Hey, that's me when I was a student! Precisely. And now let's hope that none of my students read this ;-)

Does the instructor of the more advanced course care about the student's understanding or the amount of work they put in to achieve it?

I think after setting a syllabus, you should stick to it. The rules of the class in terms of grading should have already been set up and you shouldn't treat certain students where you notice something like this differently to those where you don't. Saying that if a student manages to demonstrate a deep understanding of the material without passing, then it seems the syllabus is deeply flawed, and you should in the future adjust your syllabus in a way so that a deep understanding of the material correlates with academic success.

Not to be a wet blanket, but when you meet with the student as others have suggested, ask a couple of questions about the course material to be sure that deep understanding is really present. (I am dealing with a group of three cheaters at the moment.)

@PVAL You seem to place a high value upon obedience to the rules of a constructed system. A higher value than you place upon education. In situations where obeying the system detracts from the assumed goal of education, why should the system win out?

@otakucode: in the U.S. at least, part of the purpose of college education, since the 1950s or so, was to verify that the student is able to follow the rules at least enough to earn the degree. This is one reason that a college degree is meaningful in general, because it shows that the degree holder was able to show a certain amount of persistence and dedication over a lengthy period of time. Of course, learning about specific topics is also an important goal.

@otakucode, I think I stated something stronger than I meant to. There's something to be gained (in fairness) by adherence to the rules, and clearly something to be gained by not doing that. The thing I do feel strongly about that is that if this led to a student demonstrating (not just having) a deep understanding of the material failing a course should imply that the syllabus should be reworked significantly in between the end of this course and the next.

I think this question needs to specify on what you personally consider the grades to measure. Is it supposed to be about mastering the subject matter, or slavish adherence to bureaucratic rules? Once you specify that, the rest should be easy. FWIW, I believe homework is a cheap trick used by administrator who in an effort to spend even less money on teaching, outsource part of the education by essentially telling students to "figure it out" on their own. However, in my view I care only about learning the subject, not ancillary benefits like what @OswalVeblen points out.

Also, if this student is doing so well on exams, how is he getting a C? Are you assuming he will get 0 for a project that is 60% of the grade or something? Or do you think he will do very badly on the project even though he has such deep understanding?

I have seen a lot of answers here but why nobody suggests to just give him an reasonable deadline to give you the homework he missed? With or without penalty. You could even do that for all students...

@BenJackson I'll be the instructor for the follow-on course, and, at this stage, I think the student understands the material well-enough to continue on, and that is what matters the most to me (a concern I have, though, is that the word will get around that he was able to slide by without putting the same effort in as his classmates). I have no doubt that the best way to learn the material I'm teaching, for most students, is to do the homework, so I don't want to start going down the road of giving students the "get an A on the exam, and you don't need to do the homework" option. 1/2

Why? I don't think that the majority of students will fare very well under that policy. 2/2

@MadJack An alternative idea in that case: your department/university may allow a student to take a course he does not meet the pre-requisites for (passed class X with grade at least Y, here) with approval from the instructor. As such you could give the student the grade he legitimately earns according to your syllabus, but if you remain convinced he is capable of continuing on then tell him that you would be willing to give him this approval. Things would get more complicated if this course was a pre-requisite to many others, though.

Maybe you know a student who diligently makes homework but has trouble understanding and bring them into contact? I was once exactly like your student (except I just couldn't be bothered to work as I thought I didn't need it), and once I started doing homework together with a friend like that it worked great for both of us: he had the discipline (and didn't allow me to not show up), and I could explain things to him.

Rather than creating an exemption for him that circumvents the existing syllabus, why not extend it with a "mastery" exam that requires deep understanding of the relevant material (i.e. you don't throw 400 level material as a "mastery" requirement for a 300 course) Extend the ability to take this exam to all students in the class, and any of them that have actually grown intellectually in due course will have this additional opportunity to demonstrate as such and earn themselves "forgiveness" for not entering the class knowing all the answers.

I had several cources that were designed in this manner: the syllabus detailed the published components of the system, each evenly weighted. There would be an additional "mastery" exam on top of the syllabus that would be added to the course evaluation. Assuming four equally weighted grading components in the syllabus, the mastery exam would make the total set of scoring components number five but your grade would be an evaluation of the highest scoring set of four.

Looking over the answers, I see several people (quite reasonably) saying "stick to the syllabus or you'll end up in a mess of special-casing", and several others (completely correctly) pointing out that the point of the class is to learn the material, and homework is just a means to an end. Since both viewpoints have merit, it's worth combining the two: as you have clear proof that homework is not necessary to gain a solid grasp of the material, try revising the syllabus for next time and de-emphasizing it. (Obviously this won't help with this particular case, but it's a good idea long term.)

@BobBrown Symphony... When I read about this guy who does no homework and falls asleep in class yet gets top marks, my first thought was also shake him down for hidden iphones.

@MadJack i've been a student in that same position, but here teachers decide and can change gradings based on student performance, just wanted to share my experience. i'd talk with him to see how he thinks he is doing, explain the situation, and , if the result is positive ( the student is interested in the class but days only have 24 hours in this planet ) , offer a different grading system without homework always conditioned to good exam results. "if I see you do the effort I will make an effort, fail me and i won't bother again", as my teacher said.

