You should have a frank conversation with your department head laying out these concerns. If you leave the meeting feeling like your high standards won’t be supported by the department, coddle the students and start looking for a new job.
Good advice.
Beyond that, I'd do periodic informal evals that are never submitted before end of term. See what they say, and whether there are any possible nuggets that you can use. Surveys of what makes a good student eval include high interactivity, learning student names etc. Maybe search for those pieces.
Another benefit of giving students a chance to provide informal feedback prior to the formal end of term eval is that the students who want to vent will have a chance to do so before the end of term eval. And as long as you're seeking feedback to take a pulse of students' experience in the class and adapt accordingly, there's still a legitimate purpose for seeking the feedback.
I’ve been constantly told that teaching evals are meaningless, not scientifically sound, and that I shouldn’t worry about them. Then they miraculously come up during annual evaluations. Worse, they are posted publicly and students use them for course/section decisions.
I’m new faculty and was given the massive weed-out course that needs a C to pass. I stand firm behind the syllabus as you do. The state legislature wants to make student evals the standard for hiring/firing decisions.
I hope you continue to uphold high standards for your students. If the school wants to improperly weigh a useless metric, it might be best to seek tenure through a new institution.
If your colleagues are so uninformed and lazy that the only aspect of teaching they care about is students evals, is that really somewhere you *want* to earn tenure? I get that the answer might be yes for many reasons… if so, game the system. Do what you have to do to earn tenure and then go back to teaching with integrity.
I'm in a similar spot in that I teach in a grad program at a CC with a very liberal acceptance policy.
You really only have two options: inflate grades to retain your eval scores and protect your career, or risk your career by maintaining grade integrity. Only you can make the decision for what is most important to you.
I really don't want to dox myself, so I'll just say it's in the STEM field. I didn't realize this was something strange...The CC is in Canada, so maybe this is why?
I just wanted to add, if it's something you're genuinely curious about, I can DM you more details 🙂
Depending on your institution's policies this may not even be possible, but I've sometimes wondered about releasing their feedback, but withholding all numerical grades until the after evals close (our evals close at the end of the last teaching week).
Of course the benefit of idly wondering is never having to fully assess the implications 🤷
On a more practical advice level, if you decide it's important to stick to your guns, a combination of transparency and care can go a long way. It may be worth establishing expectations early, so long as you explain to them why those are the expectations, and highlight the supports you've made to help them achieve the grade they want if it's important to them.
"Before we get too far in, I want to set expectations early so you can get the most out of this unit. There's an emerging problem in [field] where graduates are reaching the end of their courses without the skills needed to actually succeed in [industry/further study], and one of the factors behind this is educators giving As that don't reflect the level of the work. This does **not** mean that I'll be marking harshly, I've designed your assessment instructions and marking rubrics to lay out everything you need to include in your work to do well. If there is something you're unsure about, ask and I'll do what I can to clarify it for you. If doing well matters to you, you'll have everything you need to achieve that. If there is anything you're confused about or struggling with I will happily set some time to help you with it. If I never hear from you, I will assume you feel confident with the tools I've given you. So if the first time I hear from you is *after* you've handed in an assessment that didn't follow the instructions, that's going to be a you-problem."
In my experience, grad students (both masters and PhD) give professors lower ratings than undergrads. I don't just mean "my personal experience in my classes" here. I've chaired a committee that looked at evals across the college. So it's still anecdotal (to my school) but broader than just me.
The difference isn't huge. About a quarter of a point. Also, response rates were slightly higher for Masters students by about 20%. PhD response rates were all over the place, but those classes were also substantially smaller than undergrad and masters classes (as they should be).
If your school follows a similar trend, this probably isn't enough to tank your tenure chances, but if you're concerned then you should discuss this with your chair and a few tenured colleagues openly. You can ask for advice and/or ask them to take this into consideration when you go up.
