Procrastinating until very last moments to take online exams

[the_geneticist]

Why do now what you can put off until tomorrow?

I have learned by trial and error that my students do worse, not better when we give them more time to do tasks.
I've tried giving students 3 days, 5 days, or just 1 day to turn in online assignments after class.  They can also finish them in class and just turn them when they finish.
The organized, attentive, & focused students turn them in during class.
Students who need a bit more time turn them in a bit later than same day.
Students who don't finish assignments the day of class are actually even less likely to finish if given more time. 
So, all assignments are due 24 hours after the end of class.

[Caracal]

Well, sure, that's what they'd like to do.  But would this truly help them?  Or would not making adolescents get an early start potentially retard the process of developing more competent adult brains by depriving them of the training in early rising that the adolescent brain really needs?  That's my great concern.  I'm not trying to sneer at them, or act like a classic "kids today!" curmudgeon.  I'm genuinely concerned that efforts to push back school starting times could end up harming youths in the long run, even if they make them feel better in the short term.

Those efforts are a reaction to trends of pushing school start times earlier and earlier, usually because of bus schedules and other logistical factors. Some high schools in my county start classes at 705 AM. When you factor in actually getting the bus, that probably means you have lots of kids and their parents having to wake up at 530. I agree with you to some extent about the adolescent brain stuff, but that's just really early. Are adolescents capable of waking up early? Of course they are, but that doesn't mean that having them try to learn math at 7 in the morning is a good idea. I doubt their teachers are particularly sharp at that hour either.

[apl68]

Well, sure, that's what they'd like to do.  But would this truly help them?  Or would not making adolescents get an early start potentially retard the process of developing more competent adult brains by depriving them of the training in early rising that the adolescent brain really needs?  That's my great concern.  I'm not trying to sneer at them, or act like a classic "kids today!" curmudgeon.  I'm genuinely concerned that efforts to push back school starting times could end up harming youths in the long run, even if they make them feel better in the short term.

Those efforts are a reaction to trends of pushing school start times earlier and earlier, usually because of bus schedules and other logistical factors. Some high schools in my county start classes at 705 AM. When you factor in actually getting the bus, that probably means you have lots of kids and their parents having to wake up at 530. I agree with you to some extent about the adolescent brain stuff, but that's just really early. Are adolescents capable of waking up early? Of course they are, but that doesn't mean that having them try to learn math at 7 in the morning is a good idea. I doubt their teachers are particularly sharp at that hour either.

High school classes starting at 7:00 a.m.?  This was not something I was aware of.  I've always been familiar with K-12 classes starting at 8:00 a.m.  I'd been hearing of proposals to postpone classes until 9:00 or even 10:00 a.m. because teens purportedly couldn't handle it any earlier.  I can certainly see how trying to push classes up to 7:00 a.m. would have both parents and students (and teachers, too) up in arms.

Sounds like different proposals and different issues in different places.

[apl68]

This again?

Arcturus confirmed they were not making a serious suggestion to drastically change class times.

I said over and over I was specifically addressing the question of whether or not a biological component exists, independent of the question of whether or not any sort of 'accommodation' is warranted.

Sorry, I was just trying to answer the question of why I had said what I earlier said.  I know that Arcturus meant that suggestion as hyperbole.  But I have seen serious suggestions elsewhere to postpone classes until quite late in the morning, with teen biology cited as the justification.

[smallcleanrat]

This again?

Arcturus confirmed they were not making a serious suggestion to drastically change class times.

I said over and over I was specifically addressing the question of whether or not a biological component exists, independent of the question of whether or not any sort of 'accommodation' is warranted.

Sorry, I was just trying to answer the question of why I had said what I earlier said.  I know that Arcturus meant that suggestion as hyperbole.  But I have seen serious suggestions elsewhere to postpone classes until quite late in the morning, with teen biology cited as the justification.

Fair enough. Thanks for clarifying.

A lot of factors seem to get mixed together in arguments related to this topic. In a discussion of whether or not to alter school start times, I think it is perfectly relevant to reference the fact that there is ample evidence that adolescents can and do live up to expectations to rise early in times and place where this is the cultural norm.

It just doesn't work quite as well as a counter against claims for a biological component to adolescent sleep.



Sometimes people like to say it can't be biology, because they never had problems being alert in the mornings as teens. It is possible both for there to be a tendency for adolescents to experience certain effects of physiology and for there to exist adolescents who do not display these effects.

My dad likes to say his high school early-rising habits disprove a biological component, conveniently forgetting all the times he complained about having to wait around every morning for his slower-to-rouse siblings to drag through their routine.

And biological underpinnings for variations in circadian rhythms are evident in humans in general, not just teens.



You can discipline yourself to get to bed early, get up early, and get yourself to class on time. This does not necessarily mean you will fall asleep quickly, get quality sleep, or that there are no limits on how alert you can force yourself to be.

You don't have to be up "all night" with screens for screens to affect your sleep. There can be disruptive effects even if you are shutting everything off at 10pm. And if you have to be in class during the day and perhaps have work and/or family commitments in the afternoons/evenings, nighttime screen use for homework and studying might be hard to avoid.



It's still worth encouraging young people to learn healthy habits, as healthy behavior can go a long way towards mitigating negative effects of underlying biology.

I would just resist assuming that the sleepy look on a freshman's face in an 8am class is an indication of someone who has been spoiled or lacks discipline.

I've certainly seen profs yawning their way through morning meetings or dozing off in seminars, but I think there is less of a tendency for an observer to assume irresponsibility or laziness as the best explanation.