Issue 32, Spring 2007

William A. McEachern, Editor

The Grapevine

The Fall 2006 issue of The Teaching Economist reviewed student evaluations of economists appearing on RateMyProfessors.com. Economists teaching at small, elite colleges did better than economists at Ivy institutions, public universities, and two-year colleges. John Nye of Washington University in St. Louis writes: "I was struck by the results for the elite schools. I wonder if part of the story is that these schools have brighter, more self-selected students. And brighter, more motivated students are more likely to look with favor on teaching in general (of course, controlling for easiness, professor's looks, etc.). I notice that as our own student body has improved in quality over the years, so have my course ratings. Though I might like to think that I have learned more about teaching, I also think that our students are better prepared to deal with intellectually stimulating work and don't just expect to be entertained. One more point. I think that Econ is generally a tougher subject. At a large, non-elite school, there is more self-selection between courses, so I would expect economists at non-elites to suffer a "hardness" penalty. This would flatten the relative ratings at the elites because of the relative homogeneity of the student bodies (econ vs. non-econ) and widen it at the big schools." My one reservation about these explanations is that students at the Ivy schools are also smart and may not be looking to be entertained. Yet Ivy economists seemed to do the worst in the overall ratings, especially when we factor in that, as the "hottest" faculty of the bunch, they should have gotten a natural lift in their evaluations.

Also in my RateMyProfessors.com discussion of student evaluations, economists rated higher in overall quality were judged to be easier than those rated lower in overall quality. Michael McPherson of the University of North Texas finds, based on observations from 609 economics classes taught by 35 different instructors over eight and a half academic years, that instructors can "buy" higher student evaluation scores by awarding higher grades but only in principles courses. Tenured or tenure-track faculty receive substantially better evaluations than other teachers. And larger class size has a significantly negative effect on evaluations. "Determinants of How Students Evaluate Teachers" appeared in the Winter 2006 issue of the Journal of Economics Education.

Along similar lines, Laura Langbein of American University looked at all 7,686 courses taught there between the Fall 2000 and the Spring 2003 to see if faculty who award higher grades get better teaching evaluations. She finds that actual grades have a significant, positive effect on evaluations. The results hold up even after any possible endogeneity between evaluations and actual grade is taken into account. She concludes that students, faculty, and university administrators are engaged in an individually rational but socially destructive game. Evaluations send a faulty signal of teaching quality and grades send a faulty signal of a student's future performance on the job. "Management by Results: Student Evaluation of Faculty Teaching and the Mismeasurement of Performance" can be found at http://www.pubchoicesoc.org/papers2005/langbein.pdf

Dick Schiming of Minnesota State, Mankato, writes that he finally got around to reading I Am Charlotte Simmons, Tom Wolfe's novel set at an elite liberal arts college. He would like to share the following excerpt: "[B]ut if you want to be cool, you don't show it, you don't say it, you don't even let on. A cool guy-and I've seen this happen-can secretly work his ass off five-no, four-nights a week at the library, but he has to make light of it if anybody catches on. You know what the favorite major of the cool guy is? Econ. Econ is fireproof, if you know what I mean. It's practical. You can't possibly be taking it because you really love economics (p. 378)." Professor Schiming observes that at elite schools students often choose economics because it is the only business-related major available, so Wolfe's students major in economics for pragmatic, career reasons. Professor Schiming adds that Minnesota State has a college of business so students interested in a business career are more likely to major in marketing, management, finance, or accounting. "As a result, most of the econ majors are majors because of their inherent fascination, appreciation, and/or love of the discipline. When I teach our senior seminar, we talk early on in the semester about why they became economics majors. While none ever starts out as econ majors, they always tell me that they soon came to understand the power of the economic way of thinking. In some ways, it is a rather pure emotion as most of them are unsure or unaware of the employment opportunities. They came to econ and stayed because of the inherent attraction of the discipline."

This spring, William Becker of Indiana University is offering "Teaching Economics to Undergraduates,"a course aimed at graduate students in economics. The class meets weekly for two and a half hours and is required of those leading discussion sections. The focus is on instruction, organization, and assessment. His syllabus can be found at http://www.indiana.edu/~teaching/allabout/prepare/syllabi/E502.pdf.

Top                                                                                                                                                                                          Next