A short time from now, students will be taking finals and filling out teacher evaluations. And while students are stressed over finals, members of the faculty are concerned about the evaluations.
Many schools in the University use the student feedback as a vehicle for determining teachers' abilities, and in turn, are often used as a basis for the monetary value of a faculty member.
Because of this, according to associate physics Prof. Katherine Freese, there is considerable room for gender bias in faculty salaries at the University.
"In the physics department, salaries are determined 50 percent by research, 30 percent by teaching and 20 percent by service," Freese said.
"The 30 percent - for which the student surveys are totally accountable - is the thing I'm concerned about. There is statistical evidence of gender bias on (student) evaluations, especially against women teaching technical courses in physics and math."
Developed in 1975 by the University's Center for Research on Learning and Teaching as a way for students to evaluate teachers and classes, the evaluations have recently taken on a different role - affecting teacher's salaries and bonuses.
"The teacher evaluations were originally presented as an instrument for the faculty to improve their professional development," said Lou D'Alecy, a physiology professor and member of the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs.
Freese said that salaries are based more on student feedback than on intangible factors, such as teachers' efforts to reach out to students.
"Women who teach highly technical classes tend to get lower evaluations," Freese said. "Based on this system that we have at the University, (women) will get lower raises, and this concerns me of course."
The presence of gender bias in faculty salaries is an extension of what professors see as a lack of student interest in truthfully evaluating courses and teachers.
"I think that if it had to do with how (teachers) were paid, I'd definitely pay more attention to the survey," said LSA first-year student Sara Guren.
"I wouldn't take their gender into account - the way they teach is the way they teach. If they suck and they're a woman, they suck. There are just as many bad male teachers as there are women."
William McKeachie, a former director of CRLT, agreed with Freese's claims of gender bias. During his role as director, he said there was no gender bias.
"In my research earlier, there wasn't much gender bias," McKeachie said. "In classes where students achieved better, the teacher's ratings were higher. Now, women teachers who are not friendly or outgoing tend to be knocked down. For women, there's a greater expectation than that of the male."
Freese said laying the blame for gender bias on society is expected, but the evaluations should be analyzed accordingly by the University.
"The more you act like the 'mother' of students, the better the evaluation you get," Freese said. "Obviously, it is difficult in a high-tech, large class to be very personable in a motherly kind of way. Therefore, people tend to perceive women as being tough and unpleasant in ways that would not carry over to men."
LSA Edie Goldenberg said potential biases are taken into consideration when making salary and bonus decisions.
"When we review recommended salary levels at the (college) level, we try to be sensitive to any gender biases that might be present," Goldenberg said.
While many members of the University community debate the issues surrounding the uses and effects of student evaluations, they continue to impact the faculty.
"Those evaluations were originally designed for teaching feedback," said SACUA Chair Thomas Dunn.
"Then, we were told that they were necessary, and would be used to determine salaries and bonuses. (The evaluations) provide absolutely necessary feedback, but I don't think they have any value as determinants of good teaching," Dunn said.
"If one were paranoid, they may think that (the evaluations) are a pre-tenure review to determine faculty that needs to be disposed of," D'Alecy said.
According to information released by the Office of Evaluations and Examinations, more than 10,000 University classes filled out the rating forms last year, and "teachers and administrators throughout the University used the results in their efforts to evaluate and improve teaching at the University."
The University does not have any printed reports that address gender bias in faculty salaries, but some faculty members insist the difference exists.
"I receive annual salary recommendations from each academic unit, for every member of the LSA faculty," Goldenberg said.
"Every academic unit in LSA considers educational contributions like teaching - which is broadly defined - as an important part of faculty responsibility," Goldenberg said.
Dunn also noted that the evaluations may not measure all of a professor's abilities.
"Teaching is not a simple issue. If a professor treats a class as customers, that's not the role of the faculty," Dunn said.
The student evaluation forms, revised this past summer by CRLT, contain a variety of questions, ranging from a teacher's use of multimedia to the equitable treatment of students in the classroom.
"There's no question about (the evaluations) having an effect on teachers," said CRLT Director Constance Cook.
"However, CRLT encourages administration to use various methods of teacher rating. There are other determinants of 'good' teaching, such as when teachers help students find internships," Cook said.
Despite the depth and importance of the issue, statistics indicating a gender bias in faculty salaries have not currently been developed by University Human Resources and Affirmative Action. In the meantime, Goldenberg pointed to the LSA Excellence in Education Awards as an honor that recently has elevated women.
"Of those (awards) received by tenured faculty, 30 percent went to women in 1996," Goldenberg said.
"(This) compares favorably with the fact that approximately 20 percent of our tenured faculty are women."
Provost J. Bernard Machen said at yesterday's SACUA meeting that, "I would like to do my homework on this issue before getting back together with (SACUA) to discuss it."
Engineering senior Jeff Balcerski said he spends time evaluating his instructors.
"When I come across a good teacher, I take time to give them positive feedback," Balcerski said.
"I think the surveys as a whole are pretty much blown off in the lower-level classes. There's really nothing anyone could do in seeing how seriously students respond. I guess it's up to the University to decide how seriously they want to take the surveys," he said.
Freese said other universities face some of the same problems.
"In my experience and talking with people at other institutions - not just Michigan - others have had these problems," Freese said.
In the near future, Machen and SACUA members will be discussing some of the faculty's concerns.
"We'd like to see some wider discussion on this," Dunn said.