Abstract

A sample of university students were given resumes of hypothetical prospective faculty members which were systematically manipulated to include differences in gender, race, age, and whether the person had a disability. The students were asked to rate the hypothetical prospective faculty members on the basis of teaching and professional characteristics and whether they would recommend hiring them. In spite of growing numbers of women, African American, and a few disabled faculty members presently teaching in higher education, the old prejudices remain: older, white, male, nondisabled faculty received the higher ratings.

One important part of the academic work-place is the classroom. In order for affirmative action employment programs to succeed in academia, there must be a non-hostile classroom environment in which the instructor can demonstrate ability. (Milward, Denhardt, Rucker, & Tucker, 1983) The purpose of this study was to determine the quality of the classroom environment which might be encountered by an instructor who is not a member of the dominant group in academia today which is composed of white (92%) males (58%) over the age of 40 (72%). (Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2000, Table 669) The percentage of faculty members with disabilities is not known, but it is far less than the 30% found in the general population.

Questionnaire Development

A number of studies focus on the factors which are related to instructor evaluation and to the decision to enroll in a class. These studies showed that instructor evaluations were related to different variables including the physical attractiveness of the instructor. (Goebel & Cashen, 1979) In addition, various other characteristics, judged attractive by the student, were related to a positive evaluation of the instructor. *These characteristics include such things as whether the instructor was perceived to be a fair grader, the perceived level of knowledge of the instructor, the instructor's communication skills, and the instructor's enthusiasm in class. (Barry & Dubinsky, 1981; Dion, Berscheid, & Walter, 1972; Kerin, Peterson, & Martin, 1975; Spitz & Weller, 1980; Tauber, 1973; Flood & Downs, 1979; Kane, Gilmore, & Crooks, 1976; Painter & Granzin, 1972; Kassaye & Feldman, 1983) Finally the student's decision to enroll in a class was related to the size of the class (King, 1983), the grade expected by the student (Dilts & Fatemi, 1982), the friendliness of the instructor (Spitz & Weller, 1980), and personal characteristics of the instructor which the student judged to be attractive (Kassaye & Feldman, 1983; Kassaye, 1984a & 1984b).

With these factors in mind, in-depth discussions were held with groups of students. Out of these discussions five dimensions emerged which appear to be related to students' decisions to enroll in a class. These dimensions are: the instructor's communication skills; the instructor's grading practices; the instructor's educational qualifications; the "likeableness" of the instructor; and whether other students were willing to enroll in the class.

Almost all previously published studies were carried out after the fact of enrollment. The research question in this study focuses upon student attitudes toward potential instructors before enrollment. It is an attempt to determine if there are stereotypes in students' minds which would cause the student to avoid classes taught by certain instructors.

In order to carry out the research project a model vita of a hypothetical instructor was prepared along with a questionnaire about the student's perception of how the instructor would probably perform in the classroom. They were distributed to 27 classes randomly chosen from 147 classes offered during one Spring semester at a New England university. The sample size is 307.

Administration of the Questionnaire

The students were told that the university was interested in their evaluation of the instructor based upon the vita. The hypothetical vita indicated a bachelor's degree from a well known Boston area college, a master's degree from a nationally known Boston area university, and a Ph.D. (expected at the end of the semester) from a well known midwestern public university. In addition the vita indicated three years work experience between the master's degree and beginning doctoral study, five years of experience as a teaching assistant at the doctoral university, two published articles, and professional association memberships. All candidates were in excellent health, were married and had one child.

