Mike wrote:
> Rick, there is a difference between slander and evaluation.
Mike, I agree with you and Linda that there is potential there for an
instructor's reputation to be damaged by the "evaluations."
At that same time, as you yourself point out, that same potential exists
with the traditional evaluation process that most of us undergo at our
institutions--usually with far more serious consequences for us since
_those_ "evaluations" are read by the administration of our institutions
and contribute to their decisions with respect to contract renewals,
tenure, etc. while on-line evaluations affect, at worst, only other
students (can you imagine an administrator trying to justify a contract
decision by stating s/he read a negative evaluation on an anonymous web
site?).
On the other hand, the fact that something _could_ have a negative
consequence for us doesn't justify the kind of response my message was
replying to. That response was not to contact the Webmaster at the site
and make a request that some form of control be placed on the evaluation
process (i.e., that students at the least demonstrate--via their email
address, etc.--that they even _attend_ the college where they are rating
the instructor; that the provide the term & year the course was taken in
the evaluation; that they provide their own final grade; that they provide
their actual identity privately [providing their name publicly _would_
offer a potential risk--but if it is provided privately, a slandered
instructor would have a way of identifying the person who slandered
him/her]; that _instructors_ who are evaluated be given space to reply to
the evaluation directly, etc.). Instead, that response was to suggest that
_instructors_ trash the site by posting phoney evaluations, etc. From the
original message:
> On reading the article in the Times yesterday, it
> occurred to me that if faculty are worried about this
> kind of thing, all they have to do is to post a lot of
> obviously incorrect evaluations, thus making the site
> essentially useless as a guide to which classes to take.
> Perhaps faculty have already picked up on that idea.
There one heck of a lot of difference between responding to a situation
in which potential slander or damage to one's reputation could occur and
deliberately violating the integrity of a private message exchange system!
In the former case, an instructor is responding maturely and asking the
Webmaster of a site to take steps to protect his/her rights and reputation
from deliberate attack. In the latter case, s/he is simply taking it on
him/her-self to violate the rights of _others_ in response to that threat.
I'm sorry, but I can't support _any_ action which violates the rights of
others--whether or not it may lend me some personal "protection" to do so
is completely irrelevant.
A second issue (separate from the "trash the site" suggestion) arises
with respect to direct opposition to the site itself. Frankly, I value
free speech far too much to even consider trying to ban or restrict it in
any way regardless of the consequences. Just as I adamently oppose any
attempt to impose "PC" speech on people (and, yes I _do_ know the effect
of words, among other subjects I teach courses in Minority Studies and
Social Problems), I oppose any attempt to limit the free exchange of
opinions between individuals. Perhaps those evaluations _do_ have the
potential to harm instructors--if so, and if the instructor can
demonstrate that the evaluation is slanderous (and false) then s/he has
legal recourse against the site where that evaluation was published. But
to attempt to prevent students from posting them in the first place--or
even worse to destroy the credibility of the site where they are posted by
unethical means--is a step toward censorship, something that (to me)
represents one of the most offensive acts a person is capable of
performing.
I'll take my chances with the evaluations. Perhaps some former students
with an axe to grind will rate me badly or post untruthful statements
about me, but that risk is one of the costs of living in a free society
and I'll pay it gladly.
Incidently, I looked up the evaluations of some instructors at nearby
institutions whose classroom techniques I'm familiar with (some are
excellent--some lack the skill necessary to teach felons how to steal),
and for the most part their reviews fell into two groups: those that were
fairly accurate and those that _clearly_ demonstrated personal bias (i.e.,
"she's so radical Karl Marx would adopt her") or lack of student
initiative (i.e., "her tests are _way_ too tough--I'm too busy to study
that much for classes"). If a student reading those evaluations couldn't
see the bias or sour grapes in them, those instructors would be far better
off if s/he decided not to take the class in the first place! Try it
yourself--check out some of the reviews at your institution or ones you
have attended recently and see if any good teachers are being maligned by
them in a manner that could hurt them. Poor teachers, yes. But, frankly, I
feel its fair for students to be warned about such teachers before wasting
their time and tuition dollars taking their courses, don't you?
Rick
--
Rick Adams
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Department of Social Sciences
Jackson Community College, Jackson, MI
"... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds
will be the love you leave behind when you're gone."
Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible"
