Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Student Evaluations and Gendered Expectations: What We Can't Count Can Hurt Us

  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Does teacher's gender impact students' evaluations? We critically evaluated the research literature and concluded that the form gender bias takes may not be easily detectible by quantitative scales. To explore this possibility, we did a qualitative analysis of the words that 288 college students at two campuses used to describe their best- and worst-ever teachers. Although we found considerable overlap in the ways that students talked about their male and female teachers, we also saw indications that students hold teachers accountable to certain gendered expectations. These expectations place burdens on all teachers, but the burdens on women are more labor-intensive. We also saw signs of much greater hostility toward women than toward men who do not meet students' gendered expectations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aleamoni, L. (1999). Student rating myths versus research facts from 1924 to 1998. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 13, 153–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bachen, C., McLoughlin, M.,& Garcia, S. (1999). Assessing the role of gender in college students' evaluations of faculty. Communication Education, 48, 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, P.,& Copp, M. (1997). Gender matters most: The interaction of gendered expectations, feminist course content, and pregnancy in student course evaluations. Teaching Sociology, 25, 29–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartky, S. (1988). Foucault, femininity, and the modernization of patriarchal power. In L. Quinby& I. Diamond (Eds.), Feminism and Foucault: Paths of resistance (pp. 61–86). Boston, MA: Northeastern Univ. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basow, S. A. (2000). Best and worst professors: Gender patterns in students choices. Sex Roles, 43, 401–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1983). Gender schema theory and its implications for child development: Raising gender-aschematic children in a gender-schematic society. Signs, 8, 598–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, S. K. (1982). Student perceptions of and expectations for male and female instructors: Evidence relating to the question of gender bias in teaching evaluation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 170–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biernat, M. (1995). The shifting standards model: Implications of stereotype accuracy for social judgment. In Y. T. Lee, L. Jussim,& C. McCauley (Eds.), Stereotypes: Perspectives on accuracy and inaccuracy (pp. 87–114). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biernat, M.,& Kobrynowicz, D. (1997). Gender- and race-based standards of competency: Lower minimum standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 544–557.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Biernat, M.,& Manis, M. (1994). Shifting standards and stereotype-based judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 5–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Biernat, M., Manis, M.,& Nelson, T. E. (1991). Stereotypes and standards of judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 485–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bordo, S. (1993). Unbearable weight: Feminism, western culture, and the body. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray, J.,& Howard, J. (1980). Interaction of teacher and student sex and sex role orientations and student evaluations of college instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 5, 241–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns-Glover, A.,& Veith, D. (1995). Revisiting gender and teaching evaluations: Sex still makes a difference. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10(6), 69–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carli, L. L. (1990). Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941–951.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashin, W. E. (1999). Student ratings of teaching: Uses and misuses. In P. Seldin (Ed.), Changing practices in evaluating teaching: A practical guide to improved faculty performance and promotion/tenure decisions (pp. 25–40). Boston, MA: Anker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chafetz, J. (Ed.). (1999). Handbook of the sociology of gender. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (1983/2004). Grounded theory. In S. N. Hesse-Biber& P. Levy (Eds.), Approaches to qualitative research: A reader on theory and practice (pp. 496–521). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, N. (1992). Teaching about inequality: Student resistance, paralysis, and rage. Teaching Sociology, 20, 232–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eitzen, S.,& Zinn, M. B. (1989). The de-athleticization of women: The naming and gender-marking of collegiate sport teams. Sociology of Sport Journal, 6, 362–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • England, P., Herbert, M. S., Kilbourne, B. S., Reid, L. L.,& Megdal, L. M. (1994). The gendered valuation of occupations and skills: Earnings in the 1980 census occupations. Social Forces, 73(1), 65–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, K. (1992). College students' views of male and female college teachers: Part I–-Evidence from the social laboratory and experiments. Research in Higher Education, 33, 317–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, K. (1993). College students' views of male and female college teachers: Part II–-Evidence from students' evaluations of their classroom teachers. Research in Higher Education, 34, 151–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, J.,& Mateo, M. (1997). Student and faculty gender in ratings of university teaching quality. Sex Roles, 37, 997–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferree, M. M., Lorber, J.,& Hess, B. B. (Eds.). (1999). Revisioning gender. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferree, M. M.,& McQuillan, J. (1998). Methodological and policy issues in university salary studies. Gender and Society, 12, 7–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T.,& Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, H. (1994). Student evaluations of college instructors: Effects of type of course taught, instructor gender and gender role, and student gender. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 627–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallup Poll online. (2001, February 21). Americans see women as emotional and affectionate, men as more aggressive. Retrieved from February 27, 2001 http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr010221.asp

