Dear Equity Corner,
As a teacher educator, I want to be equity-minded and supportive of my students and recognize that life sometimes gets in the way of meeting assignment deadlines. At the same time, I know that when they become teachers, they’ll be expected to meet firm deadlines in their schools. How can I offer flexibility without sending the message that deadlines don’t matter?
Molly Pasley’s approach
My assignment policy uses firm deadlines to help teacher candidates develop the professional responsibility expected in schools, where many deadlines cannot be moved. Students may submit work up to three days late with a 10% deduction per day. They also receive one “Oops Token” that provides a 48-hour extension on select assignments if requested at least one hour before the deadline.
Daryl Dugas’ approach
I discuss with students that the purpose of deadlines is to keep us on track, but if an emergency occurs, they need to communicate this to me early and make a plan for getting the work in. Within those boundaries, I can be flexible in accepting late work. I focus on the communication side of the policy rather than a defined deadline or percentage.
Discussion
Even though we both strive to be equity-minded in our teaching, we have very different approaches to flexible deadlines. This is OK! It’s not about picking the “right” policy but finding a balance between structure and empathy – too far in either direction is not helpful to you or your students.
Here are some things to consider when developing your policy:
- Be aware of the values you are modeling: We haven’t picked our policies based on the way it’s “supposed to be done.” Molly’s approach emphasizes professional responsibility, preparation for workplace expectations, time management, proactive communication and support within defined boundaries. Daryl’s approach centers empathy, responsiveness, open communication and critical examination of the reasons for rules, which he wants teachers to consider in their future work with students. Importantly, we explicitly communicate these reasons to students as a sign of respect and collaboration, and to help them develop their own values as teachers.
- Pick downsides you can live with: Every policy has downsides. For Molly, late penalties may disproportionately affect students facing significant life responsibilities, some emergency circumstances might require more than a single extension and students might see her as emphasizing compliance. In Daryl’s approach, some students do take advantage of the flexibility, and he has to spend substantial class time developing relationships and reciprocity with students to make his policy work. The goal is not to devise a perfect policy with no downsides—that’s impossible. Rather, it’s to create a policy that has downsides you’re willing to live with.
- Acknowledge that creating a policy is just the starting point: In discussing this column, we have both recognized ways we can adjust our policies to make them more balanced. Molly is considering ways she can be more responsive to students in extreme circumstances, and Daryl is putting in place requirements like documentation of emergency situations to put some limits on flexibility. From an equity standpoint, we believe it’s important that when students are in dire circumstances, we cannot hide behind a policy to avoid the difficult process of deciding if flexibility and empathy are appropriate. As we’ve experienced in writing this response, finding a like-minded colleague to help you navigate these difficult situations can be very helpful.
If you’d like some more ideas for approaches to this issue, you can check out this helpful overview from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
- Let’s keep the conversation going! Email your questions to COE_Equity@niu.edu.
- Academic Equity Committee members are Daryl Dugas (LILT) Mike Manderino (CI), Joe Curran (KNPE), James Cohen (CI), Joseph Flynn (CI), Dana Isawi (CAHE), Jenn Jacobs (KNPE), Laura Ruth Johnson (LILT), Eric Junco (CI) and Molly Pasley (SEED).
