Teacher evaluations show problematic view of female leaders

The USC student body elected the first all-female presidential ticket in Pac-12 history last year. The historic election also marked the first female president at USC since 2006. However, Undergraduate Student Government elections set to take place in early February offer no female presidential candidates. It is fitting, then, that in a year where once again no woman has chosen to seek the office of president or vice president, a study  by reported that female professors are more likely to receive unfavorable course evaluations. More specifically, the researchers concluded that course evaluations more often reflect students’ gender biases than they do the effectiveness of the professor. Students systematically favoring male professors has far-reaching, negative implications for women in all varieties of leadership positions, including student government.

Undergraduate elections and course evaluations may at first seem unrelated. Upon closer examination, however, both realities clearly and depressingly illustrate one way in which discrimination is perpetuated by the student body itself. In 2016, students still do not see women as leaders — at least, not in the same way as they see men. And judging by this year’s slate of presidential candidates, women on campus do not often enough see themselves as leaders.

This does not mean that students hate their female professors. In fact, most students have probably had a female professor whom they’ve loved. Nevertheless, instead of getting defensive about the results of the Sciences Po study, students must seriously examine the ways in which they view women in positions of power — especially when attending a school in which it is rare for women to run for the highest elected offices.

It is also important to note that the results of the study did not show that male students were more likely to be biased against female teachers. In fact, the study found that women in the United States exhibited more gender bias overall. Students of all genders have been socialized in a society that preferences male leadership, values male domination and dismisses female “bossiness.” It is not too surprising, then, that course evaluations seem to measure internalized sexism rather than a teacher performance.

Colleges across the nation, from Claremont to Yale, are on the brink of serious transformation, and professors cannot be left out of the important conversations. While it is comforting to look at discrimination and point to a single source, the reality is much more complicated. Let’s face it — the problems USC faces are more deep-rooted than administrative policies and cannot be fixed solely by appointing deans of diversity or re-implementing a diversity requirement. Of course, the importance of holding the administration accountable for creating a “culture of care” cannot be overstated. But students must also seriously examine the ways in which they themselves are perpetuating harmful and discriminatory practices. Consciousness-raising and deeply examining power relations must be part of the solution if students want to create a community that meets the needs of all.

It’s only February and the semester is far from over. So, there are still a few months before the emails begging students to fill out course evaluations are sent out. During these few months, the student body should begin exploring the ways in which they interact with their professors. This is not an easy process. Sexism is often deeply buried — surely, students do not consciously change their ratings based on a professor’s gender. However, if students critically examine how they view their professors and challenge any preconceived notions about women in power, perhaps they can also change the very landscape of leadership on campus and beyond.