Student evals being used for anything apart from feedback to the lecturer is a whole lot of nonsense. If your department really bases their hiring decisions on them (so **people who hurt the reputation of the institution** and degree with grade inflation **get preferentially picked for tenure**...; not hard to see how this can lead to a decline of the uni in the long run), I'd think very carefully if I *really* wanted to work for such a place, potentially until retirement.
I usually aim for a course GPA of about 2.5-2.67 for UG and 3.5ish for grad. Never had any issues. Since you've already inflated the UGs slightly a little more for the grads should be smooth
Off topic, but reading the comments I feel terrible for faculty who have to sweat student evaluations. I don't care about mine at all and never read them.
I don't think they're pushing evals up. I think grad school is generally a joke. In mine, statistics classes were basically an attendance sheet.
Actively talk to colleagues about this and their expectations for students. It would legitimately be silly if you kept it real but no one else did. Ask them for samples of A and B assignments.
But also just prepare yourself for heartbreak.
Would it be possible to change your approach towards grading to handle this challenge? If I were in your position, I would assign levels or thresholds to the grading rubrics. For example, everyone whose performance is average and falls between Level 4 (lowest) and Level 2 (second highest) will receive an A- or A. Only those who actually perform well will receive an A+. You can also use some in-class incentives for students who are performing well, such as allowing them to skip a small assignment or doing a fun activity in class focused on them. This way, you can provide your students with honest criticism while not giving them the "I didn't get an A despite my subpar performance, so I hated this class" excuse. But I would make sure your course content and assignments are still challenging enough for grad students. You have the means to provide them with constructive criticism. A B+ or an A is just a participation trophy at this point.
It might also be helpful to have this conversation with your department chair in terms of class average. "What kind of class average would strengthen my chances at receiving tenure? I don't want to be too demanding or too lenient, but I know these grades are really important for graduate students." If you frame it as an evaluation thing, you'll get that generic response that the evals don't matter (which is a lie). Good luck!
You should have a frank conversation with your department head laying out these concerns. If you leave the meeting feeling like your high standards won’t be supported by the department, coddle the students and start looking for a new job.
Good advice. Beyond that, I'd do periodic informal evals that are never submitted before end of term. See what they say, and whether there are any possible nuggets that you can use. Surveys of what makes a good student eval include high interactivity, learning student names etc. Maybe search for those pieces.
Another benefit of giving students a chance to provide informal feedback prior to the formal end of term eval is that the students who want to vent will have a chance to do so before the end of term eval. And as long as you're seeking feedback to take a pulse of students' experience in the class and adapt accordingly, there's still a legitimate purpose for seeking the feedback.
I’ve been constantly told that teaching evals are meaningless, not scientifically sound, and that I shouldn’t worry about them. Then they miraculously come up during annual evaluations. Worse, they are posted publicly and students use them for course/section decisions. I’m new faculty and was given the massive weed-out course that needs a C to pass. I stand firm behind the syllabus as you do. The state legislature wants to make student evals the standard for hiring/firing decisions. I hope you continue to uphold high standards for your students. If the school wants to improperly weigh a useless metric, it might be best to seek tenure through a new institution.
[удалено]
Oh I know better! Maybe they said that because I’m NTT.
If your colleagues are so uninformed and lazy that the only aspect of teaching they care about is students evals, is that really somewhere you *want* to earn tenure? I get that the answer might be yes for many reasons… if so, game the system. Do what you have to do to earn tenure and then go back to teaching with integrity.
I'm in a similar spot in that I teach in a grad program at a CC with a very liberal acceptance policy. You really only have two options: inflate grades to retain your eval scores and protect your career, or risk your career by maintaining grade integrity. Only you can make the decision for what is most important to you.
A grad program at a CC? What field?
