Guide
Extra Time: Getting it Right
A practical guide to deciding when extra time is appropriate, calculating the right amount and gathering clear subject-specific evidence.
Extra time is not a standard entitlement
Extra time is one of the most widely used—and most frequently misunderstood—assessment arrangements.
It is sometimes treated as the automatic response to dyslexia, ADHD, anxiety or another identified condition.
That is not how decisions should be made.
The right question is not:
"Does this learner qualify for 25% extra time?"
It is:
"What prevents this learner from completing this assessment within the specified time, and how much additional time removes that disadvantage?"
Extra time should be provided only where there is evidence that:
- an identified difficulty affects the learner's ability to complete timed tasks
- extra time is an appropriate way to address that barrier
- the learner normally receives and uses extra time during learning and assessment
- the specific amount requested is supported by evidence
Extra time should remove an identified disadvantage. It should not provide additional thinking time simply because it may improve a learner's result.
What extra time is
Extra time extends the working time available for a timed assessment.
For example:
| Standard assessment time | Extra-time allowance | Additional time | Total working time |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60 minutes | 10% | 6 minutes | 66 minutes |
| 60 minutes | 15% | 9 minutes | 69 minutes |
| 60 minutes | 25% | 15 minutes | 75 minutes |
| 90 minutes | 15% | 13.5 minutes | 103.5 minutes |
| 90 minutes | 25% | 22.5 minutes | 112.5 minutes |
| 120 minutes | 25% | 30 minutes | 150 minutes |
The percentage should reflect the learner's evidenced need.
It should not be selected because it is a familiar figure or because other learners receive the same amount.
What extra time is not
Extra time is not:
- an automatic entitlement following a diagnosis
- a reward for effort
- a way to compensate for gaps in knowledge
- additional teaching time
- an opportunity for staff to explain questions
- a standard percentage applied across every subject
- the same as a supervised break or rest period
- justified simply because the learner used all the time offered
Using extra time when it is available does not, by itself, prove that the learner needs it.
Many learners will use additional time if it is offered. Evidence must show that the learner's identified difficulty prevents them completing the assessment in the standard time and that a particular amount is appropriate.
When extra time may be appropriate
Extra time may be appropriate where an identified difficulty causes the learner to work more slowly during timed assessment.
Possible barriers include:
- significantly slow reading or writing
- slower processing of written information
- physical difficulty recording responses
- visual impairment requiring additional time to read adapted material
- use of Braille or assistive technology
- substantial time needed to interpret diagrams or tables
- mental health difficulties that slow processing or task initiation
- communication or motor difficulties affecting response production
- time needed to check output from speech-recognition technology
The condition or diagnosis does not make extra time appropriate.
The impact on timed assessment does.
A useful test
Ask:
Without extra time, is the learner prevented from demonstrating attainment because of an identified difficulty rather than because of limited knowledge or preparation?
If the answer is yes, extra time may be appropriate.
It must then be trialled and quantified.
When extra time may not be appropriate
Extra time is not always the best response to an assessment barrier.
Difficulty accessing written text
A learner who reads slowly may benefit more from:
- text-to-speech
- a digital question paper
- a human reader, where permitted
- an adapted paper
Once the reading barrier is removed, the learner may not require extra time.
Difficulty recording responses
A learner with slow or painful handwriting may benefit more from:
- ICT
- speech recognition
- a scribe, where appropriate
- an alternative input device
Extra time should not be used as a substitute for a more effective arrangement.
Anxiety or reduced concentration
A longer assessment may increase fatigue, anxiety or loss of concentration.
The learner may benefit more from:
- supervised breaks
- rest periods
- separate accommodation
- an agreed combination of arrangements
Lack of knowledge or preparation
Extra time is not appropriate where the learner cannot complete the assessment because they:
- do not know the course content
- have not practised the assessment format
- struggle to plan answers because of gaps in learning
- need teaching support to understand the question
- have poor time-management habits without an identified assessment barrier
Assessment arrangements remove barriers. They do not compensate for under-preparation.
Extra time and rest breaks are different
These arrangements are often confused.
Extra time
The learner continues working and receives additional assessment time.
Rest period
The learner stops working but remains in the assessment room. The clock is paused for the agreed break.
Supervised break
The learner stops working and may leave the room under supervision. The time taken does not count towards their working time.
A learner may need:
- extra time only
- breaks only
- both extra time and breaks
- neither
The decision should reflect the barrier.
For some learners, extending the total assessment period may cause significant fatigue. In these cases, breaks may be more appropriate than simply adding more working time.
How much extra time?
There is no universal percentage.
The appropriate amount is the smallest amount that reliably removes the learner's disadvantage.
Schools should not begin with 25% and work backwards.
Begin by gathering evidence.
A simple method
- Give the learner a realistic timed task.
- Record what they complete in the standard time.
- Allow them to continue working.
- Record how much longer they need.
- Repeat this across more than one task.
- Compare the pattern.
- Review whether another arrangement would remove the barrier more effectively.
Example calculation
A learner receives 60 minutes for a classroom assessment.
They require an additional 9 minutes to complete it independently.
