Last month, Student Trustee Kate Duch ’09 and I presented our initiative of declassifying course evaluations to the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Faculty Senate. Prof. Daniel Krall, secretary of the senate, has drafted a resolution to release the results of course evaluations in CALS, and the Senate will vote on the resolution at the start of next semester. While many professors support this idea, others have expressed various concerns such as grade inflation and students’ ability to accurately judge educational effectiveness. I have published two columns previously to address these concerns, and I hope that faculty members who oppose this resolution will read my columns prior to next semester’s vote. I would like to base my analysis in this column on another perspective.
Suppose we make the extreme and absurd assumption that all students at Cornell are biased. They enjoy easy courses, and course evaluations are perfectly correlated with the grades that students receive.
Even with this assumption, Cornell should still publish the results of course evaluations. To illustrate the inherent benefits of releasing evaluations, ask yourself two questions. First, what is the value of education, especially undergraduate education? Do students benefit only from the information that they learn in their courses? I would argue that the answer is no: college is a place for students to develop a wide assortment of skills, including the ability to complete accurate and objective evaluations and make judgments based on others’ evaluations. If all students at Cornell are biased, Cornell should find a way to help students overcome their biases, but not deprive them the right to view the results of course evaluations.
Second, if we do not publish course evaluations, will the aforementioned problems be solved? The answer is no. In fact, withholding the results of course evaluations will only exacerbate the problem. If we assume that we will collect biased data after publishing course evaluations, then the data that we collect now must be even worse. Currently, many students do not care about course evaluations because they believe that there is no consequence of a poorly filled out form nor is there any noticeable benefit from an honest evaluation.
I believe that the best way to teach students how to evaluate teaching is to publicize the results for a number of reasons. First, publishing course evaluations illustrates that Cornell trusts its students. Students are more likely to achieve great things when they are trusted. Second, students will know that their evaluations will help future generations of Cornell students in two ways: first by providing their professors with an accurate assessment of their strengths and weaknesses as teachers and also by providing their peers with accurate information regarding courses and professors.
In addition, publishing course evaluations is a unique chance to prompt students to seriously consider the aspects of excellent teaching. We can then supplement the publishing of course evaluation with workshops during freshman orientation and newsletters to teach students how to objectively assess professors. To my knowledge, no school in the United States combines publishing course evaluations with teaching students how to evaluate their courses and professors. This is a direction we should move to if we want to offer the best education in the world.
Finally, I would like to add another absurd assumption: suppose not only that all Cornell students biased, but also all Cornell professors are biased. Thus, professors will attempt to increase their ratings by increasing students’ grades. Should we withhold course evaluations in this case? I believe that the answer is no. Deans and department chairs already have access to course evaluation data in most schools. If a professor wants to receive a promotion, a salary increase or a teaching award and believes that better course evaluations will help his cause, he may “water down” a course regardless of whether or not the evaluations are public. By publishing course evaluations, students will feel that they are trusted and they have the responsibility to provide better data to future generations of Cornellians. We can use this opportunity to teach students how to evaluate teaching. All of this will prompt students to better identify excellent teaching and thereby increase the difficulty for a professor to manipulate course evaluations by “watering down” the content of a course.
Therefore, the benefits of publishing course evaluations are evident, even under the absurd assumption that all Cornell students and professors are biased. Besides, I don’t believe that students and professors at a first-class university like Cornell are biased or naïve. I trust Cornell students and professors, and I urge you to trust them as well.
Before I conclude, I would like to address the analogy that if we release the results of course evaluations, we should also release students’ scores. This analogy is not appropriate. A better analogy is that requiring students to choose their courses and professors without releasing course evaluations is equivalent to admitting students or awarding merit-based scholarships without requiring students’ transcripts. The selection of students by admissions committees and the selection of courses by students are substantial investments where both parties should have the privilege of information to make the best decisions. By releasing the results of course evaluations, students will be better equipped to make informed decisions regarding two aspects that define a students’ educational experience: their courses and their professors.
In addition, course evaluations are only one aspect of a professor’s teaching ability, just as transcripts are only one aspect of a students’ application. Evaluations of course syllabi and peer reviews are also important measures in evaluating professors. However, no one can deny that course evaluations are an important factor, and should be used to enhance teaching effectiveness and students’ learning experiences.
There is plenty of research among our peer schools to demonstrate that declassifying student evaluations is beneficial. The Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence at Carnegie Mellon University has published a summary of this research called “Student Ratings: 15 Common Beliefs & Misconceptions.” The article can be found online, and I would encourage concerned faculty to read its findings.
We need world-class research and world-class facilities for a world-class education, but the essence of education is interaction between people. We cannot have the best education without mutual trust among students, faculty, administrators and trustees. I strongly encourage the Faculty Senators of CALS and of other colleges to vote for releasing the results of course evaluations.
Mao Ye is a student-elected trustee. He can be contacted at my87@cornell.edu. Trustee Viewpoint appears alternate Wednesdays.