Not to hold my alma mater, Amherst, up as the ideal- okay, yeah I am, the way they
approached evaluations was that they were done and distributed to help students pick
classes -- and folks knew how to read easy kiss-ass evals -- but for tenure decisions,
the faculty went back and solicited actual letters to describe in detail what students
liked and disliked about a professor.
This made them more qualitative and reflective, rather than depending on immediate
end-of-the-semester impressions.
Not that bad hiring and tenure decisions were not made, but it was rarely a bad
teacher making it through, and it was a point of outrage and mobilization when a
well-loved teacher was denied tenure.
-- Nathan Newman
On Tue, 06 March 2001, Michael Perelman wrote:
>
> The idea that high evals. are evidence of low standards is common. If
> your evals are too high, you can get canned. If they are too low, you can
> get canned.
>
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 02:59:02PM -0600, Forstater, Mathew wrote:
> > some of my senior profs in econ who had few students in elective courses (and
> > many of these were their advisees who they coerced into taking their course) and
> > lousy student evaluations from their other courses, excused their evaluations by
> > claiming their classes were so "rigorous." If you got good evals, they claimed
> > you were too "easy", though if you got bad evals, they didn't say you were too
> > rigorous, they said you must be a bad teacher. Then they would tirade against
> > the evaluations themselves, and while I agree that there are problems with lots
> > of the forms and the way they are used, consistently horrible or consistently
> > superlative evaluations say something. there's just tons of hypocrisy, and tons
> > and tons of personal and professional insecurity.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael Perelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 12:58 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [PEN-L:8734] Re: farewell to academe
> >
> >
> > No, Barkeley. He was well liked, but students flocked to his classes,
> > stranding other teachers without a flock. They resented his teaching --
> > or at least the students' response to it.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 01:50:16PM -0500, J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. wrote:
> > > michael,
> > > I think you are overstating it here. I doubt that
> > > it is an actual negative in most places, although there
> > > are certainly many places where it simply does not
> > > count at all, either negative or positive. There are
> > > ways to check on the standards used, e.g. by looking
> > > at grades given or by asking students on an evaluation
> > > form what the "level of challenge" was in the class.
> > > I suspect what you saw was a case where they did
> > > not want the person for other reasons, politics, research,
> > > personality issues, whatever, and had to dismiss his/her
> > > apparent ability as a teacher. That happens a lot, but it
> > > is hardly the same thing as saying that the good teaching
> > > was actually a negative. Was this person actually fired
> > > because they were a good teacher? The only way I can
> > > imagine that happening is out of jealousy by colleagues.
> > > But that would only happen if good teaching mattered. If
> > > it doesn't, then why bother?
> > > Barkley Rosser
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Date: Monday, March 05, 2001 10:42 PM
> > > Subject: [PEN-L:8709] Re: farewell to academe
> > >
> > >
> > > >Actually, good teaching is a negative in hiring. It can always be
> > > >explained away. He/she had low standards. I saw that pulled on the best
> > > >teacher in my department in Berkeley.
> > > >
> > > >On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 10:26:04PM -0500, Nathan Newman wrote:
> > > >> What is sad is that teaching is so little respected in hiring decisions.
> > > I
> > > >> have to say that I was incredibly spoiled getting to go to the small
> > > liberal
> > > >> arts college thing. At Amherst, students sat on hiring committees and
> > > >> student letters would kill a prof coming up for tenure if he or she
> > > stunk,
> > > >> so the faculty either were good teachers or learned how to do it at an
> > > >> acceptable level. It amazes me that at both Berkeley and Yale, really
> > > >> terrible teaching is allowed to exist and it makes almost no difference
> > > in
> > > >> hiring and tenure decisions.
> > > >>
> > > >> My basic attitude is that a good teacher, even with conservative
> > > politics,
> > > >> is a far more radical thing than a radical prof who sucks at teaching. A
> > > >> good teacher awakens excitement and engagement and I think that is
> > > >> ultimately more likely to lead to radical reevaluation of the world and
> > > >> possibilities.
> > > >>
> > > >> It is the deadening of imagination that most breeds apathy and acceptance
> > > of
> > > >> the status quo.
> > > >>
> > > >> It's not that I denigrate radical scholarship, since I'm a good consumer
> > > of
> > > >> it, but there is no question in my mind that my radicalism was more fed
> > > by
> > > >> the good teachers I had early in life, and not necessarily just the
> > > radical
> > > >> ones, far more than any particular book I may have read.
> > > >>
> > > >> -- Nathan Newman
> > > >>
> > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > >> From: "Michael Yates" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 8:39 PM
> > > >> Subject: [PEN-L:8698] Re: Re: farewell to academe
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Nathan,
> > > >>
> > > >> Your comments are very well taken. Two comments: Most teachers are not
> > > >> very good at it and do not take the time to learn how to teach
> > > >> effectively. Second, new teachers, including progressives, say that
> > > >> they cannot make waves til they get tenure. But passivity becomes a
> > > >> habit, and it is rare inded that a professor who kept quiet for 7 years
> > > >> suddenly becomes a troublemaker. I have supported for tenure some
> > > >> persons with whom I had sharp political disagreements just because they
> > > >> were troublemakers from the start.
> > > >>
> > > >> Michael Yates
> > > >>
> > > >> Nathan Newman wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I have to say that I have great sympathy for Michael's commentary on
> > > left
> > > >> > academia. I never really intended to be an academic, although there
> > > were
> > > >> > short periods when I considered it while working on my Ph.D., but the
> > > >> > biggest deterrent was that I didn't want "to be" any of the folks I saw
> > > in
> > > >> > the professoriat-- talking the talk but doing almost nothing to engage
> > > >> snip
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >Michael Perelman
> > > >Economics Department
> > > >California State University
> > > >Chico, CA 95929
> > > >
> > > >Tel. 530-898-5321
> > > >E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Michael Perelman
> > Economics Department
> > California State University
> > Chico, CA 95929
> >
> > Tel. 530-898-5321
> > E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> --
> Michael Perelman
> Economics Department
> California State University
> Chico, CA 95929
>
> Tel. 530-898-5321
> E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