  • Hochschild, A. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, J. W.,& Rothbart, M. (1980). Social categorization and memory for in-group and out-group behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 301–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kashima, Y. (2000). Maintaining cultural stereotypes in the serial reproduction of narratives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 594–600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobrynowicz, D.,& Biernat, M. (1997). Decoding subjective evaluations: How stereotypes provide shifting standards. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 579–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobrynowicz, D.,& Biernat, M. (1998). Considering correctness, contrast, and categorization in stereotyping phenomena. In R. S. Wyer Jr. (Ed.), Stereotype activation and inhibition: Advances in social cognition (pp. 109–126). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, C., Thorne, B.,& Henley, N. (1978). Perspectives on language and communication. Signs, 3, 638–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and women's place. New York: Harper& Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, E. (1984). Power and authority in the classroom: Sexist stereotypes in teaching evaluations. Signs, 9, 482–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, P. Y. (1996). Gendering and evaluating dynamics: Men, masculinities, and managements. In D. Collinson& J. Hearn (Eds.), Men as managers, managers as men (pp. 186–209). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messner, M. A. (2000). White guy habitus in the classroom: Challenging the reproduction of privilege. Men and Masculinities, 2, 457–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messner, M. A., Duncan, M.,& Jensen, K. (1993). Separating the men from the girls: The gendered language of televised sports. Gender and Society, 7, 121–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J.,& Chamberlin, M. (2000). Women are teachers, men are professors: A study of student perceptions. Teaching Sociology, 28, 283–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neitz, M. J. (1985). Resistances to feminist analysis. Teaching Sociology, 12, 339–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rakow, L. F. (1991). Gender and race in the classroom: Teaching way out of line. Feminist Teacher, 6, 10–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L. (1987). Nonverbal behavior, dominance, and the basis of status in task groups. American Sociological Review, 52, 683–694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothbart, M., Evans, M.,& Fulero, S. (1979). Recall for confirming events: Memory processes and the maintenance of social stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 237–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, R. B. (1981). Ideal traits and terms of address for male and female college professors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 966–974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seldin, P. (1999). Current practices-good and bad-nationally. In P. Seldin (Ed.), Changing practices in evaluating teaching: A practical guide to improved faculty performance and promotion/tenure decisions (pp. 1–24). Boston, MA: Anker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, L.,& Kunda, Z. (2000). Motivated stereotyping of women: She's fine if she praised me, but incompetent if she criticized me. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1329–1342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siskind, T.,& Kearns, S. (1997). Gender bias in the evaluation of female faculty at the citadel: A qualitative analysis. Sex Roles, 37, 495–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprague, J. (2005). Feminist methodologies for critical researchers: Bridging differences. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira/Rowman& Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprague, J.,& Kobrynowicz, D. (1999, August). Gender and the evaluation of teachers. Paper presented at the meetings of the American Sociological Association, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, R.,& Haignere, L. (1987). Equitable compensation: Methodological criteria for comparable worth. In C. Bose& G. Spitze (Eds.), Ingredients for women's employment policy (pp. 157–182). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.,& Corbin, J. (1994) Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin& Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273–285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatro, C. (1995). Gender effects on student evaluations of faculty. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 28, 169–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trout, P. (2000, July/August). Flunking the test: The dismal record of student evaluations. Academe, 86, 58–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, C.,& Fenstermaker, S. (1993). Doing difference. Gender and Society, 9, 8–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, C.,& Zimmerman, D. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeless, V.,& Potorti, P. (1989). Student assessment of teacher masculinity and femininity: A test of the sex role congruency hypothesis on student attitudes toward learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 259–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadny, J.,& Gerard, H. B. (1974). Attributed intentions and informational selectivity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 34–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas

    Joey Sprague & Kelley Massoni

  2. Department of Sociology, University of Kansas, 716 Fraser Hall, Lawrence, KS, 66045

    Joey Sprague

Authors
  1. Joey Sprague
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kelley Massoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joey Sprague.

Additional information

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, Chicago, IL, August, 2002.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sprague, J., Massoni, K. Student Evaluations and Gendered Expectations: What We Can't Count Can Hurt Us. Sex Roles 53, 779–793 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-8292-4

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-8292-4

Key Words

Search

Navigation