Members of The Student executive board were split on this issue. While some agreed with the intentions behind the recommendation, others doubted that mandatory evaluations for all professors and classes would be worth the resulting problems and additional bureaucracy.
Amherst's value lies in the relationships between students and professors. Students matriculate at the College because they know able professors who love to teach will lead their classes. At the faculty meeting, Assistant Professor of Computer Science Scott Kaplan supported the status quo. "The tenured faculty who don't solicit evaluations have chosen not to and I trust their judgment," he said. "All the faculty here is good at what they do, and they can decide their methods for themselves." While we can understand this sentiment, some of us see merit in keeping tenured faculty aware of students' perceptions of their teaching habits. We do not doubt the ability of our professors to teach, but without communication between teacher and student, neither party has much to gain.
Evaluations would not have to be required for every class each semester. Rather, required evaluations could be solicited once every few years so that each class would likely evaluate certain professors only once. By limiting mandatory evaluations the College could avoid bogging down both students and professors with the feedback process. Furthermore, a more frequent requirement would surely limit the value of the feedback these evaluations offer.
We don't believe evaluations should be a way to police already tenured faculty, but rather an opportunity for professors to consider their students' responses to class material and its presentation.
In addition, responsibility lies with the students. Many of us would like to see Scrutiny revived to a point where statistical data and feedback comprise a legitimate evaluation of a course or professor. Some have suggested that biases, such as those tied to grade inflation, might diminish the value of student evaluations. Because of these possible pitfalls, there should be numerous evaluations in order to provide a comprehensive and fair analysis.
We hope the professors will approve a variation of Recommendation 20 at their next meeting. The faculty-approved manifestation should create a system that requires all faculty members to solicit student critiques once every four years. Such a system would allow senior professors to improve the collaborative nature of the student-teacher relationship at Amherst.