Tuesday, August 30, 2016

So are those trips to the MAC counter tax-deductible now?

Once again, it pays to be pretty [1].

​Not only do more-attractive teachers get better evals, it seems their students pay closer attention and learn more:

Participants listened to an audio lecture while viewing a photograph of instructor. The photograph depicted either a physically attractive instructor or a less attractive instructor. Following the lecture, participants completed a forced choice recognition task covering material from the lecture. Consistent with the predictions; attractive instructors were associated with more learning.

Can't wait to see what this is this going to do to our professional-development curriculum. 



[1] and male; an "unexpected" finding of the study was that the male instructors received better ratings than the female instructors, although the students' performance on the recall test did not differ by instructor gender. 


2 comments:

  1. Sounds a bit "Dr. Fox"-ish.

    ReplyDelete
  2. One of several reasons I don't really mind teaching online.

    Though I have wondered whether I should demand the right to teach as a male online, so as to reap the likely rewards for both myself and my students. That might get complicated come paper-conference time, however.

    I could probably get away with being Charles for the first 10 weeks or so, though, and by then impressions might be fixed. It certainly works the other way: because I'm not familiar with the gender associations of names in many of my students' cultures of origin (and because not all cultures *have* fixed name/gender associations), I don't always know the gender of my online students until I meet them, in person or on skype (and a few of them I never meet). If I've corresponded individually with a student whose name doesn't hold convey immediate gender associations to me to any degree, I usually form an impression of the student's gender, but I'd say I'm wrong a good 25-30% of the time.

    ReplyDelete