Committee Reviews Survey Gender Bias

In response to studies being conducted around the globe to examine trends in Student Evaluations, or SETs, and how instructors’ identified gender affects responses, Dickinson faculty members are currently working to assess the extent of gender bias at Dickinson.  Currently on campus, students are completing course evaluations to be reviewed by the administration and department heads.  According to Provost Neil Weissman, the committee at Dickinson that deals with this research has “not identified cases in which gender bias in evaluations has affected the evaluation of female faculty”

A study conducted by Anne Boring at the Paris Institute of Political Studies found that both French and American students rated male professors higher than female professors in general. The paper, “Student Evaluations of Teaching (Mostly) Do Not Measure Teaching Effectiveness,” showed responses were unaffected by students’ grades. According to NPR, another study conducted in 2014 tested how reviews differed based on perceived gender of professors’ names. Across the board, students submitted more positive reviews for professors with names they perceived as most masculine.

The more recent French study produced a new finding: men exhibited higher bias in France, while women’s responses proved more biased in the U.S. However, a study at the University of Colorado, Boulder found the women’s bias was much less significant, only .13 on a six-point scale. The multi-faceted results indicate a complex but evident problem with SETs and students’ gender bias.

Findings described in “Beyond Bossy or Brilliant: Gender Bias in Student Evaluations of Teaching” in the Pacific Standard reveal students evaluate the physical appearance of their instructors more positively in certain fields. Men are praised for attractiveness more often in philosophy, English and other fields associated with femininity, while women are described this way in criminal justice, mathematics and other traditionally masculine subjects.

Additionally, women were criticized for being disorganized or unattractive much more than men. Students were much less likely to comment on orderliness or professionalism of male professors. The article also pointed out the increased use of emotional descriptors like “kind,” “caring” and “mean” when describing women. These positive and negative emotional critiques are almost exclusive to women and indicate students expect these qualities in female professors.

At Dickinson, faculty has discussed this issue and how it may be addressed. The Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC) is the site of this conversation and Weissman says the committee has “discussed the gender bias in student evaluations and continues to educate itself and take the issue seriously.”

The Committee Chair, Anthony Pires, associate professor of Biology, provided more information about the result of discussion, informed by literature from Inside Higher Ed and Humanities, Arts, Sciences and Technology Advanced Collaboratory (HASTAC). The committee, Pires says, has decided to address the issue, which affects faculty retention and promotion.

“We are just beginning to plan a statistical study of Dickinson course evaluation data to understand the extent of gender bias in our own population,” says Pires. This would be similar to the University of Colorado study, though the minimal evidence of bias there may differ from Dickinson’s own trends.

Co-Chair of the President’s Commission for Women Ebru Kongar, associate professor of economics and member of the FPC, says, “This is not just a gender issue. The literature documents bias based on race, ethnicity and other characteristics.”

Kongar shared that the commission has made recommendations to the FPC and the Women’s and Gender Resource Center will make the relevant literature available. Director of the center Donna Bickford said other forms of evaluation such as formal class evaluations by other faculty and in-person communication with students about their experiences can offer more accurate feedback.

“I think this speaks to how entrenched unconscious bias is in our culture and psyches,” says Bickford. “It is also a signal to tenure and promotion committees to take this data into account when they are reviewing student evaluations.”