at 9 p.m., is only a temporary solution. In order to truly reduce students' academic burden, the key is to establish a multiple evaluation system, give teachers the right to evaluate students in the teaching process, truly teach students according to their aptitude, achieve balanced development of schools, improve quality and efficiency, and let students and teachers gain greater autonomy in teaching. For students who are still unable to complete their homework after hard work, students and parents have the right to choose voluntarily and decide when to stop doing homework; The unified requirements for all students, from the perspective of educational ideas and concepts, are no longer based on the actual requirements of children's differentiation, but may be the "one size fits all" of laziness. Everyone's life will not be programmed,