When I was a student, a number of professors would schedule an extra optional exam with really hard problems that would allow you pass with the highest grade despite lack of homework, attendance, etc. I don't know anybody who would mind those—due to the nature of the problems (special cases of research problems, harder tasks from international competitions, etc.) if someone was able to pass it, it was clear that this person is on quite a different level than the rest. I don't know if your student is that bright and capable, but if he is, I think it is a solution worth considering.

@OwenBoyle I wasn't really thinking about something confrontational. During the meeting, the professor could ask about two or three homework problems. Right answer? "See how easy that was! Now write it down and hand it in." Wrong answers or no answers, however, should generate some probing. One approach: ask the student to re-take the last exam under supervision. The student who cheated will fail.

Ask yourself why you assign homework. Is it merely for the student's own benefit as practice? If so, why do you grade it? Would it be different if a student got straight As on the homework but failed all the tests? If so, why?

I have been this student. The instructor worked with me. I appreciated it and still do. However failing would have forced me to reevaluate my situation and confront some problems in my life a lot sooner. Having a talk with the student and pointing to the various time management, mental health, financial, and health services provided by the campus may be most beneficial.

Is it merely for the student's own benefit as practice? If so, why do you grade it? — To give the students feedback, of course.

I've been told by other faculty... Huh? You haven't determined the student's circumstances for yourself yet? The student currently displays a deep understanding of the material. Has he effectively already "passed" the course? Can the course be challenged?

The question refers to both labs and homework. Labs and homework are qualitatively different. If a student can do the exams, it probably implies that the student could have done the homework. If the student can do the exams, it doesn't imply that the student is competent in lab work. Lab work often requires writing and various higher-level reasoning skills that are not well measured by exams and homework.

Since your rules don't seem to match what you really want of students, you are going to need better rules.

Having been the student in a similar situation I would hope you would give him the grade he needed. I had a class where homework counted for nothing but you had to get at least 50% to pass the class. I ended up dropping with an A but one point from an F because of this--the homework was no problem, figuring out how to write enough elementary math (Calculus II was a prerequisite) to satisfy his show-work requirement was incredibly time consuming.

At the end of the day, a grade should represent mastery of the course. Your problem is that someone who seems to have mastered the course is getting a bad grade. IOW, your grading scheme is poorly designed. It does not reflect reality. Really, this question is "Should I fail this student because I failed at designing a syllabus?" The answer to that question is a loud "no".

As a former student, I really think you ought to rethink your grading rubric. Next semester, consider reducing or eliminating the effect on a final grade of the grade on your homework & lab assignments. 10% should be good enough. If you like, you can grade them on overall objective "effort" - how often do they come to office hours/how much time do they spend in your office? How deep of an understanding do they show on the exams and/or what they do turn in?

You can also tell your students you're willing to adjust their final grades if, like this student, they demonstrate an understanding of the material, and you have determined there is absolutely no way to get homework finished.

How about a somewhat different approach: Get an A on both tests and labs (thus demonstrating you understand the material) and homework won't be counted.

I'll just echo the importance of seeing circumstances where you want to break your rules as a hint that your rules are wrong. My concerns were inverted when I taught introductory writing; I cared more about students completing a high volume of work than getting it perfect--because I think my greatest function is to help them develop a writing process capable of handling a high volume of writing with multiple papers in different phases of development. I still felt bad about failing some smart students, but I could do so with the confidence that, regardless of reason, they hadn't met that goal.

Address the issue by having an open and clear grading policy that you set out at the start of the semester. For instance, "your final grade will be 60% exam scores, 30% homework scores, and 10% attendance". Then it's entirely the student's responsibility to decide if they want to go for an 'A' or a 'C'. That's not your decision to make or your problem to solve.

I guess the question you should ask is "what does a grade in my class mean?". Does it represent a student's understanding of the material? Or is it a mixture of their understanding and effort?

Over the years I have evolved a super-flexible teaching/grading scheme: I will set several take-home graded assignments, graded quizzes, midterm and final, in-class participation. I have a mathematical formula for the overall grade (announced in advance) which drops the worst grades for homework or quiz, keeps the better of midterm/final grade, and puts (for instance) 60/40 weights on the higher/lower components. This basically emphasizes students' strengths, allows them to miss some assignments without being killed for it, and they love it. I expel cheats from the course: there's always one.

In French universities there are legal mechanisms to exempt working students, students with children, and handicap students from attendance to classes and homework, while they are still required to pass all the exams as other students. Those are mostly smart, enterprising young men and women, seniors and even elder people, so they know what they are doing anyway. The decision is being made by the special commission based on documents provided by the student.

Your country or university might have this kind of laws or legal rules as well. This mechanisms would allow student in question to succeed despite his personal difficulties, while keeping your syllabus rules intact and freeing you from the burden of decision making.

The student signed up for the course despite their work obligations. That was the student's choice. As someone who has maintained a course schedule while working 50-115 hrs/wk, I accepted the consequences of my decisions and still managed to pass with a fairly high GPA. That often meant sacrificing sleep and family time. Those are choices the student must make for him or herself.

In the good old days they had Exams .The pass mark was 50% to make allowances for the human condition .You had to get 50 to pass .To stop people mucking around completely they had terms tests which along with certain attendance requirements meant that you had to "get terms" to be able to sit the final.Surely if somebody has passed the final they have reached the standard and should therefore pass the course.Maybe with all this terrible stuff about cheating which was virtually nonexistant in my time and place Acedemia should think about more emphasis on Exams .