In light of the release of data concerning AU professor’s salaries, it is important to comment on the process behind determining these various increases or decreases in pay. To be sure, using salaries as a teaching incentive through merit pay is a wise move on the administration’s part. But to be effective, it must produce the intended consequences.
One of the most important steps in the determination of merit pay is the Student Evaluation of Teaching. Those infamous bubble sheets that reappear without fail at the end of the semester are much more than an excuse to stop lectures early. As The Eagle reports this issue, these forms play a critical role as departments decide various alterations in professors’ salaries.
Certainly, it is encouraging to see how much credence student evaluations hold in the allocation of merit pay. As long as AU’s goal is to educate, its students must have sufficient input within the process of establishing performance incentives. Still, there remain several obstacles that likely prevent evaluations from being a completely accurate representation of student views.
Few students realize that their individual assessment may be the difference between a professor’s raise and a pay cut. All too often, our classmates perfunctorily fill in a straight line of bubbles down the front of the sheet. The actual questions being asked receive little thought, if they are even read.
Of course there is a significant portion of students that recognize the weight of our words — rather bubbles — and give evaluations the thorough reflection they deserve. But to ensure that every student does this, the administration must make students aware of how important teacher evaluations really are.
Even before this happens however, the evaluation itself needs an overhaul. Few students, if any, can remember the professor evaluations different from their current form. As they stand, the questions only reveal a limited scope of student opinion — as much as can be understood through a numerical rating between one and seven.
Departments should put more importance on the written portion of the evaluations. As it is now, this section receives limited attention in the determination of merit pay and is instead largely meant for only the instructor’s use. If these surveys are truly intended to reflect the wide variety of possible opinions about a professor, administrators must at least consider the written portion.
Without these changes, the distribution of merit pay could defeat its own purpose. AU cannot put too much effort into ensuring that its best professors are rewarded, while ones lacking in skills are let go. Some may say that the system is good enough as is. But when one or two students potentially control thousands of dollars of a professor’s pay, the survey must accurately reflect student views. If not, evaluations become less helpful than harmful.
