{"title":"学生教学评价中持续存在的性别偏见:性别刻板印象的作用","authors":"Oshrit Kaspi Baruch","doi":"10.1007/s10805-024-09535-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Student evaluations of teaching (SET) are typically highly biased. In this paper, three experiments are reported, examining gender bias in SET by manipulating lecturer gender and counterstereotypes. Each experiment involved a vignette about a lecture, with a different context: Study 1 − noisy students disrupting the lesson; Study 2 − students asking for consideration; Study 3 − neutral context of a routine lecture. Structural equation modeling (SEM) revealed that the effect of lecturer gender on SET depended on the context and was both directly (Study 1) and indirectly (Studies 2 and 3) mediated by gender stereotypes. The effect of student's gender was indirect and mediated by gender stereotypes in all studies. Counterstereotypical descriptions did not affect stereotypical perceptions in any of the experiments. The findings are discussed in terms of social dominance theory (SDT) and social role theory (SRT). They offer novel insights into the mechanism that explains gender and context bias in SET. In terms of practical implications, SET should be considered with caution, particularly when used for critical decisions such as tenure status. Finally, applying additional assessments and statistical methods to control for gender bias is important.</p>","PeriodicalId":45961,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Academic Ethics","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Persistence of Gender Bias in Student Evaluations of Teaching: The Role of Gender Stereotypes\",\"authors\":\"Oshrit Kaspi Baruch\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10805-024-09535-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Student evaluations of teaching (SET) are typically highly biased. In this paper, three experiments are reported, examining gender bias in SET by manipulating lecturer gender and counterstereotypes. Each experiment involved a vignette about a lecture, with a different context: Study 1 − noisy students disrupting the lesson; Study 2 − students asking for consideration; Study 3 − neutral context of a routine lecture. Structural equation modeling (SEM) revealed that the effect of lecturer gender on SET depended on the context and was both directly (Study 1) and indirectly (Studies 2 and 3) mediated by gender stereotypes. The effect of student's gender was indirect and mediated by gender stereotypes in all studies. Counterstereotypical descriptions did not affect stereotypical perceptions in any of the experiments. The findings are discussed in terms of social dominance theory (SDT) and social role theory (SRT). They offer novel insights into the mechanism that explains gender and context bias in SET. In terms of practical implications, SET should be considered with caution, particularly when used for critical decisions such as tenure status. Finally, applying additional assessments and statistical methods to control for gender bias is important.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45961,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Academic Ethics\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Academic Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-024-09535-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Academic Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-024-09535-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
学生对教学的评价(SET)通常存在很大偏差。本文报告了三项实验,通过操纵讲师的性别和反刻板印象来研究 SET 中的性别偏见。每项实验都涉及一个不同背景下的讲座小故事:研究 1--吵闹的学生扰乱了课堂秩序;研究 2--学生请求考虑;研究 3--例行讲座的中性背景。结构方程模型(SEM)显示,讲师性别对 SET 的影响取决于情境,并且直接(研究 1)和间接(研究 2 和 3)受到性别刻板印象的影响。在所有研究中,学生性别的影响都是间接的,并受性别刻板印象的影响。在任何实验中,反刻板印象的描述都不会影响刻板印象。研究结果从社会支配理论(SDT)和社会角色理论(SRT)的角度进行了讨论。它们为解释 SET 中的性别和情境偏差的机制提供了新的见解。就实际影响而言,应谨慎考虑 SET,尤其是在用于诸如终身职位等关键决策时。最后,应用额外的评估和统计方法来控制性别偏见是非常重要的。
The Persistence of Gender Bias in Student Evaluations of Teaching: The Role of Gender Stereotypes
Student evaluations of teaching (SET) are typically highly biased. In this paper, three experiments are reported, examining gender bias in SET by manipulating lecturer gender and counterstereotypes. Each experiment involved a vignette about a lecture, with a different context: Study 1 − noisy students disrupting the lesson; Study 2 − students asking for consideration; Study 3 − neutral context of a routine lecture. Structural equation modeling (SEM) revealed that the effect of lecturer gender on SET depended on the context and was both directly (Study 1) and indirectly (Studies 2 and 3) mediated by gender stereotypes. The effect of student's gender was indirect and mediated by gender stereotypes in all studies. Counterstereotypical descriptions did not affect stereotypical perceptions in any of the experiments. The findings are discussed in terms of social dominance theory (SDT) and social role theory (SRT). They offer novel insights into the mechanism that explains gender and context bias in SET. In terms of practical implications, SET should be considered with caution, particularly when used for critical decisions such as tenure status. Finally, applying additional assessments and statistical methods to control for gender bias is important.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Academic Ethics is a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary, peer reviewed journal which examines all ethical issues which arise within the scope of university purposes. The journal publishes original research in the ethics of research production and publication; teaching and student relations; leadership; management and governance. The journal offers sustained inquiry into such topics as the ethics of university strategic directions; ethical investments; sustainability practices; the responsible conduct of research and teaching; collegiality and faculty relations; and the appropriate models of ethical and accountable governance for universities in the 21st century.