Of course going to school in the late 1960s and early 1970s the buildings might not have been open at midnight, and of course to put that deadline in someone had to be there to timestamp the work. so it was more likley the first class of the week that was the deadline (because it was less trouble for the prof that way) It is actually hard to see the advantage of midnight to 8am the next day, which in the days of physical paper having to be handed in made life easier all around (all be it with less sleep in some cases)
I'm responding to the first reply, since there was an avalanche of dissenting opinion, lol! OK, OK - I cry uncle!
FWIW, I got my engr grad degree within the past five years, so the world was well into the wired age. I was also working full time. However, I was only taking one course at a time, year-round. Took me four years. If I had been taking two at a time, it would not have been possible.
I take nothing away from anybody who said "pshaw!', and recognize that my experience is anecdotal (N=1). However, I did witness 40% of my entering class drop out because of the circumstances I cited.
I was not exaggerating: one course at a time was a 45 hour weekly slog outside of class. Would not have been possible to do two classes at a time. The last 18 mos was totally consumed with the capstone project, which meant at least that classwork was over with.
Thanks to everybody for your give and take on my "throwing down the gauntlet" assertion - very valuable.
I will note that undergrad engr degrees are at least as bad for most. I read somewhere (no cite - apologies - don't have time to look it up) that the typical engineering undergrad degree in the 2010s era takes six years - not four. I attribute this entirely to the workload.
But, if you like knowing how things work, there's no getting away from getting that foundation.
Thanks to all! Cheerio, Jane