9 ÷ 60 × 100 = 15%
This suggests that approximately 15% extra time may be appropriate.
One task is not enough to establish a reliable percentage. Look for a pattern across different assessments.
Avoid false precision
Evidence does not need to produce a mathematically perfect figure.
A learner may need:
- 12% in one task
- 16% in another
- 14% in a third
A school might reasonably conclude that 15% is sufficient.
The decision should be professional, proportionate and supported by evidence.
What matters is that the amount requested can be explained.
Why extra time differs by subject
Assessment demands vary significantly between subjects.
A learner may need more time where an assessment involves:
- extended writing
- lengthy source material
- complex reading
- sustained written analysis
- interpretation of diagrams or tables
- extensive use of assistive technology
The same learner may require less or no extra time where an assessment involves:
- short responses
- multiple-choice questions
- practical demonstration
- limited reading
- limited written production
This means a learner should not automatically receive the same percentage across every subject.
Subject teachers are essential because they understand:
- the type of response required
- the balance between reading and writing
- the amount of extended writing
- the usual pace of the assessment
- how the learner performs in that particular subject
Worked example: Claire
Claire has dyslexia that affects her writing speed.
She is capable and understands the course content, but she has an ongoing difficulty completing written tasks within the allocated time.
Her school does not apply one percentage across every subject.
Higher English
Higher English requires sustained and extended writing.
Claire's teacher records that she rarely completes timed tasks within the standard period. She routinely receives approximately 25% extra time and can usually complete the work within that allowance.
In one assessment, Claire completed part of the paper during the standard 90 minutes and used a further 22 minutes to finish.
Decision: 25% extra time.
Higher History
History also involves significant extended writing.
During one 30-minute class task, Claire required approximately 10 additional minutes to complete her response.
Alongside other classroom evidence, the teacher confirms that extra time is routinely required for essays and written analysis.
Decision: 25% extra time.
Higher Mathematics
Mathematics involves less extended writing.
Claire understands the mathematical content and can frequently answer questions verbally, but her writing speed can still prevent her finishing some tasks.
Classroom trials show that a smaller allowance is sufficient.
Decision: 15% extra time.
Higher Chemistry
Chemistry also requires less extended writing than English or History.
During a 50-minute class assessment, Claire required approximately seven additional minutes to complete all questions.
Decision: 15% extra time.
What Claire's example demonstrates
- The diagnosis remains the same.
- The writing-speed barrier remains the same.
- The assessment demands differ.
- The amount of extra time therefore differs by subject.
This is subject-specific decision-making in practice.
Worked examples: when context changes the decision
Kay
Kay experiences mental health difficulties that can cause significant anxiety before assessments and difficulty concentrating. Classroom trials show that 15% additional time is sufficient to settle, process questions and complete responses.
Decision: 15% extra time, based on the evidenced impact and the amount trialled—not simply on the presence of a mental health condition.
Jamie
Jamie is blind and uses Braille. Higher History involves extensive reading, while Higher Mathematics includes diagrams and tables that take additional time to interpret using Jamie's access methods.
Classroom evidence shows that Jamie requires approximately 50% extra time to access and complete similar work.
Decision: 50% extra time in these subjects. This reflects Jamie's access methods and evidence, not a standard allowance for blind learners or Braille users.
Luke
Luke has a physical disability and normally uses word-processing software. His National 4 courses do not have timed external examinations, and internal tasks can be managed over a longer period where assessment conditions permit.
Decision: manage available time appropriately for internal assessment rather than automatically requesting external-exam extra time.
Amar
Amar experiences anxiety and concentration difficulties and can spend long periods checking and rechecking his work. Trials show that longer assessments worsen his concentration, extend his anxiety and do not improve access.
Decision: supervised breaks or rest periods—not extra time.
Lesley
Lesley has severe dyslexia and requires 25% extra time, but longer National 5 examinations cause significant fatigue.
Decision: 25% extra time plus supervised breaks.
These examples show why arrangements must be selected and combined according to demonstrated impact.
Recording evidence for extra time
Evidence should show more than the fact that extra time was offered.
A strong evidence profile should include:
- the identified difficulty
- how it affects learning and timed assessment
- the learner's normal way of working
- examples from more than one task
- the standard time allowed
- how much work was completed in that time
- the additional time used
- the effect on completion and independence
- the views of the learner
- comments from relevant subject teachers
- the reason the chosen percentage is appropriate
A practical recording table
| Date | Subject and task | Standard time | Barrier observed | Extra time used | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 September | English critical essay | 45 min | Slow written production; final section incomplete | 11 min | Completed independently |
| 3 October | English textual analysis | 60 min | Required additional time to record final answers | 14 min | Completed all questions |
| 21 October | History source question | 30 min | Response incomplete at standard time | 8 min | Completed response |
| 7 November | Mathematics assessment | 50 min | Slow recording of explanations | 7 min | Completed all questions |
This evidence suggests that the learner may need:
- approximately 25% in English
- approximately 25% in History
- approximately 15% in Mathematics
The table does not need to be lengthy. It needs to be specific.
Writing meaningful teacher comments
Poor comment
Jamie has dyslexia and needs 25% extra time.
