The (mis)interpretation of teaching evaluations by college faculty and administrators

Student evaluations of teaching are ubiquitous and impactful on the careers of college teachers. However, there is limited empirical research documenting the accuracy of people's efforts in interpreting teaching evaluations. The current research consisted of three studies documenting the effect of small mean differences in teaching evaluations on judgements about teachers. Differences in means small enough to be within the margin of error significantly impacted faculty members' assignment of merit-based rewards (Study 1), department heads' evaluation of teaching techniques (Study 2) and faculty members' evaluation of specific teaching skills (Study 3). The results suggest that faculty and administrators do not apply appropriate statistical principles when evaluating teaching evaluations and instead use a general heuristic that higher evaluations are better.