In advanced courses, students give worse evaluations to lecturers in the gender minority

Women are still underrepresented in academia, particularly in higher positions. There are a number of complex reasons for this, but the promotion of women is clearly an important factor.

Promotions in academia often rely on how educators are appraised by their students. Unfortunately, researchers have now found that student evaluations are influenced by the gender composition of academic departments. The team finds that in higher-level courses, students tend to give worse evaluations to those in the gender minority.

The first study looked at student evaluations from 115,467 students enrolled in 51 departments at a US university. In each evaluation, students rated their teachers on 11 items, including how effective they were and how much the teacher's methods helped them understand the material.

The team found that in departments with gender disparities in the make-up of the staff, lecturers in the gender majority were evaluated more positively than those in the minority, at least in more advanced courses. In lower-level courses, those in the gender minority were evaluated more positively, but this trend was not significant. In departments with gender parity, there were no differences in how men and women were evaluated. Crucially, in 72.6% of the departments within the university, women were in the gender minority, which suggests that they are more likely to receive lower evaluations.

The second study explored these findings in an experimental setting to establish the direction of cause-and-effect. Students saw the website of an academic department, with photos of the faculty either showing a majority of men, a majority of women, or an equal number of each gender, and were asked to imagine being students within that department. They then indicated whether they expected a man or a woman would teach upper- and lower-level courses in that department.

Next, students read about either an upper-level or lower-level course they had taken, and saw a short bio and photograph of their teacher, who was either a man or a woman. They were then asked to evaluate the teacher on the same questionnaire used in the real world evaluations.

The team found that students who had seen a male-dominated faculty believed men were more likely to teach upper-level courses and women lower–level courses. In female-dominated or gender-equal departments, this bias disappeared.

Participants who saw male-dominated departments gave men teaching higher-level courses better evaluations than women, but gave women teaching lower-level courses better evaluations than men, similar to the first study. In gender-equal departments, they gave women better evaluations than men in the lower-level courses, while in female-dominated departments, they gave men more positive evaluations in these introductory courses.

The researchers also found that students gave worse evaluations when the gender of a teacher didn't meet their expectations. For higher-level courses, this had a disproportionate impact on women: participants gave poorer evaluations to an unexpected female teacher than to an unexpected male teacher. For lower-level courses, the opposite was true. The team suggests that participants were essentially penalising women for filling "the essential expert roles of teaching upper-level courses" that stereotypically go to men, and men for filling "the interpersonal supportive roles" of lower-level courses, that stereotypically go to women.

Overall, the research shows that the gender composition of academic departments can drive bias, with students generally evaluating staff based on gendered expectations. While this bias affects both men and women, it has a disproportionate effect on women because they are more likely to be outnumbered within departments and especially on more advanced courses. This was particularly clear in the second study, where women were evaluated more poorly when they taught on upper-level courses they had not been expected to.

The study suggests that faculty gender disparities could be self-reinforcing. Women are overlooked for promotion within academia for a number of reasons, leading to a lack of representation in higher level positions – thus making their presence in such roles unexpected. But considering the fact that student evaluations can play a part in promotion, this could also provide a barrier to getting into those higher roles in the first place.

The team suggests a number of interventions from universities to prevent this from happening: an emphasis on the achievements of both men and women, and ensuring men and women are both teaching on higher and lower level courses so this seems less 'unexpected'. It is also important for managers to recognise that gender biases could be present in student feedback when evaluating staff for promotion.