Sociology is Different: The Misevaluation of Teaching Effectiveness

Abstract

This paper inquires into the special problems of teaching undergraduate sociology in the last decades of the twentieth century. A major tenet of the argument is that sociology instructors, while facing with their colleagues in other departments a common set of pedagogical concerns, must also confront a distinct, perhaps unique, set of problems that results from the very nature of sociology and, to a lesser extent, from its uncertain status within the university curriculum. Sociology has been from its inception, an “oppositional science.” The critical nature of sociology renders the evaluation of teaching effectiveness particularly difficult. For this reason, I argue that the use of students’ratings as the single, or central, measure of teaching effectiveness may actually decrease the quality of classroom instructors rather than to produce the presumed intended result of increasing it.

How do we rate? An evaluation of online student evaluations

“…Over the last 20 years, many social scientists have studied and critiqued student evaluations of teaching (Abrami and Mizener 1985;Dowd 1988;Goldman 1990;Blunt 1991;Benson and Lewis 1994;Wachtel 1998). Recently, Smith and Pino (2005) observe a declining commitment to an academic work ethic, specifically learning and self-development, among students today.…”

Cross-level effects of class characteristics on students' perceptions of teaching quality.

“…Subjects with a strong theoretical orientation, such as sociology courses in the present study, demand intensive intellectual exercises, imagination, and creative thinking. Students coming from other fields of study may not appreciate such practices, leading to disapproval of the teaching style and the course design (Dowd, 1988). These arguments suggest that senior students and those majoring in the same field as the course, as a result of better learning skills, greater exposure to the course subjects, and a self-selection process, will be more receptive and therefore inclined to give higher course ratings.…”

“…As an institutional response to the demand for public accountability, course evaluation has become standard practice in most universities in the United States. Having the appeal of being objective and precise, together with the rise of student consumerism, students’ ratings based on a standard set of questions have gained popularity over other evaluative procedures such as self-evaluation, peer review, and the department chair’s assessment (Dowd, 1988; Hamilton, 1980; Ory, 1991). Recently, student ratings have spread to the East, where economic prosperity and the rise of democracy have begun to challenge the traditional authority and autonomy of higher education institutions.…”