5,726
Views
68
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Unbiased, reliable, and valid student evaluations can still be unfair

ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 1106-1120 | Published online: 20 Feb 2020
 

Abstract

Scholarly debate about student evaluations of teaching (SETs) often focuses on whether SETs are valid, reliable and unbiased. In this article, we assume the most optimistic conditions for SETs that are supported by the empirical literature. Specifically, we assume that SETs are moderately correlated with teaching quality (student learning and instructional best practices), highly reliable, and do not systematically discriminate on any instructionally irrelevant basis. We use computational simulation to show that, under ideal circumstances, even careful and judicious use of SETs to assess faculty can produce an unacceptably high error rate: (a) a large difference in SET scores fails to reliably identify the best teacher in a pairwise comparison, and (b) more than a quarter of faculty with evaluations at or below the 20th percentile are above the median in instructional quality. These problems are attributable to imprecision in the relationship between SETs and instructor quality that exists even when they are moderately correlated. Our simulation indicates that evaluating instruction using multiple imperfect measures, including but not limited to SETs, can produce a fairer and more useful result compared to using SETs alone.

Acknowledgments

We thank Elizabeth Barre, Joshua Eyler, Bethany Morrison, Fred Oswald and Arthur Spirling for helpful suggestions and comments related to this project.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

We gratefully acknowledge financial support for this project provided by the Wake Forest University – Undergraduate Research and Creative Activities Center (URECA), the WFU Associate Provost for Research, and the WFU Department of Politics and International Affairs.

Notes on contributors

Justin Esarey

Justin Esarey is an Associate Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Wake Forest University. His area of specialization is political methodology, with a particular interest in hypothesis testing and the scientific ecosystem.

Natalie Valdes

Natalie Valdes is a student at Wake Forest University. Her research interests include Methodology and Comparative Politics, specifically the interactions between gender and politics.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 56.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 1,014.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.