After reading this article you can solve this UPSC Mains Model question:
Evaluate the impact of mandatory attendance policies on the quality of higher education in India. Suggest suitable reforms. (GS-2, Social Justice)
Context:
The Delhi High Court’s affirmation that law students may sit for examinations without satisfying rigid attendance thresholds has provoked predictable anxiety among administrators still tethered to an older, bureaucratised conception of education.
What Is Pedagogical Bankruptcy?
“Pedagogical Bankruptcy” refers to a systemic state where educational institutions have run out of meaningful ways to engage students, resorting instead to “policing” through mandatory attendance.
Features of the Pedagogical Bankruptcy:
1. Attendance as a Proxy for Performance
- The Facade of Learning: Marking a register creates an illusion of a functioning academic environment. However, if the student is physically present but mentally disengaged because the lecture is outdated or uninspiring, the “learning” is zero.
- Administrative Convenience: Institutions prefer rigid attendance rules because they are easier to quantify and “audit” than the complex, qualitative process of actual cognitive growth.
2. The Death of the “Intellectual Contract”
Traditionally, the relationship between a teacher and a student is an intellectual contract.
- Incentive to Teach: “Pedagogical bankruptcy” occurs when teachers no longer feel the need to innovate. If they know the room will be full due to a 75% rule, the incentive to deliver a compelling, high-quality lecture diminishes.
- Erosion of Agency: By treating university students (who are legal adults) like schoolchildren, the system erodes their ability to exercise intellectual agency—the capacity to decide how they learn best.
3. The “Banking Model” of Education
- Passive Deposits: Students are treated as “accounts” where teachers “deposit” information. Mandatory attendance ensures the “account” is open, but it doesn’t guarantee the “money” (knowledge) is being utilized or understood.
- Stifling Dissent: A coercive environment discourages students from questioning the relevance of the curriculum. If you aren’t there because you disagree with the teaching method, you are simply “penalized” rather than “heard.”
4. The “Invisible” Learning Gap
- Hybrid Realities: In an era of high-quality Open Educational Resources (OERs) and AI-tutors, a physical lecture that merely reads from a textbook is redundant.
- The Bureaucratic Trap: When the focus shifts to “managing the shortage of attendance,” the university transforms from a center of research into a clerical bureaucracy.
Causes of Pedagogical Bankruptcy:
1. The Infantilisation of Adult Learners
- Control vs. Competence: There is a misplaced belief that the administration must exercise maximum control to ensure learning. This “parental” approach assumes students won’t attend unless coerced, which destroys the Internal Motivation necessary for higher research.
- Lack of Agency: By removing the choice to attend, universities remove the student’s responsibility for their own intellectual growth.
2. Stagnant Teaching and the “Lecture-Heavy” Model
- The Stand-and-Deliver Method: Most Indian classrooms still rely on traditional stand-and-deliver lectures that have not modernized for decades. In the age of AI tutors and YouTube/OERs, a lecture that merely repeats a textbook is redundant.
- Faculty Disengagement: When attendance is guaranteed by a 75% rule, faculty members lose the competitive urge to make their classes engaging or relevant. The “captive audience” eliminates the feedback loop that should exist between teacher quality and student presence.
3. The “Audit Culture” of Bureaucracy
- Quantification Bias: It is easier for a university to measure a student’s presence (a tick in a register) than their cognitive leap. This results in an “Audit Culture” where the Record of Learning is prioritized over the Act of Learning.
- Administrative Convenience: Uniformity in attendance rules is administratively “tidy” but logically bankrupt. It ignores the difference between a theory-heavy history class and a hands-on lab or internship.
4. Environmental and Psychological Stressors
- The Infrastructure Paradox: Many urban colleges are single buildings with no “hangout” spaces or vibrant campus life. When the campus lacks “breathing room,” students perceive the classroom as a confinement cell.
- Mental Health Neglect: Rigid rules fail to account for the “Invisible Struggles”—students dealing with depression, burnout, or the need to work parallel jobs to support their families.
5. The “Rote-Exam” Nexus
- Credentialism: The system is built to produce “degree-holders” (credentials) rather than “skilled thinkers.” Since the final exam only tests memorization, the classroom becomes a mere “waiting room” before the exam, rather than a space for critical inquiry.
Consequences of Mandating Student Presence:
1. The “Covertly Lethal” Human Cost
- The Pressure Cooker Effect: Forcing students to prioritize “marking a register” over genuine intellectual inquiry or mental well-being has led to a crisis.
- Student Suicides: Landmark legal cases (like the Sushant Rohilla case, 2025) highlight that rigid attendance norms are a significant contributing factor to student suicides.
2. Legal Repudiation: The End of “Debarment”
- High Court Rulings (Nov 2025): The Delhi High Court ruled that no student should be debarred from exams solely for attendance shortage.
