Every semester in Indian colleges, the same anxiety resurfaces—not over exams, but over attendance. Students scramble to meet the 75% rule, professors chase signatures, and administrators issue warnings. But beneath this ritual lies a question that rarely gets asked: why does attendance matter so much in the first place?

The logic behind enforcing attendance is largely administrative, not educational. Institutions are bound by the University Grants Commission (UGC) and AICTE norms that demand minimum classroom hours for accreditation. Colleges need quantifiable proof that teaching has occurred—and attendance registers serve as evidence. It’s a system designed for compliance, not curiosity.

Pedagogically, teachers argue that learning is more than reading notes or passing exams. They believe exposure to discussions, debates, and lab sessions nurtures understanding. That’s true—but only when classrooms are truly engaging. The unfortunate reality is that many lectures remain one-directional, making attendance feel like a chore rather than an opportunity.

At its core, compulsory attendance infantilises adult learners. It assumes that a student must be forced to learn. In an era where knowledge is accessible on demand—from digital platforms to open courses—equating physical presence with intellectual growth feels archaic. A student who learns independently and........

© News18