Cruel and Usual

In higher education, student evaluation of teaching (SET) has been under scrutiny for its lack of validity, weak correlation with student learning, and bias toward historically marginalized faculty. Absent from the literature are the psychological and financial implications of negative SETs. In an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mary Lourdes Silva, Josephine Walwema, Matt Thomas
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Indiana University Office of Scholarly Publishing 2025-06-01
Series:Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Subjects:
Online Access:https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/36729
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849704411985608704
author Mary Lourdes Silva
Josephine Walwema
Matt Thomas
author_facet Mary Lourdes Silva
Josephine Walwema
Matt Thomas
author_sort Mary Lourdes Silva
collection DOAJ
description In higher education, student evaluation of teaching (SET) has been under scrutiny for its lack of validity, weak correlation with student learning, and bias toward historically marginalized faculty. Absent from the literature are the psychological and financial implications of negative SETs. In an exploratory mixed methods study of 344 instructors, our findings reveal that the majority of respondents have been impacted both psychologically and financially. Female faculty and faculty of color are disproportionately affected psychologically with female faculty reporting negative affective experiences for 5 to 20+ years. Common reasons include feelings of powerlessness, frustrations with SETs as a metric for teacher quality, and biases linked to instructors' identities. Financially, both female faculty and faculty of color were more likely to report measurable and immeasurable financial losses, ranging from denial of promotion to additional time for student care or decreased time to advance one’s career. The pressure on historically marginalized faculty to counter bias in SETs has wide-ranging psychological and financial repercussions, which underscores the labor inequities of an unjust system of assessment and the ethical implications of universities and colleges requiring faculty to review biased, and at times, abusive student comments.
format Article
id doaj-art-14cb595d6dcc423d9f8a77c0b77b7e8f
institution DOAJ
issn 1527-9316
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher Indiana University Office of Scholarly Publishing
record_format Article
series Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
spelling doaj-art-14cb595d6dcc423d9f8a77c0b77b7e8f2025-08-20T03:16:46ZengIndiana University Office of Scholarly PublishingJournal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning1527-93162025-06-0125210.14434/josotl.v25i2.36729Cruel and UsualMary Lourdes Silva0https://orcid.org/0009-0009-9860-6468Josephine Walwema1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9677-9308Matt Thomas2https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5331-6768Ithaca CollegeUniversity of WashingtonCornell University In higher education, student evaluation of teaching (SET) has been under scrutiny for its lack of validity, weak correlation with student learning, and bias toward historically marginalized faculty. Absent from the literature are the psychological and financial implications of negative SETs. In an exploratory mixed methods study of 344 instructors, our findings reveal that the majority of respondents have been impacted both psychologically and financially. Female faculty and faculty of color are disproportionately affected psychologically with female faculty reporting negative affective experiences for 5 to 20+ years. Common reasons include feelings of powerlessness, frustrations with SETs as a metric for teacher quality, and biases linked to instructors' identities. Financially, both female faculty and faculty of color were more likely to report measurable and immeasurable financial losses, ranging from denial of promotion to additional time for student care or decreased time to advance one’s career. The pressure on historically marginalized faculty to counter bias in SETs has wide-ranging psychological and financial repercussions, which underscores the labor inequities of an unjust system of assessment and the ethical implications of universities and colleges requiring faculty to review biased, and at times, abusive student comments. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/36729student evaluation of teachinggender biasrace biaspsychological impact
spellingShingle Mary Lourdes Silva
Josephine Walwema
Matt Thomas
Cruel and Usual
Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
student evaluation of teaching
gender bias
race bias
psychological impact
title Cruel and Usual
title_full Cruel and Usual
title_fullStr Cruel and Usual
title_full_unstemmed Cruel and Usual
title_short Cruel and Usual
title_sort cruel and usual
topic student evaluation of teaching
gender bias
race bias
psychological impact
url https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/36729
work_keys_str_mv AT marylourdessilva cruelandusual
AT josephinewalwema cruelandusual
AT mattthomas cruelandusual