All Tutors Need Feedback

For the first time, most upperclass students will be allowed to say whether their residential tutors A) create a strong sense of community, B) provide strong advising recommendations, C) are easily accessible or D) none of the above.

With most Houses soliciting student comments on their resident tutors this year during reading period, students will be better able to give constructive criticism about where the tutors are succeeding, and also about what isn’t working. Resident tutors are important to the academic and social lives of House residents, so it is important that students have a voice in appraising their performance.

Leverett and Quincy Houses, however, are not allowing students to evaluate their tutors. Leverett House Master Howard Georgi has argued that the evaluations undermine the sense of House community by fostering an adversarial relationship between student and tutor. But this claim was not borne out in the Houses that did trial surveys last year. House tutor evaluations will offer valuable feedback and information that will be used by tutors to improve their performance in creating entryway communities and advising students on fellowships and academics.

As this is the first year that most Houses will offer the chance to evaluate their tutors, students must take advantage of the opportunity and make this process as meaningful as possible. Last spring, four Houses had trial surveys and participation rates were low, resulting in poor and skewed evaluation information. For the surveys to be effective, students must go online and provide informative feedback.

Houses should make the aggregate survey data public so that each House can recognize tutors’ overall strengths and weaknesses and try to pinpoint areas that need improvement. House Masters can then use this information in their rehiring decisions, ensuring that all the tutors are committed to making themselves available to students. Accountability and feedback can only lead to positive changes for House communities.

The exclusion of non-resident tutors in the evaluations is a mistake, as many House residents rely on these tutors for advice on both academic and personal issues. And surveys are one of the only ways for Masters to get solid feedback on non-resident tutors, since tutors who live outside the House don’t interact as regularly with the rest of the community.

Next year’s surveys should include evaluations for non-resident tutors and must be offered in Leverett and Quincy Houses. After students give their feedback this year, it should become obvious that these surveys do not disrupt the fabric of House community; they only strengthen it.