If you’ve noticed that student evaluations of teaching often seem unfair or biased, you’re not alone. Many parents and educators have expressed similar concerns. The reality is that these evaluations can be influenced by a variety of factors, including gender, race, and language biases.
Did you know that student evaluations of teaching can be biased by gender, race, and language? It's time to rethink the way we evaluate teaching and prioritize fairness, equity, and inclusivity.
Gender-Based Issues
Studies have found that students are more likely to expect special favors from female professors and react badly when those expectations aren’t met.
This can result in lower evaluation scores for female professors, even if their teaching is just as effective as their male counterparts.
The use of student evaluations as a primary means of assessing teaching effectiveness is a flawed and biased practice – Arlene
Laura Lurns · Learning Success expert
Race-Based Issues
Research has also shown that students rate courses lower when they are taught by a person of color or a female.
This can have serious consequences for faculty promotion and tenure, as well as for the diversity and inclusivity of educational institutions.
Key takeaways
- Gender Bias: Students are more likely to expect special favors from female professors.
- Race Bias: Students rate courses lower when taught by a person of color or a female.
- Language Bias: Mentioning an accent is associated with low evaluation scores.
Conclusion and Recommendations
In conclusion, student evaluations of teaching can be biased and flawed.
To address these issues, educational institutions should consider using more comprehensive and nuanced evaluation methods, such as peer review and self-assessment.
We need to move beyond simplistic and biased evaluation methods and towards a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of teaching effectiveness – Laura Lurns
Laura Lurns · Learning Success expert
The consequences of using biased student evaluations can be severe, including the perpetuation of systemic inequalities and the undermining of faculty morale. It’s time to rethink the way we evaluate teaching and to prioritize fairness, equity, and inclusivity.
See what All Access gives your child
Is your child struggling in school?
Get your free personalized learning roadmap
You describe what you see at home. We turn it into a plan you start this week.
- Answer 5 short questionnaires about what you already notice, 30–45 minutes at your own kitchen table
- Your child sits no test and gets no score: nothing to schedule, nothing for them to dread
- You do the answering, the AI does the writing, and a person reviews it before it reaches you
- Access all 40+ courses instantly: reading, math, focus, processing and more, with new ones added regularly
Why we use AI, plainly: it writes from a knowledge base our team maintains and audits. We work through it line by line and pull anything the evidence stops supporting. The roadmap you get on Tuesday reflects what we corrected on Monday, and a human still reads it before you do.
Your school district must evaluate your child free of charge if you ask in writing, whatever your income and whatever the outcome (US, 34 CFR 300.111 and 300.301(b)). That route takes time and answers a different question than you do. This one starts today, from what you already know.
Your answers stay yours. We do not sell your personal information, and we do not hand identifiable assessment data to outside AI companies to train their models.
A screener is a starting point, not a diagnosis. If your child might need formal accommodations (an IEP or 504 plan), or you suspect a vision, hearing or medical cause, pursue a professional evaluation too. That is the only route to those supports.
References
- Astle et al. (2023) - Understanding Mental Health in Developmental Dyslexia: A Scoping Review
- LWW Journals (2023) - Mental Health and Self-esteem: A Comparative Study between Dyslexic and Non-dyslexic Students
