Earlier today I was approached by a student who is also on the Advertising and Journalism BA course. They asked me what we'd been doing in the lectures. I soon discovered that this young person had failed to attend any of the lectures and seminars for the Introduction to Advertising unit. My attempt to discover why they'd not been at the lectures and seminars failed to elicit a coherent response.
I advised this person that they'd better see the lecturer pronto as we begin the assessment presentations on Monday. I also recommended that they find some meaningful reasons for their unexplained absences. The lecturer in question is already doing her utmost to induce the students to attend her lectures and is unlikely to be forgiving of someone who just hasn’t bothered to turn up. It hardly demonstrates a serious commitment to the course.
Frankly, I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. Surely such a lack of attendance should have attracted the attention of the university authorities? I was under the impression that failing to attend three lectures/seminars in a row would result in a warning letter being sent out (both to the student and the student’s parents). Maybe the university authorities are reticent to pull the plug on slacker students as it might hurt the university financially?
This kind of behaviour doesn’t do anyone any favours. If it is prevalent amongst the student body then the damage that could be inflicted on the university’s reputation would also affect those studying with the university. But what would happen if the university authorities started a crackdown? How many of these ersatz students would just throw in the towel and leave? Would that be a bad thing in the long run? Especially if it led to a rise in the quality of the student body?
No comments:
Post a Comment