Was I Not Supposed to be Honest?

[jujubea]

We recently had teacher evals, and I had one professor who, though great in some respects, was consistently (surprisingly) really not good in other respects.

I decided not to write all the details of the problems, but just say that I have been exposed to 7 other graduate professors' teaching styles, and this was blatantly poor quality, I was really just shocked. I have previously had "not-as-great" professors, everyone has their weaknesses, but this was just not good. Given the professor's penchant for laughing at others' opinions, everyone is afraid to talk to them about the issues. Indeed, when the professor comes up in hallway conversation, it is a big elephant in the room. 

HERE's the kicker. When we filled out evals, I was honest, but not brutal. I didn't give any 1's, but I think I gave a couple 2's and 3's. When I walked up to submit the eval to the folder, I noticed a few other people's papers just had 5's going the whole way down, or just 4's and 5's. Some of these were the students who had spoken up outside of class about how crappy the professor's teaching was.

So what is the deal? Are we not supposed to be honest on graduate evals? Are we supposed to do eval inflation the way they've done grade inflation for the students? A "4" really means a C? 

I was myself very disillusioned. I respect this professor's work a lot, and the person is one of the reasons I came to my program. Their work is advancing the field and their research is cutting edge. Does that mean we are not supposed to comment on the emperor's new clothes?

Edited December 7, 2015 by jujubea

[hippyscientist]

I don't know how it works at your school, but at mine (bear in mind I'm in the UK), evaluations are meant to be an honest reflection. It may be some students don't feel comfortable critiquing a professor's teaching style (even if the responses are anonymous) for fear it will come back and hurt them.

I work as a student representative, so am in constant communication with both my peers and the faculty and this has allowed us to address issues as they arise, or raise concerns if problems are not getting fixed, without the faff (for want of a better word) of evaluations. A common issue we've found with evaluations is students are notorious for not reading instructions! It may be some students assumed 5 was a low score (you don't mention the scale above, so I'm assuming a 1-5 Likert) or it may be that the comments were to "fit in" with those students who were more vocal in their displeasure of this certain lecturers slide. 

I'd say that being honest is important, but if the issue is gnawing at you, maybe speak to someone higher up, a personal tutor, a mentor...it depends on how your program is structured, and see if others have similar complaints.  In my experience, honesty is the best policy (with a bit of tact and dodging politics thrown in for good measure of course).

[kaykaykay]

Maybe other students were honest too they just did not have an issue with the teaching of that prof? Maybe you did not like him/her others did not. I had that sort of class.
I think teaching evaluations at the grad level should be constructive criticism if anything. At this level as piglet33 suggests you can talk directly to the prof/ any other people in your department if there is a serious issue with this prof+ you can drop the class if you do not like what you are getting.

 On the other hand your prof will read your anonymous comments hopefully to improve his/her class. the "you are the worst professor, the quality of this class is really poor" etc comments will not help in any way. you should suggest ways how to improve the class if you think it is remediable. (if not again you can talk to other people)

[shadowclaw]

I know as an undergraduate student, a lot of students didn't really take evaluations seriously and as long as they got a decent grade, they just filled in all 5's. Usually the only ones who gave low scores or left comments were those who did poorly. In my masters program, it looked like students took it a little more seriously, although I didn't have any terrible professors, so it's difficult to say if any of my fellow students would have actually given poor reviews to a poor professor. However, I do think that if a professor is a well-known and respected researcher (or maybe just really likable), there is a strong possibility that students will ignore his or her weaknesses and give very positive feedback because most people like to be nice. There's also the possibility that the students filled out the questions with 4's and 5's and decided to provide their criticism purely in the comment section so they could better articulate their issues (I'm assuming all schools have a space for comments).

I also think that in small courses, students are unlikely to give honest critiques since it's easier to figure out who's who, which is the reason my current school doesn't do evaluations for classes with fewer than I think six students. My school for my masters program didn't care about that, though. I actually had to do an evaluation for my thesis credits, and I sure as heck wasn't going to put anything other than a 5 on that evaluation, and I also drew a picture of a bird with a speech bubble that said "Dr. X is awesome" on the comment sheet. 

Personally, I have tried my best to do honest evaluations. If a professor was weak in some area, I didn't hesitate to give them a low score for that question. I've also given a very scathing evaluation or two. I recall one undergraduate course in particular that was online and was very easy. I'm sure most students gave the professor all 5's because it was so easy, but the professor essentially took no part in the course other than interacting with the same two or three students on the message board while ignoring everyone else. It was a huge waste of time of tuition. All we did was read the book (no lectures or outside readings were provided) and write a 2-3 sentence response to a question about the chapter each week (along with responding to another student's response). The exams were a joke and were untimed. You could literally have never read the book and just googled what you needed to know to answer the question each week and found answers to the exam questions. I was ruthless in my evaluation. 

