Reducing Bias and Improving Benefit in Evaluation of Teaching
- Conference
- Location
-
Tampa, Florida
- Publication Date
-
June 15, 2019
- Start Date
-
June 15, 2019
- End Date
-
June 19, 2019
- Conference Session
- Tagged Division
-
Women in Engineering
- Page Count
-
9
- DOI
-
10.18260/1-2--33227
- Permanent URL
-
https://peer.asee.org/33227
- Download Count
-
489
Paper Authors
Naomi C. Chesler University of Wisconsin, Madison
Naomi C. Chesler is Professor of Biomedical Engineering with an affiliate appointment in Educational Psychology. Her research interests include vascular biomechanics, hemodynamics and cardiac function as well as the factors that motivate students to pursue and persist in engineering careers, with a focus on women and under-represented minorities. More information is available at the website for the Vascular Tissue Biomechanics lab at UW-Madison: vtb.engr.wisc.edu
Dante Fratta University of Wisconsin, Madison
Elizabeth C Harris University of Wisconsin, Madison
Elizabeth Harris has been part of the University of Wisconsin Madison’s College of Engineering since 2012. She approaches Engineering Education opportunities by leveraging her background in cognitive and systems engineering in addition to her background in education. Her work focuses on improving the effectiveness of the Institution, and the experiences of students, faculty, and academic staff, by addressing the holistic ecologies present around teaching and learning at UW Madison. She does this by partnering to foster, create, and explore cultural and strategic interventions, in addition to practical.
Wayne P. Pferdehirt
University of Wisconsin, Madison
orcid.org/0000-0002-1320-6636
Wayne P. Pferdehirt has directed several online graduate engineering degree programs for practicing engineers within the University of Wisconsin-Madison's College of Engineering since 1998. Wayne serves as a member of the College's Education Innovation Committee and chairs the College's Master of Engineering Oversight Committee. Wayne is a frequent speaker and author on continuing education for engineers, project management, and engineering leadership.
Heidi-Lynn Ploeg
Queens University at Kingston
orcid.org/0000-0003-3317-7817
Dr. Ploeg is an Associate Professor of Mechanical and Materials Engineering at Queen’s University at Kingston, Ontario. From July 2003 to August 2018 she was an Assistant and Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering with affiliate appointments in Biomedical Engineering, Material Science & Engineering, and Orthopedics & Rehabilitation, at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where she established and directed the Bone and Joint Biomechanics (BJB) Laboratory. Dr. Ploeg received her Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Queen’s University at Kingston, Ontario, Canada in 2000. She was the Director Preclinical Stress Analysis Group in the Research Department at Sulzer Orthopedics Ltd. (now Zimmer-Biomet GmbH), Winterthur, Switzerland from 1992-2002. Dr. Ploeg's research focus is orthopedic biomechanics including design of medical devices, bone modeling and remodeling, mechanical testing, and finite element modeling.
Barry D. Van Veen University of Wisconsin, Madison
Barry Van Veen received the B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Michigan Technological University and the Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Colorado, Boulder. He currently is the Lynn H. Matthias Professor and Associate Chair for Graduate and Online Studies in the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He has received multiple teaching awards for development and implementation of active learning methods in signal processing and machine learning classes.
Abstract
Engineering teaching assessment at the college-level should provide: 1) data to assess the quality of instruction provided by an instructor; 2) instructors with actionable information on how their instruction may be improved; and 3) evidence of effective instruction for tenure and promotion purposes. Many institutions rely primarily on student evaluations of teaching (SET) for teaching assessment. Peer evaluations of teaching are rarely used outside of the tenure evaluation period for assistant professors. Recent research has provided compelling evidence that SET have significant systemic bias with respect to gender, race, and sexual orientation and moreover do not assess teaching effectiveness. These biases and limitations indicate that SET should be used with caution in promotion processes and to revise instructional practices. Peer evaluations as typically implemented are of limited utility in evaluating or improving instruction, due in part to limited awareness of best practices by evaluators and in part due to the time investment required for a thorough evaluation. In this review paper, we dsicuss the biases and problems with SET and present a guide for peer evaluation that could improve formative feedback and assessment of engineering instruction.
Chesler, N. C., & Fratta, D., & Harris, E. C., & Pferdehirt, W. P., & Ploeg, H., & Van Veen, B. D. (2019, June), Reducing Bias and Improving Benefit in Evaluation of Teaching Paper presented at 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Tampa, Florida. 10.18260/1-2--33227
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2019 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015