Mitigating gender bias in student evaluations of teaching.

David A M Peterson,Kevin Roe,Lori A Biederman,David Andersen,Tessa M Ditonto,Rick K Wilson

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0216241

David A M Peterson, Kevin Roe + Show 4 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216241

Copy DOI

Journal: PloS one	Publication Date: May 15, 2019
Citations: 78	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Iowa State University

Abstract

Student evaluations of teaching are widely believed to contain gender bias. In this study, we conduct a randomized experiment with the student evaluations of teaching in four classes with large enrollments, two taught by male instructors and two taught by female instructors. In each of the courses, students were randomly assigned to either receive the standard evaluation instrument or the same instrument with language intended to reduce gender bias. Students in the anti-bias language condition had significantly higher rankings of female instructors than students in the standard treatment. There were no differences between treatment groups for male instructors. These results indicate that a relatively simple intervention in language can potentially mitigate gender bias in student evaluation of teaching.

Highlights

Student evaluations of teaching (SET) are a ubiquitous form of evaluation
The evidence from our experiment with SET suggests that a simple intervention informing students of the potential for gender biases can have significant effects on the evaluation of female instructors
These effects were consistent across two different introductory courses. These effects were substantial in magnitude; as much as half a point on a five-point scale

Summary

Introduction

Student evaluations of teaching (SET) are a ubiquitous form of evaluation. Female instructors tend to be evaluated more critically than their male peers, even when there are no differences in the quality of instruction or when the gender of the instructor is experimentally and randomly assigned [5]. These biases go as far as influencing even objective assessments of instructors (e.g. speed in the return of grades) [5]. The potential for gender biases in SET leads many academics to question their use and to a growing conversation about the need for alternative mechanisms for evaluating instructors [8]

Methods

Results

Conclusion