[ExponentialDecay]

I wouldn't go by what students gossip to each other in the hallways. Like, everyone says those things about their professors, and most of the time it isn't even connected to their real opinion of them or their teaching. These conversations are social markers, like "ugh, if I don't have coffee in the morning, I will die", or "this is awesome!", or "my mom is so annoying I hate her" or "nice to meet you". You won't literally die if you don't have coffee. And you probably don't hate your mother. And meeting them was more like passable-to-mediocre rather than nice. None of it means anything.

As for evals, I don't think most people have such a scientific approach to them. It's not like I keep a special notebook where I write down how I evaluate every professor I've ever had so that I can compare future professors fairly. Usually, if I'm happy with this aspect of their teaching, I give them a 5, if they could improve, I give them a 4. I don't agree that the only people that mark professors harshly are people who did poorly in the class (evidently, at least one other category is nerds who take course evals way too seriously), but gosh, you need to relax.

[TakeruK]

Being honest is fine. I am as honest in my evaluations as I think it would make a difference. If I don't think anyone takes my comments seriously, then I won't bother writing them. In my department, I know they are definitely read---a staff members types them all up and then binds them into a book and the book is distributed annually to all faculty members. Faculty read them to see their own evaluations and to use the information to advise their students on which courses would be valuable. I think the reports are considered during tenure review and the TA evals that go into those reports are used to help determine the TA awards each year.

In addition to what others said about the professor, maybe they still think it was 5/5 teaching even if they had complained. Maybe they want to give everyone 5/5. That's their prerogative. 

And, keep in mind that teaching evaluations could have very little weight. In my opinion, these only matter when the professor reading them actually cares about their evaluations and take action to change their own teaching. Things vary from program to program, but I know my school will place almost zero weight on teaching evals for tenure evaluations. If the comments indicated that the professor violated code of conduct, then it might lead to an investigation, but otherwise, teaching ability has almost no impact on tenure here. Unfortunately, this also means that if a professor doesn't care about their teaching evaluations, their teaching would be crappy, then they would not read their comments (or not act on them) so their teaching remains crappy. 

Finally, keep in mind that relative to grad student timescales (5-7 years), departments and faculty operate on much longer timescales. Most departments I've experienced assign teaching duties on 3 year cycles and since it's really tough to put out a balanced schedule, there is very little that would change their schedules. So if Prof X is scheduled for Course Y for the next 3 years, even if they received all 0/5 on the first teaching evaluation, it is very unlikely that they will be removed from teaching that course in the next 2 years. Instead, maybe the next time they are considered for that course, the department will suggest they do something else. But, given that professors do shuffle courses in each 3-year-cycle, Professor X may not request this course again for another 2-3 cycles, which means something like denying Prof X the ability to teach a course that they were crappy at might be something that won't take affect for another 9-12 years. You'll never see this and even if you are around, you won't hear about it unless you get to sit in on the committee that decides this.

[MathCat]

I am honest in my evaluations. However, the actual questions they on evaluations usually don't capture the issue, and usually warrant positive answers. Even for a professor I thought was truly terrible, I gave 3's or higher on pretty much everything, because that was what was honest. For example, the questions ask if the professor is prepared for class, if they are available to provide help as needed, etc. Those weren't the problems, so I wouldn't lie and give a 1 or 2 for those things. However, I will leave critical comments (and suggestions), and that's really where you can see my opinion of them. Maybe that is the case here.

[serenade]

I could write an entire book on my opinion of faculty evals. But don't worry...I'll try (but probably fail) to keep this concise. To start, I'm sorry to hear you had a bad experience with this professor. It can be very frustrating. So long as you believe your professor can't reasonably decipher your eval from those of the other students, I see no reason to hold back if you have legitimate criticism. That's what evals are for, though as others on this board have noted, many students treat them flippantly. So in sum, yes it's perfectly reasonable to be honest and give constructive feedback. 

The story I'm about to share might well sound whiny and probably has zero relevance to anyone since almost no one would be stupid enough to do what I did, but I'll share it nonetheless as an example of when an honest evaluation is a bad idea. [This anecdote occurred at a completely different institution and with a different advisor than what I mentioned in a recent post on this board -"that one annoying student", just FYI]. 