The hypothetical prospective faculty member was a woman in 42% of the cases (Finifter, 1973; Howard, 1978; Exum, Menges, Watkins, & Berglund, 1984; Robbins & Kahn, 1985; Lott, 1985; Baldwin and Johnson, 1995; Woodard, 1995; Nance and Ruby, 1996; Timms, 1998; Ference, 1999; Hojat et al., 2000) and white in 67% of the cases (Fleming 1976; Fleming, Gill, & Swinton, 1978; Prestage, 1979; Jacques & Hall, 1984; Bjork & Thompson, 1989; Feldblum, 1996; Cuccaro et al., 1996; Scullion, 2000; Selden, 2000; Gordon and Rosenblum, 2001). The ages varied between 30 and 50. (Cleveland, 1987; DeMille, 1989; Walters, 1996; Clark and Liebig, 1996; Minkler and Estes, 1998; Kempen, Brilman, and Ormel, 1999) One hundred twenty seven of the vitas (41%) indicated that the candidate was disabled and used a wheelchair. (Levitan & Taggart, 1977; Pati, 1978; Gittler, 1978; Wolfe, 1980; Bernstein, 1980; Acton, 1981; Pfeiffer & Giampietro, 1981; Pati & Morrison, 1982; Pfeiffer, 1991, 1993, 1998, 1999a, 1999b) The other vitas had no indication of a disability.

The questionnaire with which the students evaluated the candidates contained twelve questions concerning the perceived probable classroom performance. They were asked (on the basis of the vita) whether they agreed or disagreed that the instructor would be stimulating, confusing, clear, enjoyable, constructive, logical, exciting, thorough, and thought provoking. Two questions asked the student to rate the candidate's ability to communicate effectively in the classroom and the candidates probable accessibility outside of the classroom. The student was also asked to rate the candidate's educational qualifications, how well the candidate would be liked by other students, how hard and how fair the candidate would be in grading. The final question regarding teaching was whether students would sign up for a course taught by the candidate. These questions were combined into a score for teaching qualifications.

The students were asked four non-teaching questions: what salary level would the candidate demand, would the University offer enough salary to hire him or her, would the candidate fit in with the present faculty, and would the candidate be interested in carrying out research. These questions were combined into a score for what was called the professional dimension. The two final questions concerning the candidate asked for the student's overall evaluation and the student's recommendation in regard to hiring the candidate. These two questions composed a scale measuring the overall dimension.

The Results

The question investigated was whether certain characteristics (being younger, disabled, non-white, and/or female) produced lower evaluations of the hypothetical prospective faculty member. Being a woman, being non-white, and being disabled were coded zero in a dummy variable and used with the age to predict the scores on the three dimensions. The following results were found forcing the regression line through the origin.

TEACHING = 0.66AGE + 0.15RACE + 0.16DISABLED + 0.07GENDER

R Square = 0.93 p < 0.00005

PROFESSIONAL = 0.67AGE + 0.14RACE + 0.16DISABLED

+ 0.08GENDER

R Square = 0.93 p < 0.00005

OVERALL = 0.60AGE + 0.16RACE + 0.19DISABLED + 0.07GENDER

R Square = 0.87 p < 0.00005

On each dimension the older, white, non-disabled men received a higher evaluation. The variable age produced the greatest impact. Race and disability produced the next greatest impact with gender playing a significant role.

These findings present a pessimistic view of the future. Even though policy makers and university administrators may make pronouncements in favor of hiring members of the protected groups, the younger minority, female, and disabled persons who are hired will face rough going from their students. They may be good teachers and scholars, but their students will view them as less capable than the older, white, non-disabled men.

References

Acton, Norman. (1981) Employment of Disabled Persons: Where Are We Going? International Labor Review; 120: 1-14.

Baldwin, Marjorie L.; Johnson, William G. (1995) Labor Market Discrimination against Women with Disabilities. Industrial Relations; 34(4): 555-77.

Barry, T.E.; Dubinsky, A. (1981) Teaching Evaluations in Tenure/Promotion Decisions: A Word of Caution. Proceedings: American Marketing Association Educators' Conference; 33-42.

Bernstein, Bruce. (1980) Overview of Section 503: Affirmative Action in Employment for the Handicapped. Colorado Lawyer; 9: 505-508.

Bjork, Lars G; Thompson, Thomas E. (1989) The Next Generation of Faculty: Minority Issues. Education and Urban Society; May, 21(3): 341-55.

Clark, Nina; Liebig, Phoebe S. (1996) The Politics of Physician-Assisted Death: California's Proposition 161 and Attitudes of the Elderly. Politics and the Life Sciences; 15(2): 273-80.

Cleveland, Harlan. (1987) The Abolition of Retirement: The Third Stage of Life and Higher Education. Change; November-December: 8.

