Slashdot Mirror
RFID Checks Student Attendance in Arizona
The student newspaper at UW-Madison is running a piece about the use of RFID to check lecture attendance at Northern Arizona University. One poster to an email discussion list suggested that getting around this system would be simple if "all one has to do is walk into a classroom with 10 RFID-enabled cards in their pocket." "The new system will use sensors to detect students' university identification cards when they enter classrooms, according to NAU spokesperson Tom Bauer. The data will be recorded and available for professors to examine. ... [The spokesman] added the sensors, paid for by federal stimulus money, initially would only be installed in large freshmen and sophomore classes with more than 50 students. NAU Student Body President Kathleen Templin said most students seem to be against the new system. She added students have started Facebook groups and petitions against the sensor system. ... One of the most popular Facebook groups ... has more than 1,400 members." What are the odds that the use of tracking RFID will expand over time on that campus?
Come on now. These are adults. If they choose to skip class because they feel their time is better spent elsewhere, that's their business. If they're wrong, they'll be punished at exam time. No attendance checks are necessary.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
This comes from a scarcity, closed-system mentality: log and track access. Mostly people who still think this way have not been shown better ways.
They could have done it open: used the resources to video record the classes, and broadcast them on campus (They did this at Stanford when I was there). Students, if they find value in being in the classroom would go, otherwise they could watch the recorded version. Benefits for the students are time shifting, taking breaks as needed, and 1.5x speed playback are obvious examples. For the university, recordings create tools for distance learning, and open education initiatives. For everyone, building a more open approach builds goodwill, and can be used for dramatic marketing and PR advantage.
The whole essence of education works better when the student originates the driving motivation to learn. Putting in place systems that force learning on someone (for example, tracking attendance) while may seem to improve results short term, actually reduce success long term for the person.
At the college level...why bother? Seriously. These kids are paying for the privilege of being there, so if they want to sleep through or skip class, who is the school to say they shouldn't?
They get paid either way.
Sent from your iPad.
How is ordering RFID-backed ID card blanks putting federal cash to work on "shovel-ready" projects?
Let me guess....campus maintenance staff would've been fired over the summer if they didn't need to set up card readers at the door to a few classrooms? Does anybody believe this stuff anymore?
Come on now. These are adults. If they don't learn anything because they feel their time is better spent elsewhere, that's their business. If they're wrong, they'll be punished in their careers. No exams are necessary.
Sign up for my Facebook group, we're protesting this invasion of our privacy!!
(good god, I hope at least some of the older slashdot denizens see the irony in it)
You get your degree for passing, not attendance. Their passing of students is not contingent on their attendance necessarily.
Who cares if the consumer does not show up to receive the service he paid for?
While I'm not going to completely disagree with you, I think it's important to note that the notion that "the student is a customer" has some gotcha clauses.
Namely, at public universities (which are very common and typically have the largest student populations), a very large (usually a majority) portion of the tuition for in-state students is being subsidized by the government. Even tuition for out-of-state students is subsidized, though usually at a much lower rate.
In that regard, even though they're still paying something, suggesting that they are as a customer paying for the whole of their experience is misleading.
Also, a school has to have SOME standards, as the degree that they issue signifies to others some meaning about that person. Without that degree stating that the person has met some level of standards, the value of the degree for everyone holding it is diminished. Now whether or not those standards should extend to attendance is debatable, but there's plenty of justification for the university dictating terms which persons pursuing a degree must meet.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
And as a school, yes I have the responsibility to vouch that said student did actually come to the classes they claim they did when they show you that way overpriced framed piece of paper. Otherwise, I'm not better than some 2bit school selling degrees.
Really? That degree says you attended all your classes? Or just that you performed all the practicals and written exams to the satisfaction of the dean?
2bit schools selling degrees don't bother with exams.
Magic doesn't work in my presence. My power of disbelief is too strong.
With many students being denied entry into a particular college/university/etc. because they are at their supposed maximum capacity.. I, for one, would think it entirely that college/university's business to say "If you're not going to attend, gtfo - we'd rather have somebody who does." as a deterrent to future students who plan on low/no attendance.
I truly despise mandatory attendance. It forces students who don't want to be there to attend (remember the distracting assholes in K-12?). It punishes students who actually contribute when they are there, while others who do not contribute merely have to BE THERE. It is often used by professors who give boring lectures. As students, we should be allowed to manage our own time. I'm considering going into education (college level) and if I do, I will NEVER do this crap.
'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' - Mao Tse-tung
Yes, but we're talking about an American university here.
