Two professors and a student are debating standardising assignment deadlines across faculties. Dr Harris (Professor) I've been reviewing assignment submission analytics, and there's a clear trend—students are overwhelmed when deadlines from different faculties pile up in the same week. Standardising key deadlines could really reduce stress and improve performance. It's about predictability and fairness. Megan (Student) I understand the intent, but I'm worried that standardisation might actually cluster workload even more. If everyone sets assignments during the same fixed window, won't that just compress the pressure into a narrower timeframe? That sounds even more exhausting. Dr. Clark (Professor) And let's not forget faculty autonomy. Each department has unique pacing and assessment methods. Forcing alignment could disrupt well established course flows. I believe flexibility allows instructors to structure their modules in the most pedagogically effective way. Dr. Harris (Professor) I agree we need balance. But the cross faculty survey last term showed strong student support for some level of coordination. If we identify peak workload periods and adjust a few core deadlines especially for large assessments we can avoid the worst overlaps. Megan (Student) Then maybe a partial standardisation would work better? Like having shared windows, but not identical dates. And if we add a flexible extension policy, students wouldn't be penalised if two major assignments still land close together. Dr. Clark (Professor) That's a reasonable compromise. As long as we're not mandating the same calendar for all subjects. We can define common high-pressure weeks and encourage departments to stagger within them. That maintains academic freedom while still being responsive to student wellbeing. Dr. Harris (Professor) Exactly. We're not talking about rigid enforcement just better coordination. The impact on grades during peak weeks is noticeable. A bit of alignment could benefit both students and faculty without sacrificing teaching quality. Megan (Student) And if we commit to reviewing it annually maybe through ongoing student feedback we can keep it adaptable. No system will be perfect right away, but at least we'll show we're trying to listen and improve. Dr. Clark (Professor) Agreed. Let's recommend a partial standardisation model, with flexible periods that departments can work within. We'll evaluate its effectiveness yearly using student surveys, submission data, and grade outcomes. That way, we remain responsive without overregulating.