Student Evaluations of Teaching and their Short Term Validity

Abstract

Looking for dialog with impacted parties number of years ago I interviewed for a position at a university that was struggling to develop a viable communications program. The chairperson of department told me he was looking for a person who was willing to be, in his words, an SOB. He said he was distressed because he believed standards in department were not what they should be. In my now nearly 30 years in higher education, this is a concern that I have heard expressed, albeit in a usually less crude manner, over and over again. Journalism/mass communication administrators are concerned that faculty are not demanding enough of students. I have lost count, for example, of number of hours I have spent on committees charged with examining why grade inflation appears to be so rampant. There is a fear that we are rapidly approaching a time when students putting even mediocre effort into a particular course will file a formal protest if they receive a B rather than an A as a final letter grade. I agree that these are legitimate concerns - concerns that go to very core of how one defines good teaching in journalism and mass communication programs. Unfortunately, I also believe we have been unwilling to directly and candidly address social and institutional developments that have been instrumental in bringing us to this point. Too often, it appears, we have danced around because we fear going directly to core of problem will result in considerable discomfort because of dissonance that will be created vis-avis a number of important constituencies. That is why I found article on evaluating teaching by Daniel Panici - Methods of Assessing Teaching: Investigating How and Why - in summer issue of Journalism & Mass Communication Educator SO interesting. I found article generally well done and informative. It raised several important questions concerning efforts to measure and, more importantly, improve quality of student instruction. My concern, however, is that it did not sufficiently address what I consider dysfunctional aspects of wide - often time singular reliance upon student evaluations in that assessment process. Does it not seem at least somewhat disingenuous to speak about increasing academic standards at same time student evaluations of teachers are given disproportionate weight in evaluating good teaching for purposes of tenure, promotion and salary increases? Is not conflict obvious to anyone willing to honestly open his or her eyes? This point was driven home a short time ago when I had an opportunity to visit with a former professor. By chance, I stopped by his as he was preparing to retire after a long and very distinguished teaching career. He is truly one of giants of journalism/mass communication education. He was in process of cleaning out his office after many years - an emotional time. This is a man of immense integrity who is also one of finest teachers I ever had - and my opinion is shared by other students - graduate and undergraduate - too numerous to count. When he was honored several years earlier as one of top teachers at university, he said, vital to good teaching is (the ability) to convey to students that you care about 1 don't have to fake that. ... They understand that you feel good about them. As we sat in his now partially empty office, we talked about teaching. Our conversation turned to student evaluations of faculty. I doubt this man ever gave a grade because it was expedient thing to do. Nevertheless, he told me, common sense would suggest that there likely is a correlation between grade inflation and student evaluations of faculty. I strongly agree. Professor Panici's article cites researchers who contend that the reliability and validity of student ratings are generally good and that student ratings are best, and often only, method of providing objective evidence for summative evaluation of instruction. …