Understanding UCLA Instructor Evaluations: Examples and Modern Approaches

UCLA, like many universities, employs instructor evaluations to gather feedback on teaching effectiveness. These evaluations play a role in faculty development and personnel decisions. This article explores examples of positive feedback, discusses the limitations of traditional evaluation methods, and introduces modern approaches to teaching evaluation gaining traction at UCLA and other institutions.

Positive Feedback Examples: A Glimpse into Effective Teaching

Student evaluations often highlight specific aspects of an instructor's teaching that resonate with students. Here are some examples of positive feedback from UCLA students, focusing on a particular professor's course:

Engagement and Enthusiasm: "Professor Wertlieb is animated, engaging, and clearly knowledgeable." Students appreciate instructors who are passionate about the subject matter and can create an engaging learning environment. "Professor Wertlieb is incredibly engaging." "Great teacher, very engaging with students." "Professor Wertlieb seems to really enjoy teaching."
Knowledge and Expertise: "Professor Wertlieb is very, very knowledgeable." Students value instructors who possess a deep understanding of the material and can explain complex concepts clearly. "Neil is clearly a very experienced and knowledgeable transactional attorney."
Care and Support: "He is a really kind and caring professor. You can tell that he really cares about his students." Students appreciate instructors who are approachable, supportive, and genuinely invested in their students' success. "Neil is one of the sweetest and most caring professors I’ve had the pleasure of learning with at UCLA." "Professor Wertlieb is a very knowledgeable, kind, and excited educator, and it is clear that he truly wants his students to succeed."
Practical Relevance: "This is the most useful class I’ve taken." Students value courses that provide practical skills and knowledge applicable to their future careers. "Probably the most useful and straightforwardly relevant class I’ve taken in law school." "This course taught me the basics of what I need to know to start as an associate in a transactional law firm that focuses on startups." "It is a helpful way to see all the business law classes come together in how a practicing attorney would encounter them in practice."
Clear Explanations and Accessibility: "Professor Wertlieb is great at explaining concepts in simple terms." Students appreciate instructors who can break down complex information into easily understandable terms and are willing to answer questions thoroughly. "Professor Wertlieb makes very complicated topics understandable. He is very patient in explaining things to the class and to individual students when they ask a question." "Professor Wertlieb explained the material very well. You could ask questions at any time and he took a lot of time to answer every question in detail."
Creating a Comfortable Learning Environment: "Very kind and the classroom environment felt comfortable." A positive and inclusive classroom atmosphere encourages participation and learning. "Prof Wertlieb creates a really comfortable learning environment where students can ask questions, learn through doing, and make mistakes." "He creates a really inclusive and safe environment where everyone can participate, ask questions, and feel a part of the overall simulation."
Effective Course Design: "Professor is passionate and knowledgeable about the subject matter, and organized the class in a thoughtful and manageable way." A well-structured course with manageable assignments contributes to a positive learning experience. "His syllabus is a good front to back simulation of creating/selling a startup."
Real-World Examples and Experience: "I love how he brings in real life examples from his work." Connecting course material to real-world applications enhances student understanding and engagement. "This is one of the most useful courses I have taken in law school and it benefits from the professor’s deep real-world experience."
Promoting Participation: "He is so great at engaging all the students and incorporating our participation and questions into his teaching." Encouraging active participation enriches the learning process for everyone. "In addition, he managed to create a classroom atmosphere in which everyone was happy to participate and thus the class was very interactive." "The class is a really good back-and-forth discourse, and the professor really cares about everyone’s participation."
Overall Positive Experience: "Absolutely loved this class." "This class was my favorite one." "One of the best classes I have ever taken at UCLA Law." "This is the best class ever and Professor Wertlieb is amazing!!"

Even constructive criticism can be framed positively, as seen in this example: "Don’t have much negative to say, but sometimes class felt a little slow when we were brainstorming the answer to a question (ex. “are we done?” in drafting a contract provision). I don’t think this is a weakness, though. It encouraged us to really think through issues." This demonstrates that students recognize the value of in-depth exploration, even if it sometimes feels slow-paced.

These examples highlight the qualities students value in instructors: knowledge, passion, engagement, support, clarity, and the ability to create a positive and relevant learning experience.

Limitations of Traditional Student Evaluations

While student evaluations provide valuable feedback, relying solely on them has drawbacks. Research indicates that traditional methods, heavily dependent on student evaluations of teaching (SET), may not accurately measure teaching effectiveness. An AAUP survey revealed that less than half of faculty members believed in the validity of student evaluations.

Several factors contribute to these limitations:

Bias: Student evaluations can be influenced by factors unrelated to teaching quality, such as grading leniency, gender, and race.
Low Participation Rates: Low student participation can skew results, with feedback often coming from students with extreme opinions.
Lack of Expertise: Students are not experts in pedagogy or the subject matter they are learning.
Limited Scope: Traditional evaluations often focus on a narrow range of teaching aspects, neglecting other important dimensions of effectiveness.
Subjectivity: Student perceptions can be subjective and influenced by personal preferences.
Focus on Rare Comments: Evaluators may focus on outlier comments, which may not be representative of overall student sentiment.
Lack of Actionable Feedback: Traditional evaluations often provide little actionable feedback to instructors for improvement.
Delayed Feedback: Evaluations at the end of the quarter limit the ability to make adjustments during the course.

As a comprehensive review on Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET) stated: “This review of the state of the art in the literature has shown that the utility and validity ascribed to SET should continue to be called into question. … many types of validity of SET remain at stake."

Modern Approaches to Teaching Evaluation: A Holistic Perspective

Recognizing the limitations of traditional methods, UCLA and other institutions are adopting modern approaches to teaching evaluation. These approaches aim to provide a more comprehensive and accurate assessment of teaching effectiveness by incorporating multiple dimensions and sources of evidence.

