I'm not sure what hypotheses you have, but I think everyone in the class benefits from a more enriching experience when every member is a full participant. I know when I was a student, I was keenly disappointed by the lack of enthusiasm displayed by some classmates, and that those who rarely showed up, left early or came in late detracted from the overall experience of everyone else. Enthusiasm can't be imposed or regulated, but attendance standards at least send the message that everyone's presence has value -- not just to themselves, but for the class as a whole. Nowadays, students who don't like sitting in a classroom can take on-line courses. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brett Magill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 4:02 PM Subject: TEACHSOC: 6-week absence: Confusing process with learning
> > Why the strong reaction against students who choose > not to come to class? I have a few hypotheses that I > will withhold. > > These are college students. They are responsible for > their own learning. Why not simply respond, "you may > choose to come to class or not, but the standards of > evaluation are the same for you as for any other > student." > > If the student can master the material without the > benefit of your lectures and participation in the > hands-on classroom exercises, then what difference > does attendance make? Why make college students jump > through hoops? If the student chooses not to attend > and fails, that too is their responsibility. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Teaching Sociology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/teachsoc -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
