Enhancing Student Engagement with Flexible Deadlines
By Lesley Zannella
Our student demographic is incredibly diverse, and the number of students who were at one time considered “non-traditional” (e.g., those who are mature students, working full-time, or have dependants) is increasing. This changing demographic coupled with an increasing rate of students’ mental health difficulties and other disabilities (e.g., learning disabilities; Costello-Harris, 2019) has also increased the number of extension requests that faculty receive from students. Decisions related to whether to grant an extension, or how long to grant an extension, not only contribute to faculty burnout (e.g., Jiang et al., 2016), but may also contribute to equity issues if some students are receiving extensions and others are not. With these issues in mind, one potential solution is to implement flexible deadline policies. By providing all students with the same flexibility in deadlines, this would alleviate some of the faculty burnout related to student requests for accommodations (e.g., reducing email) and increase equity in the classroom as instructors would no longer need to make decisions about who should or should not receive an extension on their assignment.
For the past three years, I have implemented extension coupons in my courses. I offer 3, 24-hour, extension coupons that can be used on any assignment in the course, with no questions asked or documentation required. The only rule with these coupons is that they must be redeemed with their TA before the deadline. I and my colleague, Dr. Jessica Sutherland, assessed the impact of these extension coupons across two years, two universities (York University and Arizona State University), and two populations of students (undergraduate and graduate students). Overall, students (N = 234) believed the extension coupons impacted their learning in two ways: they were able to meaningfully engage with the course content; and 2) they were able to focus on their mental health.
Students indicated redeeming extension coupons for various reasons such as job, family, and school commitments as well as physical and mental health difficulties. By reducing these barriers and providing a more equitable learning environment, our students stated that the extension coupons provided them more time to focus on their assignments, engage with the content, and submit something they were proud of rather than rushing their work. Some instructors believe that flexible deadline policies promote procrastination (e.g., Warner, 2019); however, almost 43% of our sample did not redeem any extension coupons.
Instructors who support strict deadline policies (e.g., no extensions, large penalty for late assignments) often provide the justification of “because in the real world, there are no extensions.” Our experience as academics, and the reported experience of other academics (e.g., Warner, 2019) is that in the “real world,” we do in fact receive extensions in our work such as submitting revisions on a manuscript, completing a peer-review for a journal, or putting forward a book proposal. It is possible that the only hard deadlines we have as academics are the classes that we teach or perhaps grant or award deadlines. Why do we request these extensions? Often, we have competing demands, and we cannot produce the quality of work we believe is acceptable with the current deadline. If we expect this flexibility from others in our work, is it time to offer that same flexibility to our students?
Our students specifically noted that the flexible deadline policies impacted their mental health in a variety of ways such as reducing anxiety and stress and allowing them to focus their energy on emergent situations outside of the classroom. Flexible deadlines do not require instructors to allow unlimited flexibility; much like academics experience some hard deadlines with no flexibility (e.g. class meetings, grants) but many soft deadlines, it seems reasonable to build in similar submission expectations in course designs that are appropriate to the level, content, and learning objectives of the class. For example, some courses are designed with coursework that is highly sequential. It may not be appropriate to allow coupons to be used on any assignment in the course, but perhaps flexibility can be offered on one or two assignments where the instructor believes it is more appropriate.
Ultimately, providing flexible deadline policies increases equity in the classroom as they level out the playing field between students who feel comfortable and uncomfortable asking for help. For decades, we have considered what and how we are teaching; now is the time for educators to consider who we are teaching, and design and teach courses that include all learners in the classroom.
References
Costello-Harris, V. A. (2019). Evidence of inclusion on college websites: Academic accommodations and human support. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 32(3), 263-278.
Jiang, H., Islam, A.Y.M.A., Gu, X., Spector, H. M. (2021). Online learning satisfaction in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A regional comparison between Eastern and Western Chinese universities. Educ Inf Technol 26, 6747–6769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10519-x
Warner, J. (2019). Deadlines in the “real world.” Insider Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-visiting/deadlines-real-world
About the Author
Dr. Lesley Zannella is an Assistant Professor, Teaching Stream, in the Department of Psychology. Her teaching research focuses on student engagement and inclusive pedagogies. Her teaching philosophy prioritizes flexibility, collaboration, and reflection. She primarily teaches two courses: PSYC2010: Writing in Psychology and PSYC4180: Critical Thinking in Psychology.