This gives a diagnosis and a percentage but does not explain the barrier or how the amount was determined.
Better comment
During three timed extended-writing tasks, Jamie completed approximately three-quarters of each response within the standard time. When allowed to continue, Jamie required between 12 and 16 additional minutes per hour to complete the work independently. A 25% allowance has been trialled routinely and is sufficient.
Poor comment
Uses extra time in assessments.
This only records provision.
Better comment
In a 50-minute Chemistry assessment, Morgan had completed eight of ten questions when standard time ended. Morgan used seven additional minutes to complete the remaining questions independently. Similar patterns have been recorded in two further assessments, indicating that approximately 15% additional time is sufficient.
Poor comment
Educational Psychologist recommends 25%.
A professional recommendation may form part of the evidence profile, but it does not replace current classroom evidence.
Better comment
The Educational Psychologist's report identifies slow processing. Current evidence from four class assessments shows that Erin consistently requires between 10% and 15% additional time to read, process and complete the questions. Fifteen per cent has been used successfully during normal classroom assessment.
Internal assessments
For internal assessments, schools should consider whether completion within a specified time is part of the assessment requirement.
Where timing is not part of the standard being assessed, the school may be able to manage the task over a longer period.
Where performing the task within a specified time is an assessment requirement, the centre must ensure that any adjustment:
- is appropriate for the learner
- does not compromise the assessment standard
- is supported by evidence
- is approved by SQA where approval is required
The same principles apply:
- identify the barrier
- trial the support
- gather evidence
- determine the amount required
- record the decision
External assessments
For timed external examinations, the amount requested through the Assessment Arrangements Request system should accurately reflect the learner's assessment needs.
Schools should hold evidence showing:
- why extra time is required
- how the learner's difficulty affects timed work
- that extra time is part of normal classroom practice
- how the percentage was determined
- that subject-specific demands have been considered
Absolute precision may not always be possible, but the centre should be able to explain why the requested amount is reasonable.
Avoiding over-allocation
More time is not always better.
Too much extra time may:
- cause fatigue
- increase anxiety
- reduce concentration
- encourage excessive checking
- unnecessarily extend the school day
- create an unfair advantage
- make examination timetabling more difficult
Over-allocation can also hide the need for a more appropriate arrangement.
For example, a learner who cannot access written text may receive 25% extra time but continue to struggle. Text-to-speech may remove the barrier more effectively and allow the learner to work within the standard time.
The aim is not to provide the maximum amount possible.
It is to provide the amount needed.
A percentage should never be inherited
Avoid carrying an allowance forward automatically because the learner:
- received it in primary school
- received it at National 5
- received it in another subject
- had it recommended several years ago
- used it in a previous examination diet
- has always been listed as receiving it
Needs and assessment demands can change.
A learner moving from National 5 to Higher may face:
- longer papers
- more extended writing
- more complex source material
- different response formats
Equally, the learner may develop greater independence or begin using technology that reduces the need for extra time.
Review the evidence at the current level and in the current subject.
Common mistakes
"Dyslexia means 25% extra time"
No diagnosis automatically leads to a particular percentage.
"Everyone receives the same percentage"
A blanket allowance ignores individual and subject-specific needs.
"They used all the time, so they need it"
This is not sufficient evidence. The school must show that the learner's identified difficulty prevents timely completion and that the specific amount is appropriate.
"The prelim proves it"
A prelim can contribute useful evidence, but one assessment should not be the entire evidence base.
"The Educational Psychologist specified the percentage"
Professional advice can inform the decision. The school remains responsible for determining whether extra time is appropriate in each subject and how much is needed, based on current evidence.
"Extra time will reduce their anxiety"
It may—but it may also extend the period of anxiety. Trial the arrangement and record its effect.
"More time cannot cause harm"
Longer assessments can be tiring and may disadvantage learners with reduced concentration, pain, fatigue or anxiety.
A simple decision process
Five-minute checklist
Before recommending extra time, check:
- We have identified the specific barrier.
- The barrier affects completion of timed assessment.
- Extra time is more appropriate than another arrangement.
- The learner uses extra time during normal classroom work and assessment.
- Evidence comes from more than one task.
- We have recorded the standard time and additional time used.
- The chosen percentage is supported by evidence.
- Subject teachers have contributed to the decision.
- Different assessment demands have been considered.
- The learner has been involved in reviewing the arrangement.
- The amount is sufficient but not excessive.
- The arrangement does not compromise the assessment standard.
Key messages
- Extra time addresses an evidenced difficulty completing timed assessment.
- It is not automatically provided because of a diagnosis.
- The percentage should be determined through classroom evidence.
- The amount may differ between subjects.
- Using all the time offered is not sufficient evidence of need.
- Extra time is different from supervised breaks and rest periods.
- Another arrangement may remove the barrier more effectively.
- Too much extra time may disadvantage the learner.
- Decisions should reflect current need and normal way of working.
- The right allowance is the minimum amount that reliably removes the identified disadvantage.
Continue reading Gathering Good Evidence for practical ways to record timed tasks and Choosing the Right Assessment Arrangement to compare extra time with other forms of support.