90% of life is just showing up (Woody Allen?)

There may be a lot of wisdom to that old saw. But the other day I had a student ask if he would get a higher grade because he came to class so often. Granted, he was a rather desparate student toting a precarious class average, but what prompts such thinking?

There are a number of professors who use class participation as part of their evaluation. That makes perfect sense for those classes where meaningful, directed discussion, individually or in groups, is central to learning. Even for those of us that don't have a participation component in our grading, I suspect that most will indirectly and positively consider classroom contribution come grading time, especially in borderline situations. Yet there are a few that use a participation component as a "fudge factor" in their grading, or to create an incentive to students to participate. I don't think I really agree with those reasons, but who am I to say. Participation is a good thing, generally, but I'd rather encourage than require it, but to each his own.

I consider participation because I know that many students not only equate participation with contribution, but often see attendance as equivalent to participation. Now there is a strong argument that participation does not have to be behavioral but may be mental, and therefore difficult to measure in that sense. However, I think the real genesis underlying the student's assertion that attendance should be rewarded is that in many classes it is. I haven't encountered at our college actual points given for showing up, but I have seen syllabi from junior colleges where this is the case. What is more common is the use of the stick rather than the carrot, where a certain number of absences result in points lost. I find this practice repugnant, at least for the students that I deal with, which are almost all junior standing or older.

These kids are adults, or at least near-adults as college is a half-way house pending release into adulthood, and forcing them to attend under penalty of loss of grade seems demeaning. Now if their parents or someone else (like taxpayers) is paying for their education, then perhaps there is an argument that there is a responsibility to attend as someone else is paying the freight. But in those instances where students are financing the lion's share of their education, it's their money, their education, their life, and they can do what they want with it. Of course they'll do better if they attend, and it is generally the right thing to do. But it is their choice, and further instructors have at least some responsibility in trying to make it worth the student's while to attend. But to coerce the student through penalty for non-attendance smacks of big-brother or perhaps insecurity that students won't attend otherwise. Yes, we have a duty to mentor and educate, and some of that may be shaping attitudes and behaviors, but linking attendance to grading, especially for students on the scholastic back nine, is arrogant and heavy handed in my view, and externalizes rather than internalizes the value of attendance.

On the other hand, there are too many courses where showing up is pretty much all you need to do to get a good grade, but that's a discussion for another blog.