GoKawiilNature column: professor defends ignoring student evaluations to push academic rigor
A Northwestern University marketing professor, Lan Nguyen Chaplin, writes in Nature about deciding to stop weighing student teaching evaluations after receiving harsh feedback calling her 'stingy' and 'arrogant.' She argues that prioritizing being liked by students can compromise academic rigor, and says she now focuses on challenging students rather than seeking their approval.
GoKawiil's interpretation of the reporting above, not reported fact.
The piece surfaces an ongoing debate in academia about whether student evaluations reliably measure teaching quality or instead reward likability over rigor. Commentators quoted alongside the professor suggest a middle path, noting that instructors with power over students should still pair firmness with fairness, and that evidence of actual learning outcomes matters regardless of popularity.
- A professor says she stopped prioritizing student evaluations after harsh feedback called her teaching approach unhelpful.
- She argues that challenging students matters more than being liked, given academic rigor demands.
- Other scientists quoted suggest balancing authority with fairness and tracking actual learning outcomes.
Source: nature.com — Pells, 2026-10-28
Published there as: “What students think about my teaching doesn’t matter. Am I wrong?”
Read the original report → The summary and analysis above are GoKawiil's own, written from reporting by the source above. Facts and quotes belong to the original publisher.