The issue is whether the student based teacher evaluation is gender biased. Gender bias is a common social vice that is described as the subjective perception that some people are better positioned to perform some task based on their masculinity of their femininity. For instance, most societies hold that boys or men are better at academics, rationality and in most cases possess socially unruly behavior while their female counterparts are socially interactive, more disciplined and better in arts and languages (Templeton, 2016). With such gender-based bias ingrained in the society, the fundamental question is whether students are affected by gender bias while undertaking teacher evaluations.
Concerning the impact if gender bias in the evaluation of teachers, the research dates back to the 1960s (Templeton, 2016). During these years, the studies were inclined towards investigating the impact of teacher bias on gender and race during classroom activities. One of the early studies on the subject was conducted in 1973 (Templeton, 2016). The research's objective was to identify the relationship between the students’ ratings students assigned their male and female teachers. This study, however, provided a little correlation between the two variables.
Later on in 1975, a similar study revealed that male students favored their male instructors during student's evaluation. The girls, on the other hand, were found to value the assessment process better than the male students did by showing much more commitment and honesty while rating the teachers (Collins, Chrisler & Quina, 1998). In spite of rating all the instructors, they showed a significant favor towards the female teachers. As such, the research concluded that there is a significant correlation between gender and student teacher evaluation.
Other studies have concentrated on the observation that some teachers exhibit gender bias during their teaching activities. For example, in most classrooms, the boys are seen to be the dominant and teachers favor them by involving them in class discussion more than they do for the girls. According to these researchers, this is most likely to affect the manner in which the students rate their teachers (Streitmatter, 1994). In such a situation, the girls are probably expected to assign low ratings to the teachers who disfavor them in class while the boys are expected to rate the same teachers highly. This sought of behavior is seen to be driven more by revenge contrary to the gender stereotype that men and women should remain in their respective circles in the society (Doubleday & Lee, 2016).
A more conclusive study on the matter was conducted and published in 2000. The research examined the student's teacher ratings from the student instructional report, which is an evaluation form used to evaluate university instructors. From the analysis of the reports, it was revealed that the female professors had a 6/8 chance of good rating for the female students (Guskey, 2010). On the other hand, the male teachers received the equitable ratings from the female and male students during the evaluation process. The research provided more details concerning the favor of the female teachers by a majority of the students. The female instructors were found to have been better at classroom communication and engagement of stunts. Additionally, they were more lively and social while interacting with the students relative to the male instructors. The research provided conclusive evidence that gender stereotypes affect the teacher evaluation process.
Gender bias could produce significant effects on the teacher evaluation process by the students as seen from the above texts. In the incidence of unfair assessment of either the female of male teachers, there could be a possible adverse effect on the quality of education and classroom standards. For instance, the persistence of gender bias in teacher evaluation has a challenge because the students can discourage either female or male teachers from performing to their maximum in aiding the student (Zittleman & Sadker, 2002). As such, this research should be furthered to identify if there is a particular correlation between gender stereotypes by the students during teacher evaluation, which would provide ideas on how the impact could be eliminated.
As a conclusion, evaluation in the education sector has increased significantly and students have also been integrated in the evaluation procedures. The evaluation of tutors in educational institutions plays an imperative role in enhancing institutions to provide responsive programs to students. However, gender bias has been identified as a major challenge and it affects the outcome and the purpose of the evaluations. For instance, various studies have identified gender biases during evaluations, which might make such evaluations ineffective. For instance, female students have been found to rate, male tutors and professors highly as compared to female counterparts. Such bias can create stereotypes that might affect the productivity of the professors and tutors due to the creation of perceptions towards certain students.
References
Doubleday, A. F., & Lee, L. M. (2016). Dissecting the voice: Health profession students' perceptions of instructor age and gender in an online environment and the impact on evaluations for faculty. Anatomical Sciences Education, n/a-n/a. doi:10.1002/ase.1609
Guskey, T. R. (2010). On your mark: Challenging the conventions of grading and reporting.
Templeton, K. (2016). The Impact of Gender on Teaching Evaluations of Faculty: Another Example of Unconscious Bias? Journal of Women's Health, 25(5), 420-421. doi:10.1089/jwh.2016.29008.kte
Collins, L. H., Chrisler, J. C., & Quina, K. (1998). Career strategies for women in academia: Arming Athena. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Zittleman, K., & Sadker, D. (2002). Gender Bias in Teacher Education Texts: New (and Old) Lessons. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 168-180. doi:10.1177/0022487102053002008
Streitmatter, J. (1994). Toward gender equity in the classroom: Everyday teachers' beliefs and practices. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