During my second semester of my MA program, I was in a directed readings course with my advisor, whom I had known since my sophomore year of undergrad. He agreed to advise this course, but apparently planned on half-a$$ing it. I realize different people and institutions have different expectations for directed study courses. If limited interaction is expected on both sides, no problem. However, in my small university, close student-faculty interaction was expected. I realize that's not the case for every advisor/student and institution. That being said, in my department, if a course was in the registrar's system, the instructor was required to make a syllabus. My advisor did not make a syllabus and literally made the course up as the semester went on. I'm not opposed to flexibility, but he treated the course as an afterthought. He only required me to read three books the entire semester. I understand part of grad school is figuring out what to read on your own, but he treated the course so flippantly. I would submit a book review by email and he would take sometimes up to a month before getting back to me to say "read X next." There was no master plan. The paper I wrote for that course was one of my thesis chapters. When I submitted it to him, he returned it with revisions. Since it was a thesis chapter, I (stupidly) assumed the revisions were for the eventual, final chapter, i.e. when I was actually writing the chapter into my thesis. I didn't know he expected me to send the corrected version back to him before the end of the semester. Had I had a syllabus, or if he had simply told me, I would have known. On Friday evening of the last day of the semester, I got an email from him (while he was in Europe) asking me where my paper was. This resulted in me staying up until 3 a.m. making corrections to send back to him with profuse apologies on my part. He never acknowledged his lack of clarity. Finally, he never met with me. Everything was by email ("everything" meaning me sending a book review and him emailing me back saying "next read X.") No substantive communication. No meetings. 

Sometime that semester, I was talking to the department head and the subject of my directed study course came up. I casually mentioned, without really thinking, something about my advisor conducting my directed study course through email. The dept head became furious that he was blowing off the course, 'wasting' my tuition money (though I had funding, but it was the principle of the matter, I guess), and being negligent. So the dept head talked to my advisor, telling him he needed to be holding regular meetings with me. My advisor's response was to hold one meeting. For the entire semester. Not exactly what the dept head meant by "regular" meetings. My advisor began that single meeting with the words, "Well, the department is forcing me to meet with you, so....I guess let's get started." I know grad students are supposed to have thick skins, but that comment really plummeted my self confidence, which was already pretty low after he had been neglecting me. 

SO, all that to say, at the end of the semester, I wrote a pretty scathing eval. Yes, it was a stupid idea. I was the only person in the course! There was no anonymity. Yes, I was an idiot. But I was also 22 and foolish, and I chose a bad medium to make comments. My evaluation was actually cool headed and well written (admitted another professor in my department who was furious at me for attacking his colleague and hampering their "working culture," i.e. half a$$ing. The fact that it was well written, said prof lamented, would make it harder for the promotion review committee to ignore my eval). On the "suggestions for improvement" question, I suggested 1) a syllabus 2) a reading list of more than 3 books and 3) face to face meetings, with a few sentences on each. I thought I was giving constructive and honest feedback. My advisor thought otherwise. To put it lightly, he was FURIOUS. He was up for promotion from assistant to associate prof. that year. He accused me of trying to hinder his promotion and put his family in financial danger (which was doubly awkward considering I knew his wife and in-laws fairly well from a variety of contexts). He then told me he would be happy if I found a new advisor. To make an already long story (sorry!) short, my life was hell until I graduated. I cried a lot that year. Spent a good amount of time at the campus counseling center. Sweated out his upcoming promotion review like it was my own because I felt responsible for his job, family, and well being. That's a lot to put on a 22 year old's shoulders. All because of ONE evaluation (which I later realized by itself will not make or break anyone's tenure review). The short version is that he continued to hold a grudge, remained distant, and openly laughed when I asked him to hood me at graduation and refused to show up. However, despite his anger, he wrote me strong letters of rec and I got into a good PhD program. He also passed his promotion review in which the dean casually flipped through his teaching evals and didn't even stop to read mine (according to the dept head who told me this later). So all's well that ends well. (Though over a year later, I am still emotionally recovering from being on the verge of a nervous breakdown for nearly a year). 

I say all of this to say: the only time an honest eval can hurt you is when there's no anonymity and you are stupid enough to express your opinions through that medium! 

[ExponentialDecay]

On December 8, 2015 at 2:43 AM, serenade said:

I say all of this to say: the only time an honest eval can hurt you is when there's no anonymity and you are stupid enough to express your opinions through that medium! 

Yes and no. To be fair, there is a lot more going on in your story than you writing an honest eval in a one-student class. I'm writing this with your recent advisor/speaking up problem in mind because I'm a creep who creeps people's profiles and sometimes strikes gold.

First things first, your MA advisor/professor was highly unprofessional (and maybe is an asshole in general). It was definitely not okay to accuse you of jeopardizing his career, even if you had done that, because a person who is going up for tenure should be able to put his big-boy pants on and deal with the problem instead of uselessly flailing at his underlings. The fact that you hadn't, and he had to have known that, suggests that the guy was just using you to blow off steam, and we don't need to go into how not cool that is. It was not cool of him to act like you weren't welcome in his office and like he didn't want to see you. It was not cool of him to get pissy on your graduation day.

