<p>I took an undergraduate level class at Umich which met twice a week, and the professor arranged that one of those days each week a different group of students would give a presentation to teach a section of the course, and she didn’t come to class. She missed a lot of her days to teach, too, and when she did teach she was very unorganized. The class seemed like a lot of pretty inaccessible information thrown together willy-nilly that we had to figure out what to do with ourselves. One day she had her husband come in to teach instead, who I guess was supposed to be qualified to teach and did teach a different course at the university, but the whole thing was just bizarre.</p>
<p>We all must have done pretty terribly because I was expecting to fail the course and ended up with a B+. I felt really cheated by this class, I’d taken it for a reason and I didn’t learn a single thing. But, I was failing it-- if I’d gotten to just not go to class and still learn the material and get a good grade, I probably would have been okay with that. I had classes like that, too. If I were the parent in the equation I would probably feel just the same as you do, but in my classes the lectures really supplemented the reading in most cases, not the other way around, so if the reading was adequate I don’t know that I’d feel more than a passing irritation with the prof-- as a student I was too busy to worry about getting my moneys worth in principle, I just wanted the knowledge and the credits and to move on. So, I get your D’s attitude, too, if she is learning the material. I know it’s difficult to imagine you could really learn the material from reading as well as you could from a lecture, but I think I only took a handful of profs at Michigan that were so good they were better than the books. Sad but true.</p>