BY SYDNEY FREEMAN, JR., AND DEBORAH THORNE

Results from student evaluations of teaching (SETs) are biased; the evidence is irrefutable. Students more harshly assess female instructors and instructors of color. Despite that, in the professional lives of instructors, SETs are extremely consequential—they are used to guide very high stakes personnel decisions such as whether one is hired at a college or university, whether one is granted tenure and promotion, and whether one receives a raise.

The problem of bias in SETs is hardly new. So why write yet another piece on the subject? Because in many states, including our own state of Idaho, there has been a concerted effort by conservative politicians to curtail, if not outright eliminate, classroom discussions of systemic racism and sexism. These attacks send a clear message: educating college students on the historical experiences of people of color and women is “left-wing indoctrination” that promotes contempt for America. As young adults, our students are not immune to these messages of intolerance—some will reject them, but others will likely embrace them. As such, we can expect that bias in evaluations will become more pronounced.

Conservative politicians are exploiting the topic of systemic racism to foment intolerance; consequently, we expect that faculty of color will experience an increase in negative evaluations. Since most of the courses that address issues of racial inequality are housed in the social sciences, where most instructors are women, we also expect that women will increasingly receive biased evaluations. Therefore, reassessment of the ways in which teaching evaluations are designed and used is urgent.

Among many administrators, concerns about bias in SETs have fallen on deaf ears. Why is this? Probably because those who are most likely to experience the negative effects of biased evaluations are least likely to hold administrative positions. A recent report from College and University Professional Association for Human Resources indicated that less than 8 percent of university administrators are Black, and women hold less than 40 percent of executive leadership roles. At the highest levels of university administration are white males—the same people who are more likely to be rated more positively by their students.

We do not necessarily recommend eliminating SETs. Well-designed evaluations can provide an important opportunity for students to share their classroom experience with their instructors. And when students are thoughtful and reflective in their comments, the evaluations are important tools for faculty to improve their instruction. But any institution that chooses to keep SETs should transform the evaluation system to ensure that faculty members receive unbiased and meaningful feedback that can lead to improved student-learning outcomes and experiences.

Below we share recommendations designed to help faculty senates, faculty-affairs committees, academic administrators, and other institutional bodies transform their evaluation policies and practices to make them more equitable.

• Convene a task force: A team of faculty members should assess the issue of bias in SETs at their institution and make appropriate recommendations. While it might be tempting to populate the task force with women and people of color, especially those who are in the social sciences and humanities, we believe that white men, especially those in the STEM disciplines, must also participate. Too often, those who are targets of the bias do the heavy lifting, while the more privileged individuals who receive more positive SETs, sit on the sidelines. But this issue is critical, and all university and college faculty have skin in this game.
• Reduce the weight of student evaluations: Student evaluations, done correctly, can be an important formative tool to improve instruction. However, they should be only one data point among several. We also suggest revising evaluations to minimize opportunities for biased, unproductive feedback.
• Elevate the weight of peer evaluations: Prioritize peer teaching evaluations over other forms of assessment. Our colleagues know what constitutes teaching effectiveness, and their assessment and feedback is especially valuable. We recognize the considerable work involved in conducting high-quality evaluations, so we recommend counting this labor as a component of the faculty service requirement or incentivizing it through other means.
• Provide mandatory student evaluation training: Prior to completing SETs, students should learn about the racial and gender biases that can appear in evaluations. Additionally, we recommend providing students with a code of ethics regarding the feedback that they provide to instructors. Finally, students should be shown examples of helpful and constructive feedback to emulate.
• Identify and choose a model that works for your campus: There are various new models of faculty evaluation that have been presented in recent years, including approaches such as Pass/Fail, the Teaching Quality Framework Process, and the Holistic Faculty Evaluation Model. The task force should review these models.
• Implement new policies and practices: It is important to involve voices from all constituencies in the discussion, including faculty, students, and academic administrators. But the hard work must not end with task-force recommendations. With faculty senate and senior administrator support, these transformational policies and practices should be implemented as soon as possible. The status quo is not acceptable.

The political climate, especially in states like Idaho that have passed laws to prevent classroom discussions of race and gender inequality, is likely to exacerbate bias against instructors of color and women. Without administrative leadership and intervention, we expect some faculty members to experience career obstacles and short- and long-term financial consequences that may prompt some to join the ongoing exodus of faculty of color from academe. A meaningful overhaul of evaluation systems sends a powerful message of support for instructors who are most likely to be unfairly assessed by their students. Bias in SETs is well-documented, so is it ethical or even legal for universities to continue to rely on them for employment decisions, promotion and tenure decisions, and merit raises? We think not.

Guest blogger Sydney Freeman, Jr., is professor of education and leadership at University of Idaho, and guest blogger Deborah Thorne is professor of sociology at University of Idaho.