Student Evaluations, Grade Inflation and Pluralistic Teaching: Moving from Customer Satisfaction to Student Learning and Critical Thinking

Abstract

Faculty at universities that place significant weight on student evaluations often report that they give out easy grades, avoid controversial material and dumb down courses in order to get higher student evaluations. Unfortunately, research on student learning indicates that challenging courses, especially those that challenge students' existing mental models, facilitate greater learning. Meanwhile, research on student evaluations indicates that grading more easily and teaching easier courses has, at best, a small impact on student evaluations. Thus, ironically, faculty perceptions about student evaluations are more problematic than student evaluations themselves. In order to improve the quality of teaching, it is important for universities to develop a system for evaluating teaching that emphasizes (and rewards) the degree of challenge and learning that occurs in courses. This can be achieved by altering student evaluation forms to emphasize the amount students learn and the amount of work they do in a course. Additional possibilities include the development of a more robust system of peer evaluation of teaching and of teaching materials. Given that heterodox economists teaching pluralistic material tend to challenge the status quo, it is particularly important for an evaluation system to reward teaching that challenges students' perceptions of the world. Otherwise heterodox teachers will not be evaluated fairly.

Keywords:

• student evaluations of teaching
• pluralism
• grade inflation
• learning

Notes

This paper has benefitted significantly from the comments of an anonymous reviewer. Any errors are, of course, my own.

¹ The IDEA student ratings form adjusts for most of the known biases but not for the grade inflation bias. The unsettled nature of the debate on grades and SETs is probably the reason for not adjusting scores based on grading practices. However, Johnson's (2003) work on this subject is compelling. Unfortunately, most home-grown SETs are not adjusted for known biases, rendering them quite problematic.

² These studies do, however, indicate that adjunct instructors grade more leniently than tenure track and tenured faculty members. This could indicate that the insecure status of adjunct professors puts additional pressures on them to inflate grades.

³ Interestingly, the research does not demonstrate a conclusive bias in favor of small or large classes. According to Arreola (2007, p. 103), “Taken in its entirety, the literature has not indicated a consistent relationship between class size and student ratings.”

⁴ Sometimes, we teach both mainstream and heterodox material. Sometimes, we provide the heterodox alternatives to mainstream classes. Either way, heterodox instructors inherently operate in an uneasy space, teaching material that conflicts with the mainstream.

⁵ As another example of this phenomenon, for years students would accuse me of giving busy work because I gave them so much homework. In response, I began explaining what they would learn by completing each assignment and how it would help them succeed in the course. And, I reminded them regularly in class that by doing the homework they were learning the material. The change in student responses on my course evaluations was dramatic. Instead of complaining about busy work, students started to write about how much they appreciated all of the work I gave them and how much they learned from it. Thus, even though I continued to teach in exactly the same way, the written student comments in my courses became much more positive.

⁶ As one reviewer pointed out, budget constraints and administrative intransigence can be major barriers to reform. This is an important topic in and of itself, and is beyond the scope of the current paper.

⁷ Classroom observations can be problematic, but if done systematically and frequently, they can be valuable.

⁸ The Foundation for Critical Thinking also provides a set of SET questions designed to determine the extent to which professors engage their students in critical thinking. It is available online at http://www.criticalthinking.org/files/Course_Evaluation_Form.doc.