Autumn Terry
Published: April 27, 2005
Some students admit that they are not completely honest when filling out those teacher evaluation forms this time of year.
The familiar forms ask how well faculty present the subject matter, whether they make the subject interesting, how fairly they test, how quickly they return papers, among about a dozen other qualities.
PJC student Megan Matts, for example, says she wants to be nice especially to teachers who are kind.
However, some teachers are great people who are not always good at teaching, she explained.
Brian Dean, another PJC student, said he has not always been honest on the evaluations. Sometimes Dean just thought it better to “give the teacher a cookie.” But now he says he’ll be more honest in the future.
Thom Botsford, head of the Department of English and Communications, said he takes the evaluations seriously, reading “every comment” written by students. Of course, he acknowledges that not every student remark is true.
Jelle Roos, an English and literature teacher, thinks most students are “more complementary than they should be.” He says the evaluations could accomplish more if there were some type of reward or penalty system.
There are, in fact, rewards for some teachers, Botsford said, metioning tenure and promotion as examples. But not all faculty are affected.
Henry Seiler, a biology teacher at PJC, said he takes the legitimate statements seriously. But Seiler believes students sometimes go as far as to mention personal, unchangeable defects in attacks on his performance.
“Students who make poor grades give the worst evaluations,” he added. “Students who make the good grades give the best evaluations.”
Or, to put it another way: “The teachers who are lenient get the best evaluations, and the teachers who are tough get the worst.”
Seiler said a college committee is working on a new system to change the content of the evaluation to focus more on subject matter. That way, a chemistry professor would not be evaluated with the same form given to an English teacher. The way the questions are now, one size fits all, Seiler said.
PJC student Shane Preble believes department heads don’t always consider the critical remarks given by the students. Preble said he gave a teacher a poor evaluation, pointing to her lack of skills, but nothing happened. The teacher is still on the job.
Dr. David Sam, vice president of academic affairs, agrees with Botsford that evaluations are taken very seriously. Sam adds that the evaluation process is a complicated matter because students aren’t customers as much as they are partners.
Sam compares acquiring an education to a gym contract. Does one place the entire blame on the gym because he or she did not lose weight or get in shape? Both parties are expected to play a part in the partnership, and if one party does not hold up part of the contract, the partnership will fail.
Sam believes students aren’t always honest because they don’t want to hurt the teacher’s feelings, or they are afraid the teacher may find out what they write. When students aren’t honest, however, the college cannot help both teacher and student improve.
That’s why Sam urges students to take the evaluations seriously. That way, teachers can learn something.
“Good teachers are always good learners, especially when it comes to learning how to be a better teacher,” he said.
