AT THE END of every semester, students must fill out professor evaluations. A great deal of ceremony is involved, such as the professor leaving the room and a student delivering the completed evaluations to the department office. But do these evaluations matter at all, and how important are they? While research and service to the University are important, teaching ability, which the evaluations are supposed to determine, should be the predominant factor in granting tenure, raises and promotions for faculty.
One wonders how important these evaluations possibly can be. Consider the situation of government professor James R. Sofka. Last semester, Sofka received an average evaluation of 4.931, the highest in the government department. But instead of the University rushing to give him a faculty chair, or at least tenure, he was the subject of constant speculation about his future. If this is how the University treats student responses to evaluations, we shouldn't bother filling them out.
In an interview, Assoc. Dean Richard Handler of the College noted that the evaluations are used to determine tenure, faculty raises and promotions. He said, "Student evaluations become part of a faculty member's dossier as he or she is being evaluated for tenure and promotion. At that time, the department reviews a faculty member, using the evaluations as one source of evidence."
|
The evaluations can help professors improve their teaching and courses. Obviously evaluations are important to the College. But they are only one factor, along with research and service to the University, which is used in determining tenure, promotions and faculty raises. Teaching should be the primary purpose of any university. Whether or not a student understands the American Civil War is more important than if his professor published a successful book about it. Educating students is more important and necessary than influencing other intellectuals.
Every student has had one or more mediocre professors at the University. With the money that students must pay, especially the out-of-state students, one could at least expect excellent professors in each class. But this does not always happen. Students are consumers and should be treated with a high quality product. This is why evaluations are key. Many professors stay at the University based on reputation or research alone, and do not do a good job of teaching students. If evaluations are the primary factor for granting tenure, professors who do not perform will be forced to improve their teaching methods or leave the University. While it is unlikely that a professor with bad evaluations would get tenure, it still is possible, especially if the professor was very good at research and was regularly published. While research and publication are important, a school is ultimately judged by the education that its students receive.
Administrators and alumni spend lots of time thinking about how to make sure that the University remains equal or better than Berkeley. If we have a reputation for catering to the interests of students, the best and brightest will come here, and then the rankings will take care of themselves.
Evaluations also should be used as the primary factor in determining who gets tenure at the University. If a professor is tenured, this indicates that the University expects to employ him or her indefinitely. It is logical that the University makes sure that someone can teach before it makes such a big investment in hiring a professor.
Determining objectively whether or not a professor is doing a good job by looking at evaluations can be difficult. Some students may be motivated by the likely prospect that they will get a bad grade in the class to evaluate a professor negatively. Others may just not have gotten that much out of a class. The key is to look at all of the evaluations and make a judgment from the overall impression.
Professors need not worry about negative repercussions of giving evaluations more weight. Most students are mature enough not to penalize professors who are tough graders or do not have the most pleasant personalities.
Whether it is student seating in a new basketball stadium or where the University should invest its funds, the student body's voice must predominate in all decisions.
(Harris Freier's column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at hfreier@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | YesterdayInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
SHRAUGER: McIntire’s three-year model limits opportunities for first-year students
By Alex Shrauger | 4 days agoBy pigeonholing students into commerce so early, the University violates its own mission of providing a holistic education that produces students capable of succeeding in a variety of fields.