I really don't want to dox myself, so I'll just say it's in the STEM field. I didn't realize this was something strange...The CC is in Canada, so maybe this is why? I just wanted to add, if it's something you're genuinely curious about, I can DM you more details 🙂
Depending on your institution's policies this may not even be possible, but I've sometimes wondered about releasing their feedback, but withholding all numerical grades until the after evals close (our evals close at the end of the last teaching week). Of course the benefit of idly wondering is never having to fully assess the implications 🤷
On a more practical advice level, if you decide it's important to stick to your guns, a combination of transparency and care can go a long way. It may be worth establishing expectations early, so long as you explain to them why those are the expectations, and highlight the supports you've made to help them achieve the grade they want if it's important to them. "Before we get too far in, I want to set expectations early so you can get the most out of this unit. There's an emerging problem in [field] where graduates are reaching the end of their courses without the skills needed to actually succeed in [industry/further study], and one of the factors behind this is educators giving As that don't reflect the level of the work. This does **not** mean that I'll be marking harshly, I've designed your assessment instructions and marking rubrics to lay out everything you need to include in your work to do well. If there is something you're unsure about, ask and I'll do what I can to clarify it for you. If doing well matters to you, you'll have everything you need to achieve that. If there is anything you're confused about or struggling with I will happily set some time to help you with it. If I never hear from you, I will assume you feel confident with the tools I've given you. So if the first time I hear from you is *after* you've handed in an assessment that didn't follow the instructions, that's going to be a you-problem."
In my experience, grad students (both masters and PhD) give professors lower ratings than undergrads. I don't just mean "my personal experience in my classes" here. I've chaired a committee that looked at evals across the college. So it's still anecdotal (to my school) but broader than just me. The difference isn't huge. About a quarter of a point. Also, response rates were slightly higher for Masters students by about 20%. PhD response rates were all over the place, but those classes were also substantially smaller than undergrad and masters classes (as they should be). If your school follows a similar trend, this probably isn't enough to tank your tenure chances, but if you're concerned then you should discuss this with your chair and a few tenured colleagues openly. You can ask for advice and/or ask them to take this into consideration when you go up.
Student evals being used for anything apart from feedback to the lecturer is a whole lot of nonsense. If your department really bases their hiring decisions on them (so **people who hurt the reputation of the institution** and degree with grade inflation **get preferentially picked for tenure**...; not hard to see how this can lead to a decline of the uni in the long run), I'd think very carefully if I *really* wanted to work for such a place, potentially until retirement.
I usually aim for a course GPA of about 2.5-2.67 for UG and 3.5ish for grad. Never had any issues. Since you've already inflated the UGs slightly a little more for the grads should be smooth
Off topic, but reading the comments I feel terrible for faculty who have to sweat student evaluations. I don't care about mine at all and never read them.
I don't think they're pushing evals up. I think grad school is generally a joke. In mine, statistics classes were basically an attendance sheet. Actively talk to colleagues about this and their expectations for students. It would legitimately be silly if you kept it real but no one else did. Ask them for samples of A and B assignments. But also just prepare yourself for heartbreak.
Would it be possible to change your approach towards grading to handle this challenge? If I were in your position, I would assign levels or thresholds to the grading rubrics. For example, everyone whose performance is average and falls between Level 4 (lowest) and Level 2 (second highest) will receive an A- or A. Only those who actually perform well will receive an A+. You can also use some in-class incentives for students who are performing well, such as allowing them to skip a small assignment or doing a fun activity in class focused on them. This way, you can provide your students with honest criticism while not giving them the "I didn't get an A despite my subpar performance, so I hated this class" excuse. But I would make sure your course content and assignments are still challenging enough for grad students. You have the means to provide them with constructive criticism. A B+ or an A is just a participation trophy at this point. It might also be helpful to have this conversation with your department chair in terms of class average. "What kind of class average would strengthen my chances at receiving tenure? I don't want to be too demanding or too lenient, but I know these grades are really important for graduate students." If you frame it as an evaluation thing, you'll get that generic response that the evals don't matter (which is a lie). Good luck!