Cuccaro, Michael L.; Wright, Harry H.; Rownd, Christina V.; Abramson, Ruth K.; et al. (1996) Professional perceptions of children with developmental difficulties: The influence of race and socioeconomic status. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders; 26(4): 461-69.

DeMille, Barbara. (1989) Age Discrimination in Higher Education Is Both Overt and Subtle. Chronicle of Higher Education; June 7: B2.

Dilts, D.A.; Fatemi, A. (1982) Student Evaluation of Instructors: Investment or Moral Hazard? Journal of Financial Education; Fall: 67-69.

Dion, K.; Berscheid, E.; Walter, E. (1972) What is Beautiful Is Good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology; 24: 285-90.

Exum, William H.; Menges, Robert J.; Watkins, Bari; Berglund, Patricia. (1984) Making It at the Top: Women and Minority Faculty in the Academic Labor Market. American Behavioral Scientist; 27: 301-24.

Feldblum, Chai R. (1996) The (R)evolution of Physical Disability Antidiscrimination Law: 1976-1996. Mental and Physical Disability Law Reporter; 20(5): 613-21.

Ference, Tamar. (1999) Rehabilitation Issues: Women with Disabilities. Sexuality and disability; 17(3): 187-98.

Finifter, Ada W. (1973) The Professional Status of Women Political Scientists: Some Current Data. PS; 6: 406-22.

Fleming, John E. (1976) The Lengthening Shadow of Slavery: A Historical Justification for Affirmative Action for Blacks in Higher Education. Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press.

Fleming, John E.; Gill, Gerald R.; Swinton, David H. (1978) The Case for Affirmative Action for Blacks in Higher Education. Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press.

Flood, R.G.; Downs, P.E. (1979) Determining If Instructors' Personal Characteristics Affect Student Evaluations. Proceedings: American Marketing Association Educators' Conference; 120-23.

Gittler, Amy Jo. (1978) Fair Employment and the Handicapped: A Legal Perspective. DePaul Law Review; 27: 469-501.

Goebel, B.L.; Cashen, V.M. (1979) Age, Sex and Attractiveness as Factors in Student Ratings of Teachers: A Developmental Study. Journal of Educational Psychology; 71: 646-53.

Gordon, Beth Omansky; Rosenblum, Karen E. (2001) Bringing Disability into the Sociological Frame: a comparison of disability with race, sex, and sexual orientation statuses. Disability and Society; 16(1): 23-44.

Hojat, M.; Gonnella, J.S.; Erdmann, J.B.; Rattner, S.L.; Veloski, J.J.; Glaser, K.; Xu, G. (2000) Gender comparisons of income expectations in the USA at the beginning of medical school during the past 28 years. Social Science and Medicine; 50(11): 1665-72.

Howard, Lawrence. (1978) Civil Service Reform: A Minority and Woman's Perspective. Public Administration Review; 38: 305-309.

Jacques, Jeffrey; Hall, Robert L. (1984) Desegregation in Higher Education: An Examination of Traditionally Black and White Institutions. Sociological Inquiry; Fall, 54(4): 382-407.

Kane, M.T.; Gilmore, G.M.; Crooks, T.J. (1976) Student Evaluations of Teaching: The Generalizability of Class Means. Journal of Educational Measurement; 13: 369-79.

Kassaye, Wandwossen. (1984a) Critical Insight into How Students Size Up Prospective Business Classes. Journal of Business Education; October: 22-26.

Kassaye, Wandwossen. (1984b) Some Sources of Personal Prejudice in Student-Instructor Evaluations. Journal of Financial Education; Fall: 11-18.

Kassaye, Wandwossen; Feldman, Wallace. (1983) Students' Perception of American-Born vs. Foreign-Born Instructors: A Preliminary Experiment. Proceedings: Academy of Marketing Science; 89-92.

Kempen, Gertrudis I.J.M.; Brilman, Els I.; Ormel, Johan. (1999) Morbidity and quality of life and the moderating effects of level of education in the elderly. Social science & medicine; 49(1): 143-56.

Kerin, R.; Peterson, R.; Martin, W. (1975) Teaching Effectiveness: How Do We Rate? Combined Proceedings: American Marketing Association; 694-98.

