Are teacher evaluation systems fair and effective?

No

1 of 4

by Rebecca Williams

• 

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

Almost every student or teacher has had some experience with student evaluations of teaching. But are these evaluations a good basis for judging teaching ability? Are they even relevant? What makes a student an expert on teaching? Not only are student evaluations of teaching based on a false assumption, but the results of such evaluations are not necessarily representative of a teacher's ability and should not be used to determine job status.

Firstly, evaluations are based on comparisons. Not many students take the same class over and over with different teachers. Ergo, they have no basis for comparison. How can a student evaluate a teacher's performance in teaching a class if they have not taken that class, or even that subject, previously? Even if they had the same teacher, there would be some basis for comparison: how did he or she do compared to previous semesters? In universities, where the practice of student evaluations is so common (McPherson and Jewell 868), students are often in the situation of taking a class they could not or would not take in high school - a class on a subject matter with which they have no previous experience. Still, the student is expected to evaluate each of these instructors for each of these classes.

Secondly, student evaluations assume that the student knows something about how to teach. Some students, such as those majoring in education or with close relatives working or majoring in education, undoubtedly know at least something about how a teacher should teach; most students have nothing more than a personal preference and, possibly, knowledge of his or her own learning style. I have had at least one teacher that the rest of the class claimed could not teach - and I learned from that class and thought the teacher did a good job. Considering the variance of preference and the efforts of modern day teachers to incorporate all learning styles, should we trust data based on such flimsy support?

Some would argue that student evaluation of teaching forms ask questions that require no comparison to previous experience in classrooms teaching the same subject or knowledge of teaching methods in current use. This may be so. In this case, we can assume that students are reliable sources of information for how well a teacher teaches. If the questions are all based entirely on one semester of experience, all based on teacher leadership or how instructive the class was, we may assume the student knows what he or she is talking about. My only questions are "Teacher leadership as compared to whom?" and "How do you know how much you know about a subject as compared to how much there is to know?" It is possible on many subjects to learn a lot and still barely brush the tip of a massive iceberg - history is an example.

However, even should we choose to ignore the faulty foundation of the argument for student evaluations, there are issues with student evaluations of teaching still to be addressed. According to Michael A. McPherson and R. Todd Jewell, factors such as teacher race, age, and tenure status unduly influence students on these evaluations (879). Some teachers, specifically David Holmberg as he explains in his New York Times article on the subject, are emotionally hurt by the comments on these evaluations. Also, James S. Pounder argues that "there is considerable disagreement in the literature on the link between SET [Student Evaluations of Teaching] scores and student achievement" (178-179). Given this evidence, can we still in good conscience use student evaluations as a basis for teacher job status?

Before answering that question, let's examine the evidence more closely. McPherson and Jewell argue that, while student evaluations are not entirely worthless, the scores ought to be adjusted (868). They claim that their research shows that students tend to give white teachers higher scores than non-white teachers, younger teachers higher scores than older teachers, tenured teachers higher scores than non-tenured teachers, and higher scores to teachers who artificially inflate students' expected grades. According to their results, rankings of teachers change, sometimes drastically, when adjustments are made for these and other factors. For example, in an experiment where race, tenure, and expected grade were treated as equal for all instructors, one instructor went from a ranking of 10th out of 17 to 1st out of 17, another from 1st to 7th, and still another from 9th to 4th (McPherson and Jewell 877). There were only three instructors to retain identical rankings in this experiment: those in 2nd, 16th, and 17th place out of seventeen (McPherson and Jewell 877). If not conclusive evidence that student evaluations are not a good idea, this data should at least give those powers to be pause for thought when they make decisions about teachers' jobs based on student evaluations of teaching.

Some teachers are emotionally distraught by comments made on student evaluation forms. Who can blame them? They are only trying to do their job, and students tear them apart for the silliest things - like a New York Times editor using that newspaper in his journalism classroom (Holmberg). It may be the world's most liberal newspaper, but it still contains examples of good journalism. The students in this class clearly evaluated based on materials used by the teacher, not the method of teaching, how much material was covered, or even the teacher's leadership. It is difficult, but possible, to put aside personal views to learn writing skills from an example that contradicts those views. In other words, these students used poor criteria for their evaluations - such evaluations should not be considered by the administration.

A well-researched paper entitled "Is Student Evaluation of Teaching Worthwhile?" was written by James S. Pounder. He uses well supported evidence to come to the conclusion that, at least in their current form, student evaluations of teaching have a "questionable" worth (186). If their worth is "questionable" at best, easily swayed by factors over which the teacher has no control, why do we waste class time doing them? The best answer to that question is twofold: some studies seem to indicate that they have some value, and it gives the student a feeling of responsibility and power. Is it a good thing for a student to have power over a teacher? Is that not a reversal of the proper relationship?

The evidence of dozens of research projects shows that student evaluations of teaching are at best uncertain in significance and in need of adjustment; they can be emotionally damaging for a teacher; finally, they are based on an arguably false premise. They are, essentially, a waste of valuable class time that could be spent studying for exams, answering questions, or learning new material. How can any reasonable person still wish to use such unnecessary and potentially harmful measures? Surely there must be some other method for the administration to evaluate the teacher, such as surprise observation days or examinations of the syllabus. Unfortunately, that's a subject for another day.


Works Cited

Holmberg, David. "Student Evaluations." New York Times (1 July 2007): 18.

McPherson, Michael A., and R. Todd Jewell. "Leveling the Playing Field: Should Student Evaluation Scores be Adjusted?." Social Science Quarterly 88.3 (Sept 2007): 868-881.

Pounder, James S. "Is Student Evaluation of Teaching Worthwhile?: An Analytical Framework for Answering the Question." Quality Assurance in Education: An International Perspective 15.2 (2007): 178-191.

Learn more about this author, Rebecca Williams.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.