3 ms·

If students are able to learn material on their own then I really can't understand why they should be forced to attend. If they don't attend and can't learn th

• duck 16y ago
  I agree, but I never had a problem when some of my smaller classroom courses took attendance. In that setting there was a value added that even if you passed the class without going you missed a lot. However, lectures (which this article addresses) in general never added any addition value over the material, so this seems pointless.
  • Robin_Message 16y ago
    A lecture is a one-way process, so the it's up to the student if the lecture is worthwhile for them or not. If it's not, they shouldn't attend. If no-one attends, the lecturer needs training/putting out to pasture. Like you say though, it makes sense for a class where you are expected to participate, since then you will be teaching and learning from the other students as much or more than the teacher. The problem here is you, the student, have become part of the value proposition of the class -- and the penalty against non-attendance is not the school penalising you for reducing your own learning, but a discouragement from reducing the learning of others, who the school promised a classroom full of smart peers.
• anamax 16y ago
  > If students are able to learn material on their own then I really can't understand why they should be forced to attend. Attendance is part of how the school gets paid. (No, the students aren't paying much of its expenses.)
• jules 16y ago
  In some countries the government pays the universities money to educate students. The universities only get money for students that complete the education.