King, A.S. (1983) How Students Size Up Prospective Classes. Journal of Business Education; March: 220-23.

Levitan, Sar; Taggart, Robert. (1977) Jobs for the Disabled. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Lott, Bernice. (1985) The Devaluation of Women's Competence. Journal of Social Issues; Winter, 41(4): 43-60.

Milward, H. Brinton; Denhardt, Kathryn G.; Rucker, Robert E.; Tucker, Thomas L. (1983) Implementing Affirmative Action and Organizational Compliance: The Case of Universities. Administration and Society; 15: 363-75.

Minkler, Meredith; Estes, Carroll. (editors) (1998) Critical Gerontology: Perspectives from Political and Moral Economy. Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing.

Nance, Carriella H.; Ruby, C.L. (1996) On Gender Role Violations and Judgments Made About Euthanasia: A Research Note. Journal of Social Issues; 52(2): 105-18.

Painter, J.J.; Granzin, K.L. (1972) An Investigation of Determinants of Student Course Rating. Combined Proceedings: American Marketing Association; 79-84.

Pati, Gopal C. (1978) Countdown on Hiring the Handicapped. Personnel Journal; March: 144-53.

Pati, Gopal C.; Morrison, Glenn. (1982) Enabling the Disabled. Harvard Business Review; July-August: 152-68.

Pfeiffer, David. (1991) Employment, Income, and Disability. Translating Disability: At the Individual, Institutional and Societal Levels. Edited by Fred Hafferty, Stephen C. Hey, Gary Kiger, David Pfeiffer. Salem, OR: The Society for Disability Studies and Willamette University; 331-37.

Pfeiffer, David. (1993) The Problem of Disability Definition. Journal of Disability Policy Studies; 4(2): 77-82.

Pfeiffer, David. (1998) Two Futures of People with Disabilities. The Manoa Journal; No. 10, 47-55.

Pfeiffer, David. (1999a) The Problem of Disability Definition, Again. Disability and Rehabilitation; 21(8): 392-95.

Pfeiffer, David. (1999b) Who's Disabled? Ragged Edge, September/October, 22.

Pfeiffer, David; Giampietro, Michael. (1981) Government Policy Toward Handicapped Individuals. New Strategic Perspectives on Social Policy edited by John Tropman, Milan Dluhy, and Roger Lind; revised Edition; Elmsford, N.Y.: Pergamon Press; chapter 21.

Prestage, Jewel L. (1979) Quelling the Mythical Revolution in Higher Education: Retreat from the Affirmative Action Concept. Journal of Politics; 41(3): 763-83.

Robbins, Lillian; Kahn, Ethel D. (1985) Sex Discrimination and Sex Equity for Faculty Women in the 1980s. Journal of Social Issues; Winter, 41(4): 1-16.

Scullion, Philip. (2000) Disability as an Equal Opportunity Issue Within Nurse Education in the UK. Nurse Education Today; 199-206.

Selden, Steven. (2000) Eugenics and the Social Construction of Merit, Race, and Disability. Journal of Curriculum Studies; 32(2): 235-52.

Spitz, E.A.; Weller, R. (1980) A Comparative Study of Professor Friendliness and Student Perception of Professor Friendliness and Utilizing `The Paired Hands Test' and Student Course Evaluations. Proceedings: Midwest Marketing Association; 138-43.

Statistical Abstract of the United States. (2000) Washington, D.C.: US Census Bureau; <www.census.gov>.

Tauber, E.M. (1973) Student Criteria for Judging Instructor Performance. Combined Proceedings: American Marketing Association; 21-27.

Timms, D. (1998) Gender, Social Mobility and Psychiatric Diagnoses. Social Science and Medicine; 46(9): 1235-47.

Walters, James W. (editor) (1996) Choosing Who's to Live: Ethics and Aging. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.

Wolfe, Barbara L. (1980) How the Disabled Fare in the Labor Market. Monthly Labor Review; 103: 50-51.

Woodard, Rebecca. (1995) The Effects of Gender and Type of Disability on the Attitudes of Children toward Their Peers with Physical Disabilities. Therapeutic Recreation Journal; 29(3): 218-27.