At the same time, you seem to have a problem with your communication skills which will ensure that you find yourself in this situation again and again. You seem to bottle up your feelings until they boil over.

Quote

My advisor did not make a syllabus and literally made the course up as the semester went on. I'm not opposed to flexibility, but he treated the course as an afterthought. He only required me to read three books the entire semester. I understand part of grad school is figuring out what to read on your own, but he treated the course so flippantly. I would submit a book review by email and he would take sometimes up to a month before getting back to me to say "read X next." There was no master plan. The paper I wrote for that course was one of my thesis chapters. When I submitted it to him, he returned it with revisions. Since it was a thesis chapter, I (stupidly) assumed the revisions were for the eventual, final chapter, i.e. when I was actually writing the chapter into my thesis. I didn't know he expected me to send the corrected version back to him before the end of the semester. Had I had a syllabus, or if he had simply told me, I would have known. On Friday evening of the last day of the semester, I got an email from him (while he was in Europe) asking me where my paper was.

This resulted in me staying up until 3 a.m. making corrections to send back to him with profuse apologies on my part. 

 He never acknowledged his lack of clarity. Finally, he never met with me. Everything was by email ("everything" meaning me sending a book review and him emailing me back saying "next read X.") No substantive communication. No meetings.

Nothing in that paragraph displays good conflict resolution skills, but that is what hit it home for me. Okay, you apologized because you were presumably late with your work, which is appropriate - but why profuse? But more importantly, why did you not mention your concerns to your advisor at any point during the entire semester? The email with your final paper, which he asked for out of the blue and gave you 6 hours to produce, would have been a perfect opportunity to mention that you were startled by his request because the requirements for the course had never been discussed and you were confused about what you were supposed to be doing the whole semester (along with apologies for being late, profuse or not). Would that have fixed anything? No. Would your email have irritated him? Yes. But it would have done a very important thing that you failed to do throughout this ordeal: it would have let your advisor know that you are unhappy with the situation, and it would have given you documented proof that he was aware of your status. 

From this story, it looks like you expect people to read your mind. Not once in your story do you mention having discussed your concerns with your advisor. Then how do you expect him to know that you have concerns? I understand it was policy at your university for the instructor to have a syllabus, but policy is a guideline that's there in the event that the interested sides can't come to an agreement between themselves - such as your own situation, if you had tried to discuss it with your advisor. To add to your advisor's foot-long list of bad behavior, not asking you for input on how you want to be advised was an obvious mistake. However, the responsibility to tell him that you are unhappy with the arrangement lies with you. Yeah, it puts you into an uncomfortable position, but that position would have been miles better than the one you finally found yourself in. Being okay with feeling uncomfortable is an important life skill, but women especially need to be okay with making other people feel uncomfortable when it interferes with work. You'd want your advisor to tell you if you're doing something wrong, right, not least because you probably don't know that you're wrong? Your advisor deserves the same courtesy. 

From your advisor's perspective, you betrayed him. First (I assume - it's not clear at what point), you went behind his back and complained about him to another professor. We only do that when we can't resolve the issue between us; however, in your situation, he didn't even know there was an issue. Then you wrote him a scathing review full of serious stuff that has never come up in conversation between you! All the while, you seemed perfectly pleasant and content, but apparently dealing with issues so serious that you had to go to his superiors about them. From his perspective, you lied to him for 4 months. On top of that, you apparently knew him and his family outside of class (as friends?). I think he felt pretty vulnerable.

Once again, I am not defending your advisor. He fucked up. Teenagers have better coping skills (which is why I'm writing this). But here's the rub. Even if he were maliciously trying to give you a nervous disorder to tickle his own sick sense of humor, he could play the situation like you were in the wrong. That's something you want to avoid like the plague. This is why it is important to address your concerns early and often. If you need to involve the higher powers, you need documented evidence that you tried something and this guy thwarted it. If you come to them and say, my feeling are hurt but I've been keeping a stiff upper lip about it, they're going to congratulate you on your stiff upper lip and tell you that they can't do anything unless there is evidence of misconduct. I've been there before and sure, people make a big show of indignation etc, but nobody does anything until you give them due cause. Sometimes you have to be the bigger person in front of people who are bigger than you.

Back to the original topic, I originally assumed that ratings were different from comments. I write thorough comments, but I don't pummel somebody's ratings unless they're really getting on my nerves.

Edited December 11, 2015 by ExponentialDecay