Bias and trends in student evaluations in online higher education settings

Abstract

End-of course evaluations have been frequently used to assess teaching effectiveness and influence critical decisions about faculty contract renewal, future course assignment, tenure and promotion in higher education. This quantitative study sought to determine whether there are differences in student perceptions of faculty performance based on gender or faculty status (full-time vs. adjunct) in an online higher education environment. It also sought to answer these questions: 1) Do adjunct faculty tend to grade more leniently than full time faculty, and as such, do adjunct faculty receive higher evaluation ratings than full time faculty, who may be more stringent in grading? 2) Do student evaluation scores differ depending on the course being evaluated? 3) Does gender or faculty status impact student response rates? Survey responses from a total of 683 sections associated with 24 courses were analyzed from the March 2018 to January 2019 timeframe. Due to the broad range of class sizes and differences between faculty characteristics, the variances for each comparison sample were observed to be significantly different using Levene’s test for equal variances. Thus, the Mann-Whitney test for two variables and the Kruskal-Wallis test for evaluation of significant difference between more than two variables were used on the data. While other literature and personal anecdotes may indicate that gender bias exists, this study did not indicate that gender bias is occurring in online higher education courses taught for the time period studied, suggesting gender neutrality.