Set Assignment Default Due Time

[mwade]

This idea has been developed and deployed to Canvas

---

We are a K-12 school. One of the biggest negative feedback items we receive on Canvas has to do with assignments being due at midnight (11:59). Parents are concerned that we effectively asking them to stay up until midnight to turn in their homework. This is especially important for our middle school and junior high students.

We would like to be able to set assignment due time to default to a time that can be set in our school's account settings.

Yes, it is true that teachers can change the time, but we are relying on them doing the extra steps all the time to match our school's assignment policy - and it requires a lot of clicks to make this simple change.

[richard-jerz]

Okay Renee, I feel better.

But it still seems that we are skirting the issue.  I hate to talk for Esmail, but it seems that he was wondering why this feature request has not been implemented and that it might need another 100 (of his) votes.  The point is that this feature request already in the upper 10%, it (right now) doesn't need another 100 votes, and that the nature of it being in the upper 10% does not say anything about it ever being worked on.  The #1 feature request (the one with more votes than any) is not in development.  None of the feature requests in the upper 10% are in development.  What I think you are trying to point out is that when something isn't "in development" that it doesn't mean that it "will never be in development." It might (half-full.)  And I think that you are pointing out that the feature request system is only one of many places where Canvas finds ideas for development. 

The feature request system and its procedures do not mean that any of these feature requests will every be worked on.      Additionally, as I have posted in my graphic above, something can be worked on that is not in the upper 10%.  So the feature request system is only a system to gather ideas.  Canvas works on what they feel is most important.  (I am not trying to imply that Canvas is wrong to work on what it feels is important, this is often normal business. We users can be contributors, but users are not "in control" of development.)

[Renee_Carney]

Rick, you've nailed a lot of it!  We absolutely love hearing from all users, and this process allows us to do that.  Any user can submit an idea, and any user can share their use cases and interest in an idea (contrary to those companies that require the telephone game through an appointed admin).  The top 10% list allows us to identify a group that we'll thoroughly review (we look at them all, but the 10% are part of a more formal process) and give an official response on. A top 10% idea doesn't guarantee it will be developed, and there is no vote threshold that will either.  All ideas have a chance of being developed, even some with only 1 vote.  The top 10% are just intentionally in front of our face more often!

Appreciate this conversation and your willingness to look into the details!

[richard-jerz]

(Sorry for my delayed response, and that we are a bit off of the original topic.)

So, Renee, understanding that feature-requests that are in the upper 10% might not ever be worked on (which is the case right now,) and feature-requests that get low votes can remain on the list and be "In Development," this can lead someone to ask "What is the real purpose of the 10% rule?"  I will try to answer this with my own perspective.

The 10% rule gives Canvas the opportunity to easily archive (meaning somewhat hide, or can) those ideas that didn't get enough votes and that Canvas doesn't like.  Even if the same feature-request is re-created again, it will likely not get enough votes because those who voted on it earlier will most often ignore the re-created identical feature-request, and because the re-created feature-request does not adopt old votes.  If Canvas likes a feature-request that doesn't get enough votes, Canvas will keep it on the list.

If Canvas didn't have this 10% rule, there would appear to be no justification for Canvas to get rid of ideas that they don't like.  And if this undesirable feature were left alive, Canvas would risk that someday it might gain enough votes.

I am just trying to be realistic about what this 10% rule does.  Maybe others will see other things that it does.

[Renee_Carney]

 @richard-jerz ‌

You've got part of it. The "10%" number can get confusing, because there are actually 2 different 10% chucks that we look at.  I'll explain here.

• Monthly Archive: Every month we look at ideas submitted 6 months ago (This July '19 we'll look at ideas submitted last Jan'19)  and we archive anything that is not in the top 10% of that cohort.  This isn't because we don't like the ideas, it's because we know how overwhelming the sea of ideas would be if all were flooding the search, and it allows us to set aside those that just aren't as important to the community as whole (so it's the community's voice, not ours).
• Quarterly Prioritization: Every quarter we officially review (we're always looking at ideas 😉 ) the top 10% of voted ideas overall and commit to adding a comment on them that says if they are prioritized for the next quarter or not.  There is no commitment to build them, but we know (from the community voice) that they are the most important to the majority so we want to update them.