American universities aren't exactly places of learning, like they are in Europe and elsewhere. They're more like businesses in many ways. Students pay them huge sums of money, and in return they expect a piece of paper saying they've got certain "qualifications".
The actual learning part isn't really a priority for many students. They pay, they perform the minimum amount of work necessary, and expect to pass, even if they haven't actually learned the material or earned the qualifications that they seek. This is especially true for students who went through Bush's "No Child Left Behind" system, where failure is unheard of, even when students had absolutely no grasp of the material in question.
When professors do fail these students, the end result is often legal action against the university. Claims of "discrimination" are thrown against the university and the professors, and regardless of the outcome, the university ends up dealing with some bad publicity and legal costs. So it makes sense why they'd try to cover their asses, and at least have something to show the courts to indicate that the students in question didn't even bother to try to learn the material.
Seems schools considering this need to look over their core competencies to make sure education is one of them.
"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
I thought the point of post-secondary education was that attendance is optional, knowledge of course content is required, and verified by examination. Some of my profs were among the most brilliant people I've ever met. Sadly, a number of them had the personality and teaching skill of a venomous reptile. Forcing students into regular contact with them would have been regarded as a war crime in any civilized country on Earth.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Why not test "knowledge of subject matter" to check attendance?
I know most undergrad students still act like children, but the whole point of university is that that's where you start treating them like adults.
sic transit gloria mundi
I learn a lot from lectures. Others people don't. Requiring attendance is one way of forcing students to conform to a learning style that may or may not work for them.
Mandatory lectures, mandatory reading, mandatory practice problems, mandatory study groups.... By the time you get to college, you should already know how to learn.
Also, a school has to have SOME standards, as the degree that they issue signifies to others some meaning about that person. Without that degree stating that the person has met some level of standards, the value of the degree for everyone holding it is diminished. Now whether or not those standards should extend to attendance is debatable, but there's plenty of justification for the university dictating terms which persons pursuing a degree must meet.
That is what the tests, exams, and pojects are for.... The few exceptions I can see for this would be for things like "Public Speaking", or "Film History", "Directed Study in Voice", or other "performance" classes where being there is needed to actually do the work. For 101 level english lit, math/calculus, physics, chemistry, biology, etc., let them attend or not. The proof will be in the exams. I can tell you for a fact that I showed up to a total of 4 chemistry lectures and 2 biology lectures my Freshman year at college. My time was better spent elsewhere. I also received "A's" in both those subjects all Freshman year. You are now saying to yourself that I must have gone to a crappy college or something, but the reality was that I went to a VERY good High School and took all the AP level courses, I just didn't take the AP exam for college credit because the college I was going to would not accept AP credit for core classes, which as an engineering major, those were part of the core program, and were required to be taken at my college. Those classes were also a complete waste of my time.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
while may seem to improve results short term, actually reduce success long term for the person.
Trouble is the school doesn't have to care about the long term effects on their students.
why the continuous necessity to subvert the system?
The problem isn't in having the RFID system. It's the underlying reason that ended up requiring it. It's just a case of trying to fix mistakes with other mistakes. Basically, a poor class and semester planning by the teachers overloads the students so badly that they don't even have time to pee, let alone to themselves and to do homework. To aggravate the situation, a lot of students have to work to support not only themselves but their families. The day has only 24 hours and you need to sleep at least eight (which none of them do). Where do they get the time? From the classes, so they end up doing all the work in class time and attending only the final exams. Hence the class presence rate drops.
Onda Technology Institute
How, precisely, do you 'support the troops'? Do you support them in that you hope they will come back alive? Do you support them in re-integrating into civilian life after discharge? Do you support them by hoping they win their battles? Do you support them in hoping they succeed in their mission?
Although different people would stress different items from your list, a straightforward person would list all of the above.
So by your own words, a straighforward reading of 'support our troops' implies supporting the mission. And you're confused why someone would want to say 'support the troops without supporting the mission'?
If you support the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq, say so. Don't use phrases that confuse concern for the welfare of solders & servicemen with approval of foreign wars.
The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
What point are you trying to make? There are only two American universities in the top 10, Harvard and Yale. Of the remaining eight, four of them are in the UK, one is in Japan, one is in France, and two are in Germany.
There are only two more American universities in the next 20, the University of Chicago and MIT. Of those remaining eight, one is in Hong Kong, two are in Japan, two are in Australia, one more is in Germany, one is in Switzerland, and one is in Italy.
So there are exactly 4 American universities in the top 20. That's pretty unremarkable, given the stature of the US.
Certainly, not every student is going to make it.
But if it takes an electronic leash to fill your classroom, you're doing it wrong. :-)
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."