Rigor in the classroom. A case study of grading differences: Teacher characteristics for improved practice

Student evaluations of faculty (SEF) have become common practice in higher education. Originally intended to give instructors feedback for improvement in teaching, student evaluations have become important in personnel decisions, tenure, and as indicators for faculty improvement. Early studies of student evaluations showed they were a valid measure of teaching effectiveness.{09}However, grade inflation coincided with the adoption of student evaluations of faculty at a disturbing pace. It is commonly accepted in popular literature and in many research studies that student evaluation of faculty causes, or at least is correlated with, grade inflation. Yet some instructors manage to grade rigorously or deliver courses with greater workloads and do not receive lower evaluations from students. Why? This comparative case study attempts to answer three questions. What strategies or teacher characteristics in the classroom can instructors use which will reduce grade inflation and not lower SEF? Is there a difference in characteristics between instructors who are rigorous graders, demand more of students, and still earn high evaluations from instructors who are not rigorous graders or who demand less of students and earn high SEF? Do grades really influence SEF as much as instructors claim they do? The cases suggest that teachers with three categories of effective teaching characteristics can demand heavy work loads and grade with rigor while earning high evaluations from students. Application of the model proposed may lead to improved practice in higher education.