Abstract:

Student absenteeism has become an increasingly relevant issue in higher education, particularly in technically oriented institutions where traditional lecture-based teaching models remain prevalent. Understanding how and why students attend—or choose not to attend—classes is essential for evaluating teaching effectiveness, student engagement, and academic performance. In an academic environment where students have increasing access to alternative learning resources, the traditional assumption that physical presence equates to learning is no longer valid. Instead, attendance becomes a meaningful indicator of perceived instructional value. Moreover, absenteeism has significant implications at multiple levels. At the micro level, it affects individual learning outcomes and academic progression. At the meso level, it influences classroom dynamics, peer interaction, and the effectiveness of active learning methodologies. At the macro level, persistent absenteeism patterns may signal structural issues in curriculum design or pedagogical approaches.

Mindful of this issue, the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) has carried out a series of institutional satisfaction surveys, which provide detailed self-reported data on attendance patterns and their underlying motivations. Unlike administrative records, these data capture students’ perceptions of teaching quality and the value of in-class learning.

The findings indicate that absenteeism is not a generalized behavior but rather a selective and strategic one. While overall attendance rates are high—typically with 90–98% of students attending more than 75% of classes—there is a notable proportion (ranging from roughly 10% to over 40% depending on the center) of students who report attending less than 25% of classes in at least one subject.

This apparent paradox shows that students do not disengage entirely from their studies; rather, they selectively skip specific courses. Data reveal substantial variability across centers, for example, the Faculty of Mathematics and Statistics exhibits the highest level of selective absenteeism (around 43.6%), while the Vallès School of Architecture shows minimal levels (around 4.2%). Most other centers fall within an intermediate range of 20–30%, indicating a common institutional pattern with localized deviations.

According to the data, the primary drivers of attendance are linked to academic discipline and perceived pedagogical value. Students attend classes mainly because they help them keep up with coursework and better understand the material. Social interaction plays a secondary role. Conversely, the main reasons for absenteeism are dissatisfaction with teaching methods, preference for self-study, and the need to allocate time to assignments or exam preparation. Students seem to behave as rational agents optimizing their time.

These findings have significant implications for higher education teaching models. They challenge the effectiveness of traditional lecture-based approaches and highlight the importance of active, engaging, and high-value instructional design. Increasing attendance is not primarily a matter of enforcement but of enhancing the perceived usefulness and quality of classroom experiences. In conclusion, absenteeism at UPC should be understood as a structurally driven, context-dependent behavior rather than a symptom of student disengagement. We must work for the alignment between teaching practices and student learning strategies.

Keywords:

Higher education, STEM + Architecture, absenteeism.