Attendance is King ... Long live the King. (23rd Mar 2012)

Unfortunately, there are several problems with this idea. First, some would achieve regardless of the quantity of teaching they received. It is a rumour put around by us teachers that learning only happens when we are there (making us indispensable). Some have access to alternative sources, such as parents, siblings and their social network. However, there is a category that is often overlooked, the self-starters. These learners are just interested and will acquire knowledge despite their surroundings.

So maybe we have a linear graph where the slope has decreased, but the shape is still the same, like this:-

Another problem is that the syllabus is set so that a proportion of learners will fail despite their attendance. Whether they take the SATs tests, GCSEs, A'Levels or degrees, the bar is placed where some cannot reach it in time. That is what makes the qualification worthwhile - the Didn't-I-Dun-Gud Principle. This lowers the end point, so the line becomes shallower again, maybe like this:-

Now, let's tackle the linear nature of the graph. This assumes that every 1% increase there will be the same increase in achievement all along the line. It is reasonable to assume that early increments in attendance will have more effect than later ones. For example, a rise in attendance from 10% to 20% would probably cause a bigger rise in achievement than a rise from 80% to 90%. The marginal productivity decreases as attendance improves. We therefore end up with a graph like this:-

Again, the argument was started at the left-hand end. Let's now pay attention to what happens on the right. The previous argument assumes that there will be an increasingly small advantage to the improving attendance, but achievement will always improve as attendance goes up. However, this may not be the case. There may be a time when those forced (and I do mean forced) to attend will really resent being there and will do what they can to disrupt learning. They will seek to affect those who have just been added to the attenders. You may argue that this is a classroom management issue, but it extends well beyond the classroom. Yes, there will be paper throwing, pulling of hair and general rowdiness (those Masters students can be a real problem) all of which detract from the teaching and take time to be managed. That time is lost for each person in the class, so a 5 minute incident with one student loses two hours of teaching in a class of 24. Then there is the time needed to get back up to speed - the recap may take another, say, 2 1/2 minutes losing another classroom hour.

More insidious is the de-motivation that happens outside the classroom. The social pressure to do something else, to concentrate on things other than education. This would also lead to a drop in achievement. Therefore, the net effect is that as attendance approaches 100% the achievement will drop rather than increase. This means that the shape of the curve becomes:-

This may sound as if some should be encouraged not to attend and surely that is anathema to those in teaching. Well, yes and no! I am in teaching because I can see the benefits this brings to an individual. However, I am realistic enough to want to maximise achievement rather than attendance. If this means that some are removed from the process then that is fine by me.

You may think this heartless and cruel. Surely, giving up on people is the opposite of what I came into education to achieve - but that is only the short-term view. I would not give up on anyone. This may not be the time in their life that is right for learning. By forcing the issue I may be putting them off education forever. It may be a better tactic to give someone space - let them go out to work and see why their education is important - than trying to force everyone into the same pattern.

The actual shape of this curve will depend upon factors such as the age, social and level profile of the group. It will also depend upon the teacher - we can all think of teachers whose classes we would have preferred to avoid.  A effective teacher is one who moves the whole curve upwards.

Now, let's make the final change to the graph.  If we use absence instead of attendance and failure instead of achievement then the curve swaps over to become a standard J-curve as used in other social sciences such as economics and sociology.  Therefore, its final form would be:-

* Attendance is a proxy for the amount of productive time in class and is affected by punctuality, the ability of the teacher to keep the students on task, etc..