- Shift to Grade-Reduction: The court suggested a move toward “proportionality.” Instead of taking away a student’s academic year, institutions may now only apply a minor penalty (e.g., a maximum 5% mark reduction or 0.33 CGPA points) for low attendance.
- Constitutional Violation: Courts have begun viewing rigid 75% rules as a violation of Article 14 (Right to Equality/Reasonableness) and Article 21 (Right to Dignity/Life), especially when they don’t account for modern learning modes.
3. The “Employability Gap” and Innovation Crisis
- The “Stifled Explorer” Syndrome: When students are forced to choose between “attending a dull theory class” and “gaining practical experience,” they often choose the former to avoid debarment, resulting in graduates with degrees but no skills.
- Loss of Start-up Culture: Institutions with flexible attendance (like BITS Pilani) see higher rates of innovation. Bankrupt institutions produce “docile conformists” rather than the risk-takers needed for a knowledge economy.
4. Systemic Deterioration: “Disinterested Students, Indifferent Faculty”
- The Feedback Loop of Boredom: When attendance is guaranteed by law, faculty members lose the incentive to innovate. This leads to a “hollowed-out” classroom where students “zone out” and teachers “read out,” effectively erasing the learning.
- The “Dummy School” Culture: For school-level education (CBSE 2026), rigid rules have ironically fueled the “dummy school” industry, where students pay to stay away and study for competitive exams (JEE/NEET), further eroding the credibility of formal schooling.
Government Initiatives:
1. National Education Policy (NEP) 2020
- NEP 2020 marks a paradigm shift from attendance-based compliance to learning-outcome-based education.
- Emphasises student-centric, flexible and multidisciplinary learning, questioning the primacy of rigid attendance norms.
- Focus on critical thinking, discussion, research and experiential learning, not mere classroom hours.
2. Outcome-Based Education (OBE) Framework
- Higher education institutions are encouraged to assess students on competencies, skills and understanding, rather than time spent in classrooms.
- Learning outcomes, credits and performance matter more than compulsory physical presence.
3. Academic Bank of Credits (ABC)
- Enables flexible learning pathways, entry-exit options and accumulation of credits across institutions.
- Reduces the relevance of rigid attendance rules by recognising learning beyond a single classroom or semester.
4. Digital & Blended Learning Initiatives
- Platforms like SWAYAM, SWAYAM-PRABHA and virtual labs promote anytime, anywhere learning.
- Reinforces the idea that learning can occur outside physical classrooms, challenging attendance-centric education.
5. University Grants Commission (UGC) Reforms
- UGC has encouraged flexibility in curriculum delivery, online credits and innovative pedagogy.
- Supports autonomy of higher education institutions to redesign assessment and engagement methods rather than enforce uniform attendance rules.
6. Judicial Interventions & Rights-based Approach
- Recent court observations (including High Court rulings) underline that education quality cannot be ensured through coercive attendance alone.
- Reinforces a rights-based, learner-centric interpretation of education.
7. Focus on Teaching Quality & Faculty Development
- Government-backed initiatives promote faculty training, pedagogy reform and innovation in teaching, shifting responsibility from students’ attendance to institutional accountability.
The Way Forward: Moving to a “Wellness Model”
1. Shift from attendance-based control to learning-based accountability
- Replace rigid attendance norms with learning outcomes, participation and competency-based assessment.
- Measure what students learn, not how long they sit in classrooms.
2. Improve teaching quality and classroom engagement
- Invest in faculty training, pedagogy reform and interactive teaching methods.
- When teaching is engaging, attendance becomes voluntary and meaningful, not forced.
3. Flexible attendance frameworks
- Allow context-sensitive flexibility for higher education students, especially those with health, economic or personal constraints.
- Treat adult learners as autonomous individuals, not wards under surveillance.
4. Strengthen continuous and formative assessment
- Emphasise projects, presentations, discussions, tutorials and research work over end-term exams and attendance thresholds.
- This aligns evaluation with actual learning and critical thinking.
5. Leverage blended and digital learning
- Integrate online, hybrid and flipped classroom models to complement physical teaching.
- Recognise that learning can occur inside and outside classrooms, especially in higher education.
6. Align institutional rules with NEP 2020 spirit
- Universities should harmonise regulations with student-centric, multidisciplinary and flexible learning pathways.
- Attendance should be an enabler, not a gatekeeper to examinations.
7. Build trust-based academic culture
- Foster an environment of mutual trust between institutions, teachers and students, encouraging curiosity and responsibility.
- Move from a culture of punishment to one of intellectual motivation.
CONCLUSION:
Government initiatives increasingly recognise that meaningful learning flows from flexibility, autonomy and quality pedagogy, not from mandating physical presence—aligning higher education with constitutional values and NEP 2020 vision.
