It seems fairly intuitive to us; if someone is teaching a section for a particular course, it's probably a good idea for that person to attend the lectures for that course. Attending the lectures just might make a teaching fellow (TF) a more effective discussion leader and enable him or her to integrate sections more into the course as a whole.

Recently, the Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) considered a proposal that would require teaching fellows to attend the lectures for the courses they teach. This proposal, along with another proposal allowing instructors to excuse TFs from lectures under certain circumstances, will be voted on by the Faculty Council.

We believe that requiring TFs to attend lectures is a good idea. We urge the Faculty Council to vote in favor of the stronger proposal.

The benefits of having TFs at lectures should be fairly clear. Teaching fellows who attend course lectures will have a better idea of which concepts to focus on and which ones to spend less time on. They will be aware of any changes in the way that professors teach the material at hand.

Teaching fellows who attend lectures will have a better sense of how the section can complement, rather than rehash, the lectures. In addition, they will be better able to explain any ideas that were unclear in lecture. How can a TF clarify an incomprehensible lecture if he wasn't even at the lecture?

One could argue that some TFs, if forced to attend lectures that go over material they know backwards and forwards, won't get any benefit from going. Instead, they will be bored and will fall asleep. But we believe that it is far better for TFs to fall asleep in lecture than to fall asleep at home.

Admittedly there will be a certain amount of flexibility when it comes to enforcement this rule. Certainly some courses are less in need of having TFs attend every lecture than others. If some-one is teaching an introductory course in a discipline where there are only a few basic ways of approaching the material, perhaps having TFs at each and every class meeting would not be necessary.

The merit of the proposed change is that by requiring attendance but leaving enforcement to professors, it places the decision about the necessity of TF attendance in the hands of professors. The proposal achieves an important goal; it removes non-attendance at lecture as a possible bargaining chip in the negotiations between professors and the TFs they want to hire. It sends the strong message that attendance at lectures is something that is required of TFs, not something that is above and beyond their duty.

As Professor of History James Hankins stated, "If you're being paid to teach the course, you ought to show up. As I understand it, the argument is if I want to hire this good TF, I have to offer non-attendance at lecture. I don't think that should be part of the equation."

We agree that granting TFs permission to skip out on lecture should not be available as a possible concession for professors to make in order to secure the best TFs available. We hope the Faculty Council approves the proposal to make attendance at lecture mandatory for TFs.