Digital deadline dilemma
ILLUSTRATION BY: STEPH BRAVO
IN MY 20 years of teaching Journalism, it has always been about the paper—literally. But I recently had a paper-checking crisis.
I relied primarily on my students’ submitted articles when coming up with their grades. Aside from just plain good writing and the ability to follow instructions, I rewarded the ability to meet deadlines, something that they would need whether they became journalists, advertising executives or anything else.
Until fairly recently, I asked my students to submit hard copies of their papers to the department, usually time-stamped by the secretary. It required the students to finish their papers at least a few hours before the deadline because they had to print out their papers, staple them and travel to the school to submit them.
I would leaf through the papers and correct or edit them with a pen.
Last year, I began to feel like I had fallen way behind the times and was unintentionally making things unnecessarily difficult for my students. This soul-searching was brought about by observations that the students were now submitting their papers in other classes through e-mail.
This digital process has several advantages in my mind. First, it created a digital paper trail. Papers were clearly on time or late based on the time stamp in the e-mail. No more wondering if the papers had vanished. No more dogs eating homework. Second, I also got to keep a soft copy of the paper instead of having no copy once I returned the graded paper to the student. I would correct the soft copy while using Microsoft Word’s Track Changes function.
Third, it appeared to give the students more time to finish their papers as they now had up to the deadline itself, surely giving them a few extra hours at least.
Disaster strikes
So I decided to switch to digital submission. It was a disaster!
Instead of finishing early, students seemed to try their best to submit at the very last second. Some didn’t submit at all. The quality of the submissions actually deteriorated, as it was apparent they crammed.
Some students would submit late—as much as a day—and act as if nothing was amiss. I suddenly missed the students who would rush into the department huffing and puffing and begging that their papers be accepted.
To be fair, the switch to the digital submission process didn’t affect the conscientious students. They submitted their well-written, proofread articles pretty much the same time they submitted hard copies.
I also realized that a midnight deadline was the worst possible deadline to give college students as it gave them time to wait around, procrastinate and then cram for their lives. The noon deadline was bad as well, as students didn’t apparently do well working in the morning.
Dispirited, I asked around and got my footing. I figured out how to make the digital deadline work for the students and me. I realized the switch had to be complete or not at all.
If I required both soft and hard copies, it would basically be a case of me waffling. I decided to take the plunge. We could all stay in the 21st century.
The most important element is to be completely and transparently strict with the deadline. I now have a no-late rule in my class.
For whatever reason your e-mail arrived after the deadline and/or arrived but without the attachment, it was not going to be accepted. The reasons behind the tardiness mattered not. The number of seconds or hours it was late mattered not.
Second, I had to find the right deadline. I find that 6 p.m. is the optimum time for submission as it is late enough in the day but also early enough so students can do their papers before dinner or going out.
Finally, switching to a digital deadline submission is a vote of confidence for my students, that, with the air clear and the no-late rule in place, they will come through and submit good work on time as required.
The new system works for both them and myself. It’s a step forward for me and a good deal for everyone involved. It reminds me of what the late great David Bowie sang: “Let the children lose it. Let the children use it. Let all the children boogie.”
Ruel S. De Vera has been a lecturer at Ateneo de Manila University’s Department of Communication for 20 years. He holds a Master’s Degree in Journalism from Ateneo, where he is also moderator of the college newspaper, The Guidon. He is a desk editor for the Lifestyle section of the Inquirer.
