How many times have we sat through long lectures physically present, but mentally exhausted or focused on studying something else entirely? At the same time, there is a student like us in the USA studying sincerely through recorded lectures and self-study resources because over there, mandatory attendance is often required mainly for practical sessions and clinical rounds.
Attendance policies usually exist to maintain discipline and accountability. One of my pharmacology professors often said that students abroad take huge educational loans and hence value the education they are receiving, whereas over here we are financially supported by our families, which is why if mandatory attendance did not exist, no one would show up. Although he was right to some extent, there are always two sides to a coin.
When attendance rules become too rigid, they create unnecessary stress without improving learning outcomes. Presence in a classroom does not always guarantee understanding. The bigger issue is not attendance itself, but how teaching is delivered and how learning is actually measured. Many professors like answers to be written word for word from the lecture they delivered. Many students have a tough time with rote learning but have an amazing practical understanding, which is what truly matters as a clinician.
Do you think strict attendance improves learning or there should be a stricter focus on practical competence ?
MBH/AB