By Kristina Meyers ’27, News Contributor
Professor Owen looks into evaluation bias. Photo courtesy of Hamilton College.
Students are asked to complete evaluations of their professors during finals week each semester, but a plethora of new research has emerged in recent years regarding bias in these evaluations. This raised alarm bells across academia as faculty evaluations carry a lot of weight and are traditionally used to evaluate if a professor will receive tenure. Professors’ performance evaluations leave their jobs at stake.
When the troubling news broke, Economics Professor Ann Owen and 44 other professors joined together in the Fall of 2019, forming the Committee on Evaluative Teaching (CET) to address this recent revelation. Inclusivity was a focus during the development of this committee, Professor Owen explained during an interview with The Spectator. “Any faculty member who wanted to be on the committee could self-nominate themselves,” Professor Owen explained, meaning they “weren’t telling anybody who thought this was important that they couldn’t partic-
ipate.”
The CET got to work to create a holistic and transparent approach to the teaching evaluation system. One of the biggest changes was the introduction of a new system in which, Owen explaind, “any conclusions
you draw about a person’s teaching, to the extent that you can, you should corroborate them with other information.” This began the process of using other resources like a faculty members syllabus for the class, personal statements, peer reviews and eliminating the “purpose to compare people” from surveys. These new changes were implemented to minimize the amount of bias that was cropping up in these surveys.
The committee spent months gathering research from student surveys. This included tweaking the timing of the survey process, like having some students complete the surveys the following semester rather than during finals season. (Though only a fraction of students actually completed the surveys a semester later, it seems finals-season surveys are here to stay). The types of questions and survey styles were adjusted, tested and evalu-
ated as well. This culminated into two prime recommendations: to make “peer review more consistent, fair and transparent and then making improvements to tenure promotion guidelines to increase consistency and transparency,” Professor Owen said. While things can be done to improve the bias in survey outcomes, it might not be eradicated completely. “The
only thing our committee has been trying to do is remove it [implicit bias] and in fact… it doesn’t matter and it is there no matter what we do,” Owens said.
However, students can be more mindful in their responses to reduce bias. Thorough, detailed responses are best. Students should remember which factors (like class time, for example) the professor cannot control. One can also note of their own personal bias based on the grade received in a course or level of effort put into the class.
Faculty evaluations matter not only to the professors who are up for tenure but also those already tenured. Professors genuinely consider and reference these surveys when tweaking their curriculum and teaching style. Owens recommended students reference the document attached to the email from the Reg- istrar’s Office if they’re unsure what to write in their responses.
