What student representatives say about attendance

Updated Sep 07, 2026

Attendance records can show whether a student was present, but they cannot explain the decision on their own. Tom Lowe, Conor Naughton, Tania Struetzel, Rebecca Adams, Jessica Walker, Philip Kynaston and Colum Mackey explore students’ accounts in Why Are Students Not Attending In-Person Classes Post-COVID-19?, published in Active Learning in Higher Education on 19 September 2025.

Source scope: this briefing uses the publisher’s abstract and accessible indexed sections describing the context, participants and concluding recommendation. The complete paper could not be retrieved and has not been verified in full.

What the accessible evidence shows

The researchers worked with 40 student voice leaders, described as programme-level Student Academic Representatives, from three post-92 institutions. They explored perceived reasons for changing attendance in the post-pandemic context.

The authors report living costs as important to attendance decisions, alongside teaching quality and content. Their conclusion encourages institutions to investigate the issue with their own students rather than assume that a national explanation fits every course.

The sample provides the perspectives of representatives. It is not a representative survey of all students who miss classes, a count of why individual absences occurred, or an experiment comparing attendance policies. The reported themes should therefore guide enquiry rather than be treated as a causal diagnosis.

Questions for local enquiry

The following are editorial suggestions, not tested outcomes of the paper.

Invite students to describe a recent decision to attend or miss a session. Ask what made participation possible, difficult or worthwhile, leaving space for more than one reason. Check whether students who rarely attend can access the feedback exercise; a discussion held only in class may miss them.

Compare comments with timetables, participation coverage and the design of the sessions involved. A theme about costs could prompt a discussion of travel and scheduling. A theme about teaching could prompt a review of what students expected from a session and what they experienced. Neither theme alone proves the cause of absence.

Agree a small, testable change with the relevant programme team and students, then review both the experience and attendance data. Keep any evaluation separate from punitive judgements about individual motivation. Consistent comment categories can help compare feedback over time, provided the responding groups and questions are also understood.

FAQ

Were 40 students interviewed across the whole sector?

The accessible Participants section reports 40 student voice leaders at three institutions. That is a selected group, not a sector-wide sample.

Does the paper prove that better teaching or lower costs will increase attendance by a particular amount?

No such effect estimate is established by the evidence reviewed here. The paper reports perceived reasons and supports further local investigation.

Can comments identify why an individual was absent?

Only the person’s own account and appropriate follow-up can clarify their situation. Aggregate themes should not be used to assign motives to individuals.

Review note, 7 September 2026: clarified the accessible evidence and participant count, distinguished representative accounts from causal explanations, and removed unverified promises about attendance-policy changes.

Reference

Tom Lowe, Conor Naughton, Tania Struetzel, Rebecca Adams, Jessica Walker, Philip Kynaston and Colum Mackey (2025). “Why Are Students Not Attending In-Person Classes Post-COVID-19? An Explorative Study in Student Engagement.” Active Learning in Higher Education. Publisher article.