Where your explanation goes awry is the Canvas doesn't like.  Honestly, there are no ideas that we don't like.  There may be some that don't align with our philosophy or strategy, but those are few and far between.  Rather than on a scale of like, we like to view the community voice (vote count) as a scale of [most important to the community --------------- least important to the community]

[richard-jerz]

All this mumble-jumble that you provide is a way to hide what actually happens, and I don’t buy it.  The reason is that at this point in time (if your database system is correct,) there are no 10% items tagged as “In Development,” even though some of these have been around for 3-4 years.  And the only items that show “In Development” are low voted items having less than 115 votes (see my attachment), which I doubt were ever in an upper 10% category.   So as much as you try to explain the Canvas methods, they do not appear to support any of this 10% stuff.

I would agree that Canvas wants to have a system that continues encouraging users to provide ideas for improvement, but to say that Canvas likes all ideas is incorrect. This is why Canvas moves ideas to other places (archive and cold-storage).  If Canvas really liked all ideas, all ideas would remain in the one database systems for all people to always see.  These 10% methods are a convoluted way of encouraging people to provide ideas with an “incentive” that if their ideas gain support, that it will be worked on.  Esmail’s post reflects this: he thinks that he needs 100 more votes! This seems far from what is happening.

The rational that Canvas doesn’t want to keep all ideas in one place because it confuses users is ridiculous in the modern world of database systems.  Canvas could have a million ideas in one system, and with good filtering and sorting tools, users could find what they are looking for, all in one place.  It makes no sense to force people to query three different places, active, archives and cold-storage, to see if something has been already suggested.  And it makes even much less sense to force them to have to recreate items that have already been created.  This system of Canvas is so convoluted that it has caused me never to post another feature request.

Canvas can continue with this weird system, but I suggest to remove this 10% mumble-jumble stuff and put all ideas in one place.  Then you could properly “scale” ideas.  (I know that there has been discussion about this, maybe even a feature request somewhere, but I can’t find it.  Probably archived, or in cold-storage.  Who knows?)

[Renee_Carney]

 @richard-jerz 

I think we're at the point of diminishing returns here. We appreciate opinions, but please also keep The Canvas Community guidelines in mind.  As in life, you don't have to whole heartedly agree with something in order to respect it.  We're all in this together, dude.

[jpaull]

Hello,

@rcarney What would you recommend to get this idea back up for a vote?

As we approach a new school year, more teachers may be aware of the daily needs and overall implications of having that 11:59pm default time for assignments' due dates, so it's a good time to revive.

In the meantime, could Canvas simply make the system-wide default time 5pm or 8pm instead of 11:59pm?

With one more school year behind us, I have even more anecdotal evidence of students, parents and teachers talking about that 11:59pm time as a signal for a disregard for rest and wellness. Teachers often leave that time in place for sheer expediency, and might give a different time verbally in class, but seeing that time in the official CMS feeds into the growing view that at a high-school level, we expect work to continue until the wee hours. Has anyone else experienced this in their school?

Thanks for your help!

[mhale]

I will admit I didn't read all 87 comments before mine, but it would be nice if you set a default due time for each section separately. I have assignments due at the start of class for 8 different sections at my school and that would save me tons of time when I post assignments.

[Stef_retired]

 @jpaull ‌, this idea is currently open for voting. (If you aren't able to vote on it, make sure you're logged in to the Canvas Community and then double-check that you haven't already upvoted it.)

[macyhong]

This post is so underrated! I agree with all the comments above and would LOVE to have the ability to set a default due time. Canvas has been really great about updating each year, and I see that this was suggested 3 years ago. Hopefully this year is the year!!