Microsoft Word - RACE & ETHNICITY BIAS.docx



PETITION FOR SENATE ACTION REGARDING BIAS, ON THE PART OF STUDENTS, AGAINST FACULTY ON THE BASIS OF RACE, ETHNICITY, AND FOREIGN ACCENT IN STUDENT-BASED COURSE EVALUATIONSWHEREAS, in keeping with the student-centered philosophy of Saint Mary’s College, student-based course evaluation of faculty is instrumental in the rank-and-tenure process;WHEREAS, the Academic Senate has recently entrusted to a task-force the responsibility of examining the student-based course evaluation process, including corresponding questions and forms with the aim of making recommendations it deems necessary or desirable in order to ameliorate the faculty evaluation process, including corresponding questions and forms;WHEREAS, there is research evincing that student-based course evaluation questions, processes, and forms result in race-biased evaluations of faculty of color, whether the latter be male or female1;WHEREAS, there is research evincing that student-based course evaluation questions, processes, and forms result in ethnicity-biased evaluations of ethnic faculty, whether the latter be male or female2;See for example Landon D. Reid, “The Role of Perceived Race and Gender in the Evaluation of College Teaching on ,” Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 2010, 3 (No.3): 137-52.According to the author, the lot of Black faculty is nonpareil, predictably:Racial minority faculty struggle to be seen as intellectually competent and credible in the classroom (Nast, 1999; Williams, 2007). Hendrix (1997, 1998) found that students of all races apply more stringent criteria for credentialing Black faculty as intellectually competent than they do White faculty. Similarly, Harlow (2003) found that students rarely challenged the academic credibility of White faculty in the classroom. Conversely, Black faculty, even those who believed that their race had no effect on how students treated them, reported having students regularly challenge their intellectual authority and academic competence in the classroom. A recent study by Ho, Thomsen, and Sidanius (2009) found that students’ perceptions of intellectual competence were a bigger factor in the SETS of Black compared to White faculty. This was true for both Black and White students and high and low prejudice students (138).See for example Therese A. Huston, “Race and Gender Bias in Higher Education: Could Faculty Course Evaluations Impede Progress Toward Parity?” Seattle Journal for Social Justice, Volume 4, Issue 2, Article 34, 5-1-2006. The author has the following to say with respect to race and ethnicity:Although there are many benefits to using faculty course evaluations, research indicated that this evaluation practice tends to leave faculty of color at a disadvantage. Several studies report a main effect on race such that faculty of color received lower course evaluations than their white peers . . ./ On the issue of racial discrimination, DiPietro and Faye foundWHEREAS, there is research evincing that student-based course evaluation questions, processes, and forms result in foreign-accent-biased evaluations of faculty who are not native speakers of English, whether the latter be male or female3;WHEREAS, in the name of fairness and parity, preventing, minimizing, and /or remedying bias exercised against faculty of different races (i.e. non-Caucasian), ethnicities (i.e. Asian, Indian, Latino, Middle-Eastern, etcetera) and native languages must needs be a specific focus of any revision of questions, processes, and forms pertaining to student-based course evaluations4;NOW THEREFORE, the undersigned request that the Academic Senate charge the aforementioned task-force to examine the issue of bias against Black, Asian, Latino, Middle- Eastern, and Native American faculty, among others, as well as bias against foreign-accented faculty in Saint Mary’s College’s evaluation process, including questions, and forms; and to make recommendations conducive to preventing, minimizing, and/or remedying such bias.1. Claude-Rhéal Malary 2. Lino Rivera ?that Latina/o faculty received the lowest course evaluations ratings, followed by Asian American faculty, and white faculty received the highest scores” (598-9).See also Marilyn Gilroy, “Bias in Student Evaluations of Faculty?” The Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education 17.19 (Jul 2, 2007): 26-7.In Huston’s words: “On the issue of ethnic discrimination, Hamermesh and Parker reported that students gave lower ratings for courses taught by non-native English speakers” (598).See for example Dana A. Williams, “Examining the Relation between Race and Student Evaluations of Faculty Members: A Literature Review,” Professions, MLA (2007) 168-73. The author points out the implicit complicity of certain institutions regarding the sort of race bias that occasions negative evaluations: “/. . . ./ the problem of racially motivated negative evaluations does not end with racist students; it is an institutional problem, as colleagues and administrators are often unequipped and unwilling to recognize and to deal with racism. Nast speculates that the fear of negative evaluations and the lack of institutional support to combat racism lead faculty members to assume defensive postures with regard to evaluations” (169).3. Alvaro Ramírez4. David Quijada5. Ravi Bhandari6. Jerry Brunetti7. Hisham Ahmed8. Keith Ogawa9. Tomás Gomez Arias10. Jeannine King11. Deepak Sawhney12. Barbara McGraw13. Vidya Chandrasekaran ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download