While students are almost always offered the chance to evaluate their professors at the end of a term, the degree to which students impact tenure decisions varies across departments sparking conflicting views on the proper role of students in the tenure process.
One standard College-wide method of gathering student input is used whenever a member of the faculty comes up for tenure review. Eighty names of students who have taken classes with tenure candidates are randomly selected and asked to provide evaluations.
According to Dean of the Faculty Jamshed Bharucha, the evaluations provide a useful source of information.
"The students that do respond tend to do so thoughtfully," he said. "Student evaluations are very, very important."
Aly Rahim '02, chair of the Student Assembly Academic Affairs Committee, said that in spite of the apparent use of student input, "It's difficult for us to assess how much those evaluations really matter."
He continued, "There has never been an official message from the administration" about how they use student input. "A lot of people feel it's like the icing on a cake -- it doesn't have to be there, but if it is -- great."
Michael Perry '03, former Assembly Vice President of Academic Affairs, also questioned the lack of transparency.
"The biggest problem seems to be that the tenure process is all behind closed doors. Student input is solicited but we never know how much it counts," he said in an email message.
In addition, departments also have the option of using other forms of student input to supplement these 80 random evaluations. In some cases, faculty members may submit names of students by whom they wish to be evaluated. When these non-random evaluations are submitted, they are marked as such.
Despite the distinction, computer science professor Tom Cormen said he gives these evaluations equal weight.
"One could say that is stacking the deck in favor of the professor, but I think there is no reason those letters shouldn't be used [if the student had a good experience]," he said.
Debate rages about whether tenure decisions are based more on scholarship or teaching as reflected in student evaluations.
Professor James Heffernan of the English department, which does not use supplemental student input, said that deans and senior professors "expect to see clear evidence of scholarly work" when evaluating tenure candidates.
Heffernan noted that to be seriously considered for tenure in the humanities, a candidate has to have published at least one book. But he asserted candidates do not win tenure without a strong showing in both teaching and scholarship.
Psychology professor William Kelley agreed that the tenure process is research oriented.
"When all is said and done, overall, [student input] is just a small component of the tenure decision ... publishing and grant support are more important," he said.
Cormen, however, stands behind the idea that students do contribute to the decision.
"If you look at a typical case, you will actually see more student input than faculty input," he said, speaking of the teaching component of the tenure decision.
With the degree to which student evaluations impact tenure decisions varying and sometimes unclear, the Assembly, which believes student imput should count more, has been working through the undergraduate teaching initiative to find ways to meet that goal.
Many students contacted by The Dartmouth said they are unaware of the extent to which student input is considered in tenure decisions, but offered varying opinions about the ideal amount of student involvement.
Many thought that student input should be highly valued.
Jason Medeiros '05 said that while a professor's academic credentials are significant, "more importantly, what is the use of their knowledge if they can't effectively share it with students...they should be able to show how their material can be used to make a better today. If a professor wants tenure, they should show passion for their specialty as well as for those they are sharing it with."
Jason Taylor '02 agreed. "The College cannot say they have made a fully informed decision about granting a prof tenure without the input of the students, who are most directly affected by a such a decision and have experience-backed, honest opinions about a professor's ability to teach effectively."
Other students disagreed. Some thought that undergraduates don't always provide reliable information.
"I would trust the College more than I would trust student opinion. Good professors choose good professors -- not the friendly ones, not the easy graders, not the ones who give you the weekend off," said Dan Chang '03, former president of the Class of 2003.
He added, "Being well-liked is not how we get our grades, and likewise being well-liked should not automatically grant tenure."
"Student input is very valid but by no means should it systematically carry weight over faculty evaluations," Chang continued.
In spite of the disparity in opinions over the balance of influence and input in the tenure decisions process, Bharucha said the administration is happy to work with students.
"I have applauded the fact that the SA has taken up academic issues and started the teaching award," Bharucha said.
