Attendance

There seems to be some confusion here caused by the "we're the customer" attitude. Just because you pay your fees doe not entitle you to a degree. You need to meet the requirements of the particular course - the payment is for tuition and use of facilities - if you choose not to take advantage then that's your concern. For many years many academic bodies have charged fees and the law is quite clear - all that's changed is the level of fee charged nothing else. Many learned societies charge fees in exactly the same manner.

It's also the case (often not realised by students) that you need to have a certificate (usually generated internally and so not seen by the student) that indicates you've met all the requirements to sit the examinations of the university. In many, many universities this includes a minimum attendance level. Fail to meet the minimum attendance levels and many universities will refuse to allow you to sit the exams and therefore pass the unit. This is one of the consequences of first year students being told their first year doesn't count. It does and every year in every university there are students that find this out the hard way by having to pay a not inconsiderable fee to resit examinations.

I iron out confusion with the internet and books. If you prefer a lecturer, then that's fair enough - like I said, it depends how much you prefer independent working.

As for "fresh perspective", do you honestly think that anything an undergraduate student (especially one in 1st/2nd year) comes up with in a tutorial is going to be original or academically worthwhile? There are masses of journals and books written by academics who have spent their lives researching the topics that you discuss in these tutorials - so yes, relative to them, your fellow students are completely clueless.

I like independent working too, however sometimes when your're reading it takes ages to find someone in a book or journal who's going to put what you're stuck on in nicer terms compared to simply asking about it in a lecture.

Yes, I really do. Someone in class can make an interesting point and they you can say "hmm let me go see if there's research on that". They may be first years and not experts but they still have opinions on the literature being studied. Maybe it depends on the field but in essays you don't just spurt out journal articles, for the higher marks you must discuss and critique what you've read and other students opinions can help that. Thirty minds with different ideas can really make you think different.

Also no offence, your way suits you and that's great. Problem is if you were at my uni and your attendance went below 70% you would lose your academic right to have your work marked

I never said you didn't. I said it depends on the extent you like it. All you're doing is pointing out the subjective nature of this topic, which I've already stated.



I disagree.



Of course, the OP should check his university's rules.

I disagree.

The key point is attendance at many institutions is a formal requirement of sitting university examinations - clearly stated in the second paragraph.

Which doesn't dispute our normative claim that it shouldn't be. Clearly expressed in my entire post.

Yet and at the same time, I think you're creating a false vision of the average person who misses lectures. They are not generally - I would suspect - people who thrive on independent work and achieve highly. I would expect that the majority of those who miss a lot of lectures actually don't do work outwith class to make up and achieve poorly. Or, at least, less well than they would have if they had attended all the lectures.

There's an arguable case for saying that is a matter for the individual. However, as significant sums of taxpayers' money are spent on students it would seem to me to be reasonable to require they attend.

Whilst I agree that lectures with large groups of people are generally useless, you cannot debate with articles or textbooks. I assure you, you are not so intelligent that every one of your views is incapable of improvement through debate with fellow students; albeit that perhaps only a limited number of students will know the material well enough to debate you.

Would you care to be more specific? If you are discussing a journal article will you at least agree that you are bound by your own thoughts/culture/preservations which could prevent you from looking at it differently? However, someone from your lecture who has had a different experience has a different way of looking at the world. How is what I'm saying that much different from academics getting their work reviewed by others who are similarly knowledgeable about the work?

Sorry I've taken this so far, I just really believe there is a benefit to attending lectures, not that it is anyway superior to independent studying but that it compliments it nicely.

You're missing my point, which is that my views are better improved (in terms of grades achieved) through the views of experts, not students.

There is no way of accurately monitoring attendance in classes over 100

The point is being missed here - it's not about the impact of differing learning styles which are variable and something I have never challenged.

The op asked about attendance at lectures and the view of institutions. Having spent his weekend chasing students who'd missed seminars/lecturers and having seen students excluded from university because of non-attendance, the simple fact is that in many institutions missing lectures/seminars can have serious implications. It can also mean students are not entered for examinations. I am concerned that some students could read this and think their non-attendance might not matter. In many universities it does and can have very serious consequences.

After I look at a journal article, another article about that topic will open up new perspectives. The way in which your student-lead example is different to the academic world is that the latter are experts who you can reliably cite in a piece of work or an exam, unlike a student. The chances of an undergraduate ever coming up with anything original is too slim to warrant me turning up everyday. The copious resources provided by books and journals will always allow for a first class answer; it just depends on how much independent study you're willing to put in. I agree they can compliment each other at times but, on average, lectures are superflous and too basic to ever significantly help your grades. To me, it's just like the argument against creative writing courses, i.e. you'll learn a lot more about writing from reading the works of those who can write, rather than being taught the difference between homodiegetic and heterodiegetic narrative or how to structure a novel. Just read...

Hmm sort of understand what you mean now, for example, if you read an article about the feral child Genie you would then go and read articles about how people criticised that study etc etc. That works I suppose for big things like that but for more obscurer focuses/ or new research (often needed for higher grades) people haven't gotten round to criticising that at all. That's what I've found anyway and no amount of old books or research can help you there. I still think your underestimating what a good ole debate can do but hay ho

The regulation of attendance at university is nothing short of ironic. We are continually told from highschool upwards that we need to improve our independent research to prepare for the rigours of university. In reality, however, university is no less spoon-fed than A-levels. We are taught exam technique, given a syllabus and past papers, ordered to attend lectures where powerpoint slides are read off, and tutorials where lecturers become teachers, group study and group assessment is forced upon us, and there is a general feeling that students believe their lecturers should be getting a 2.1 for them.

I agree with you completely there. That's all political though isn't it? So that the university has something to through at you if you mess up. I mean, God forbid if you ever mess up and you have to appeal they can use that attendance sheet to throw at you. I rarely have exams and they aren't much, 10%, 20% of one module, my course is predominately essay based. I love that about the course. I feel in exams you just memorise and spew things out when the time comes (whole other debate here), with essays you can really do research and get into the depth of something. No syllabus or exam technique to help you there just an obscure question and a ton of journals.

Maybe the solution to the saturated graduate market is to stop this notion of universities being degree factories. If independent research was actually predominant at university then the amount of people coming out with a 2.1 would be far less.