Over The Line: When Evaluations Become Cruel
By Allison Henrich, Matthew Pons, and David G. Taylor
From left to right: Matthew Pons, David G. Taylor, and Allison Henrich
It’s one of those times of year again, when we finish our grading, submit our grades, then open the manila envelope (okay, I’m old school; for you, open the Google form) to read our student evaluations. In a good term, you’ll find things to smile about: students who appreciated the extra office hours you put in, the energy you brought to class, or your understanding when they were sick. But then there are always one or two evaluations that you read and they seem to not understand you, to miss what you were trying to do in the course, to…dislike you. How can that be? Didn’t they attend the same class as the other students? Didn’t they know how many hours you spent just to help them succeed? Sometimes, they even get to the point of being cruel.
At the MAA MathFest 2022 in Philadelphia, MAA President Jenny Quinn hosted an evening of Ignite Talks. An Ignite Talk is a precisely-five-minute talk with twenty slides that are automatically advanced every 15 seconds. There were a number of memorable talks, such as the fun and energetic Matt Boelkins’s “This Episode is Brought to You By the Number 3.”
One that touched particularly close to home for me (in part because I was one of the twenty slides) was the talk by Allison Henrich, Matthew Pons, and David Taylor: three-fourths of the team that brought us all Living Proof: Stories of Resilience Along the Mathematical Journey. These three wanted to turn over some rocks and expose to the light of day some of the cruel things that math folks hear under the guise of “evaluations.” Just as Living Proof has helped to normalize everyone’s struggle with mathematics, their Ignite Talk, “There’s a Fine Line Between Critique and Some Mean Sh*t: Real Comments About Real People and Complex Stuff,” helped to normalize for professional mathematicians that we all have received critiques that have gone too far at times. With their permission (and the permissions of those featured here), we reprint their talk. (If you missed the Ignite Event, you can find their talk here.)
-Deanna Haunsperger
Student evaluations and other anonymous reviews are fraught with biases, often reflecting more about the reviewer than the reviewed. These can be traumatic to read. Sharing our reviews can help us be more objective about the comments and even find the humor in some of the NASTIER ones. Here are some mathematicians sharing comments they have received.
A student of Stan Yoshinobu, Director of the Academy of Inquiry-Based Learning, wrote: “I do not like the idea of turning the lectures into a DIY lecture with your classmates.”
An end-of-term evaluation from the introduction to proof-writing class of Deanna Haunsperger, former MAA President, said: “Proof that Deanna is a bad teacher: If Deanna were a good teacher, she’d be able to answer all of our questions. QED.”
Matthew Pons, author of the book Real Analysis for the Undergraduate received this review of his dissertation: “These results were neither interesting nor unexpected.”
A review of a 21-page paper by Tom Edgar, Editor of Math Horizons, read “The paper contains many [results]. But I do not think they are very interesting. Almost each proof is easy and very short, and I do not find any important technique or method from these proofs.”
A referee of a paper of Nancy Neudauer, MAA Associate Secretary, wrote, “At some points, the level of detail (such as, giving an example after a crystal-clear simple proof) makes me wonder if the authors wanted a research article or an expository paper for novices … This paper would be out of place in the best journals.”
Alder Award-winner Lara Pudwell had a referee say “[Don’t accept] this paper. There isn’t much which is new (though the paper makes it sound as though there is). Furthermore, what is new is not as powerful or as important as the paper makes it seem.”
Allison Henrich, Editor of MAA FOCUS was told “The chapter seems to be more of a summary of the author’s accomplishments than a description of what it takes to succeed as an academic. Moreover, I found it long winded.”
Alexander Diaz-Lopez, another Alder Award winner, heard this from a journal: “The author’s [work] contains laughably silly details … I think the counting problem presented here is pretty much a pointless exercise.”
While Michael Dorff was MAA President, someone said of him, “He’s not a real mathematician.”
When MAA President-Elect Hortensia Soto was having complications with her pregnancy, her research mentor said, “Let me know when you get serious about research.”
The only “positive” thing an NSF reviewer could say about MAA-award-winner Alicia Prieto Langarica’s REU proposal was “I guess the PI is Hispanic and I guess that is good.”
Alder Award Winner Vinodh Chellamulhu received a student comment: “The class can be improved by being taught by a different teacher.”
Emille Davie Lawrence, Co-Editor of Living Proof received this comment from a student: “She is rude and does not even attempt to accommodate for students in any situation…this has led me to [consider] switching majors to a less math-inclined subject, especially if she is the head of the department.
Our very own MAA President Jenny Quinn penned this evaluation of MAA-award-winner Gary Gordon: “I think we have gotten past the stage where just one person does all the problems and tells the rest how.”
Jenny should talk. According to the unbiased, reputable website ratemyprofessors.com, Jenny Quinn is an “AWFUL” teacher.
So there you have it. Even the best of us hear some mean shit.
Allison Henrich is a Professor at Seattle University and editor of MAA FOCUS.
Matthew Pons is the Marie and Bernice Gantzert Professor in the Liberal Arts and Sciences and Professor of Mathematics at North Central College, and the deputy editor of MAA FOCUS.
David Taylor is Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Administration and Professor of Mathematics at Roanoke College, sits on an MAA Council and a pair of Committees, and has been very involved in the Maryland, DC, and Virginia Section.