CAN TEACHERS CATER FOR STUDENTS’ DIVERSE NEEDS WITHOUT INCREASING THEIR OWN WORKLOADS? A TRIAL OF AUTOMATIC NO-PENALTY EXTENSIONS

Universities increasingly strive to support diverse student populations, yet current accommodation systems often rely on reactive, disclosure-based processes that can add to academic workload and reinforce deficit-framing of students with atypical learning needs. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) offers a proactive alternative, but full course redesign can be resource intensive. This study replicates Ruesch and Sarvary’s recent trial of ‘ideal deadlines’ with automatic no penalty extensions to examine whether this partial UDL intervention can benefit a more diverse student cohort. Mixed methods surveys, submission data, and extension request records were analysed across two years and two compulsory courses in criminology and law. Students in both courses strongly preferred structured deadlines with integrated flexibility and reported reduced stress, improved time management, and enhanced experiences in other subjects. Individual requests for formal extensions also decreased by approximately 60%, substantially reducing the administrative and pastoral workload for academic staff. Student performance remained stable across control and trial years. Qualitative feedback highlighted benefits for students managing disability, caring responsibilities, or complex life circumstances, though some reported increased procrastination. Findings indicate that modest, targeted applications of UDL—such as flexible due dates—can foster more inclusive learning environments without adding to academic workload.