Key features of modern teaching evaluation include:

Multiple Dimensions of Effectiveness: Instead of relying on a single overall "quality" rating, modern approaches define multiple dimensions or elements of effective teaching. These dimensions align with research-informed practices and provide a more nuanced understanding of teaching quality. Examples of dimensions include:
- Goals, content, and alignment
- Teaching practices
- Class climate
- Achievement of learning outcomes
- Reflection and iterative growth
- Mentoring and advising
- Involvement in teaching service, scholarship, or community
Multiple Sources of Evidence: Modern approaches utilize a variety of evidence sources to assess teaching effectiveness. These sources can be categorized into three "lenses" or "voices":
- Instructor Lens (Self): This includes materials such as a CV, teaching statement, and self-reflection on teaching practices.
- Student Lens: This includes course evaluations, samples of student work, and student feedback.
- Peer Lens (Third-Party): This includes classroom observations, peer reviews of course materials, and feedback from colleagues.

By combining these multiple dimensions and sources of evidence, modern approaches provide a more holistic and reliable assessment of teaching effectiveness.

Read also: Navigating Tech Breadth at UCLA

The Six Stages of Teaching Evaluation Reform

The implementation of modern teaching evaluation systems typically follows a six-stage pattern:

Recognition of a Problem: An individual or group within the institution identifies issues with traditional teaching evaluations and commits to addressing them.
Objective and Strategy Development: A clear objective and strategy for change are established, and an official channel for making change is created.
Adoption of a Research-Informed Framework: A framework that defines effective teaching across multiple dimensions is adopted, based on research and best practices.
Formalization of Structures and Policies: Structures, guidelines, and policies for evaluating multiple sources of evidence are formalized.
Evaluation and Revision: The new evaluation process is evaluated using real data and revised over time to ensure its effectiveness.
Adoption of Modern Technologies and Sustainability: Modern technologies are integrated into the evaluation process, and the system reaches a sustainable steady state.

Examples of Institutions Implementing Modern Approaches

Many institutions have already begun transforming their teaching evaluation methods. Examples include:

Appalachian State
Bates College
Boise State
Clemson
Colorado State
Dalhousie University (Canada)
Northwestern University
Penn State
Texas Tech
UC Irvine
UC San Diego
UCLA
University of Baltimore
University of Colorado Boulder
University of Delaware
University of Georgia
University of Illinois
University of Kansas
University of Massachusetts Amherst
University of Oregon
University of Virginia
University of Washington
Wake Forest University

These institutions serve as models for others seeking to modernize their teaching evaluation systems.

Motivations for Reform

Several factors drive the movement towards modernizing teaching evaluation:

Dissatisfaction with Student Evaluations: Concerns about bias, validity, and the use of student evaluations.
Desire for a More Accurate Story of Teaching: The need to capture the breadth and depth of teaching work, especially for teaching-focused faculty.
Need for Structure and Transparency: Concerns about fairness, accountability, and safeguards against personal biases.
Desire to Develop as a Teacher: The motivation to prioritize teaching development and recognize teaching accomplishments.
Undervaluation of Teaching: The desire to elevate the importance of teaching relative to research in higher education.
Concerns about Grade Inflation: The worry that good grades are exchanged for good evaluations.

By addressing these concerns, modern teaching evaluation systems can contribute to a more equitable and effective learning environment.

Read also: Understanding UCLA Counselors

UCLA's Holistic Evaluation of Teaching Initiative

UCLA is actively engaged in reforming teaching evaluation through initiatives like the Holistic Evaluation of Teaching (HET). This initiative aims to provide a more comprehensive and nuanced assessment of teaching effectiveness.

The HET process involves several steps:

Instructor Preparation: Instructors prepare for evaluation by reviewing rubrics that outline specific teaching practices. They then describe how these practices are implemented in their teaching or link to documents that illustrate these practices.
Evaluator Review: Evaluators receive the rubrics and review the instructor's descriptions and supporting documents. This provides a detailed picture of the instructor's teaching.
Well-Informed Evaluation: Evaluators use the information gathered to write a detailed and well-informed evaluation letter.

This process ensures that evaluations are based on a thorough understanding of the instructor's teaching practices and are not solely reliant on student evaluations.

The Role of the Center for Education Innovation & Learning in the Sciences (CEILS)

CEILS at UCLA plays a key role in promoting effective teaching and instructional innovation. CEILS hosted a symposium on "Exploring Practical Ways to Inspire and Reward Teaching Effectiveness and Instructional Innovation" in 2018. The event featured speakers who shared resources on student ratings of instruction, peer teaching observations, and self-assessment of teaching practices. CEILS also hosted a talk on "Student Evaluations of Teaching: Managing Bias and Increasing Utility." These events and resources contribute to the ongoing dialogue about improving teaching evaluation at UCLA.

Best Practices for Using Student Evaluations

Even when modern approaches are implemented, student evaluations can still provide valuable insights. Here are some best practices for using student evaluations effectively:

Focus on Common Themes: Identify the most common ratings and comments, rather than focusing on outliers.
Group and Rank Comments: Sort student comments into groups based on similarity, label each group with a theme, and rank the themes based on frequency.
Consider Improvements in Student Outcomes: Look for evidence of improved student outcomes, such as decreased drop rates or performance disparities in underrepresented groups.
Avoid Comparisons: Refrain from comparing faculty to each other or to a unit average in personnel decisions.

By following these practices, institutions can maximize the value of student evaluations while minimizing their limitations.

tags: #UCLA #instructor #evaluations #examples