I have always been excited by Cornell’s initiative to become the best teaching and research institution for undergraduate students in the United States. I have noticed, however, that nearly all of our peer schools have similar goals. In fact, our peer institutions make the same claims to greatness: world-class faculty, outstanding curriculum design and incredible research opportunities. So the question must be reworded: how can we become different? How can we move a step ahead of our peer institutions?
One possible solution is to take student satisfaction more seriously. Many schools claim that they are excellent in teaching, but few of them can show clear evidence about the efficacy of the teaching that they praise so loudly. The usual standards for ranking, such as endowment growth rate and average SAT scores, do not have a close connection with student satisfaction.
One method of achieving student satisfaction is through extensive course evaluations. Every year students complete course evaluations, but most of us have no access to them. Granting access to course evaluations will have at least three benefits.
First, it will give incentives for good teaching. Professors care a lot about their reputations because of the self-selection process of academia. If we do not declassify course evaluations and make them accessible, the incentive for good teaching is severely weakened. James Miller, an economist at Smith College, said, “Just imagine how much less time most tenured professors would spend on research if all academic articles had to be published anonymously.”
Secondly, such evaluations will make it easier for students to make informed decisions concerning classes.
Most importantly, however, this will be a long term investment in Cornell’s future. Students will reward Cornell with huge donations if they think they received the best education here, and if they feel that their rights were respected.
Of course, there are many who are critical of this idea as well. When I discussed the possibility of releasing course evaluations, I received a number of concerns. Let me address them one by one.
Concern 1: The data contained in course evaluations is very noisy.
To a large extent, the noise may be a consequence of the fact that we do not declassify the course evaluations. Students will not take them seriously if they can not know the results. Some students have told me they choose only 5’s or only 3’s when they fill in the form. Some students told me that they fill in the form in a zigzag pattern. They said they do not care because there is no consequence of a poorly filled out form nor is there any noticeable benefit from an honest evaluation. Therefore, the declassification of course evaluations will reduce the noise in them.
Concern 2: The publication of the evaluations will cause grade inflation.
The University of Pennsylvania began publishing student managed course reviews in 1959; it is called “The Course Bible” by the students. When it was first published, there was a debate as to whether this would cause grade inflation. Ultimately, they discovered that for UPenn, a world class university like our own, this was not a problem. Overall, evaluations of a course are rarely correlated with the difficulty of the course. Students have the ability to distinguish bad professors from tough professors.
Similarly, I believe we Cornell students can make the same distinction. See the April 26th Cornell Chronicle containing a retrospective article about Walter LaFeber: “His famed History of Foreign Relations class had the reputation of being one of the toughest courses at Cornell — and one of the best.”
Cornell students are the next generation of world leaders. If we still do not have the ability to distinguish between bad and tough, how can we lead the world once we graduate? Some might say a few students may not be able to make this distinction. Even if they are right, my solution is to teach students effective ways to do the evaluations without depriving them of the right to see what their results are. In the sprit of democracy and education, course evaluations must be declassified.
Concern 3: If we do not publish course evaluations, we can protect the reputation of some professors.
Some people consider my initiative as a way to protect students’ interests, but not to protect the interest of professors. This view is incorrect.
First of all, this very obviously protects the interests of good professors. This gives them more rewards as a result of their excellence in teaching.
Secondly, for professors who are not good at teaching, this also protects their rights. We do not live in a vacuum; when a student’s opinions lack an outlet inside Cornell, outlets elsewhere will inevitably emerge. Ratemyprofessors.com, a very popular website among the student body, has almost every Cornell professor on its list. The effect of ratemyprofessors.com is almost the same as declassifying course evaluations but there are three negative side effects. First of all, it is open to the public, not only Cornell students. Secondly, since it is not official, there are more dramatic comments than would appear on official course evaluations.
Thirdly, it is easy to create multiple accounts. Therefore, if we do not declassify course evaluations, we may make poor teachers look even worse and let the whole world know who he or she is. That is why some professors, who had been originally strongly against my idea of declassifying course evaluations, agreed with me after I showed them this website.
Our predecessors at Cornell have taken the lead in many trends, and their effort has granted us a splendid history. But we need to continuously find ways to improve ourselves if we want to maintain Cornell as one of the best universities in the world. Declassifying course evaluations is not the only measure of teaching quality, but it is a decent measure from the most important voice on campus: the students. We may first begin this effort experimentally, or release the information step by step, but let us begin now. We are proud of our history. Decades from now, we will be able to see how history was made.
Mao Ye is a student-elected trustee. He can be contacted at my87@cornell.edu.Trustee Viewpoint appears alternate Tuesdays.