College is often framed as the bridge between adolescence and adulthood, but how much should professors “step in” to guide student behavior along the way? In this episode, we dig into the economics of teaching choices: attendance policies, deadlines, nudges, and classroom rules. We reflect on how these decisions affect student outcomes and engagement, and whether support in the short run may come at the cost of long-run independence.

In this episode, we discuss:

* What paternalism looks like in college classrooms

* Should attendance be required in higher education?

* How paternalistic policies affect learning and engagement

* Trade-offs between student freedom and faculty expectations

* Whether “hand-holding” helps or hinders student success

* And a whole lot more!

Catch up on some old episodes:

You can also subscribe to us on Spotify, TuneIn Radio, Amazon Music, and Apple Podcasts. If one of these is your go-to podcast service, be sure to rate us and subscribe!

Some show notes:

It’s early December, and the semester is just about coming to an end at Virginia Tech and Susquehanna. Jadrian opted for a Prickly Pear Fruit Beer from Shiner, while Matt went with a Voodoo Ranger Juice Force Hazy Imperial IPA in a small 7.5 oz can. Matt’s was high in ABV but “efficient.”

We kicked off this episode with a new game, and it might just become a regular segment. One of us brings a specific number from a recent news story, and the other has to guess what it represents. Jadrian chose a stat from a new survey on whether adults think college is worth the cost, while Matt focused on gains in the S&P 500. Let us know what you thought of the segment in the comments!

We’ve touched on paternalism before, but this felt like the right moment to give it a full episode. As the semester winds down, we naturally start asking which policies should stay and which should change next term. A lot of those decisions come down to how much we should shape student behavior. Take attendance, for example. Should professors require it, track it, and tie it to grades? Or is it enough to show up, teach well, and let students make their own choices?

From there, we expand into a broader design challenge. Every classroom policy (e.g., attendance, phone or laptop bans, email rules, assignment deadlines) is a lever that nudges behavior. Jadrian shares his use of Friday night deadlines as a way to protect students’ weekends and reduce procrastination. It’s a deliberate nudge that some students dislike at first but often come to value by the end of the course (he thinks!).

Matt frames these choices as a kind of mechanism design problem: how do we build classes that support learning and accountability, without overwhelming students? And how do we balance short-term support with long-term independence? There’s also a practical question of whether being too hands-on now ends up leaving students unprepared for less flexible environments after graduation.

We also zoom out to look at institutional choices, like Susquehanna’s common lunch hour on Tuesdays and Thursdays. That break in the schedule encourages students to eat, meet with faculty, and build community. Even small decisions like that carry a bit of paternalism baked in.

We don’t land on a one-size-fits-all answer. But we agree on this: every classroom rule, even something as simple as a deadline or device policy, is an economic choice. Whether intentional or not, it shapes how students behave and what they learn about navigating structure.

This week’s pop culture references:

Jadrian passed on his pop culture pick this week to keep the conversation going about Susquehanna’s campus-wide lunch break. But Matt came prepared with a clip from Jadrian’s favorite show (Parks and Recreation) where Leslie Knope argues for a soda tax to reduce overconsumption in Pawnee.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit econhappyhour.substack.com