With the popularization of higher education, teaching quality has become the key factor to the development of colleges and universities . In order to improve the teaching quality, many kinds of measures are adopted. At present, evaluation of teaching is also used in some universities to improve the quality of teaching  . The evaluation of teaching generally includes the students’ evaluation of teaching  and peer review , and the proportion of the two parts is different in different schools. This kind of teaching method has some disadvantages  . So, it can’t improve the quality of teaching, and it is possible to make the teaching quality and teaching style decline.
2. Disadvantages of Student-Assessing Teaching
2) Compared with the previous situation, the monitor one person instead of the whole class to check, this situation is more serious so this kind of data can not represent the overall.
3) Judging people by outward appearance, good appearance and young teachers, may be more able to win the high evaluation of students, that is, students’ visual impact instead of a rational judgment.
4) Teacher to give students a warm brand is more dominant. In order to obtain the students’ praise, some teachers to meet the needs of students, not strict, free to give students a higher score, therefore, it is easy to get higher marks ignoring the lack of teach in. This situation not only trampled on the teacher’s dignity, but also seek students’ mercy, That is a serious violation of the sacred atmosphere of teaching.
5) Now college students to pass for the purpose, do not care about how much knowledge to learn, so, students tend to dislike strict and careful teacher, such good teachers can not be a good evaluation.
6) The students in different grades give different points. Because of understanding the situation and the courage of a small, low grade students tend to give teachers a higher score. The high grade, especially the graduating class students, often give the teacher a low score, so, evaluation data of teaching get from the students between different grades are not comparable.
7) There is imbalance between different disciplines, such as theoretical courses, applied courses and so on. Teaching methods of different courses are different. The basic theory of the subject, including a larger formula, theory, may be more boring, causing the student’s aversion, the student evaluation of teaching may be low.
From the above analysis, it is known that the students’ evaluation of the teaching is affected by many factors, such as subjective, objective, etc., Therefore, credibility, objectivity, comprehensiveness, fairness and justice of students’ evaluation of teaching are questionable. Thus it may be known, data affected by many factors is not true and reliable, with which to evaluation the teacher, even with the teacher a lot of vital interests associated, we can imagine that will get very serious consequences. Strict teachers may reflect on the question own serious may be wrong. To get high marks some may shake their hard style, and cater to the students’ thought. Style of teaching and study degrade.
3. Disadvantages of Peer Review
1) Peer assessment generally adopts the form of supervision group. The steering group members are mainly a number of retired teachers. All teachers were evaluated by the steering group. However, due to professional restrictions and other reasons, it is difficult to give a reasonable evaluation of each teacher.
2) In peer mutual assessment, it is inevitable to be influenced by human feelings. So unfair phenomenon may also be in peer assessment.
Based on the above analysis, there are many disadvantages of the existing evaluation system. So, the teaching data is not reliable, not objective, not comprehensive, unreasonable, unscientific, which cannot be true, fair and impartial reflection of the teacher’s teaching level. If the results of this assessment linked to teacher’s all kinds of interests, it is easy to cause serious negative effects. The teacher’s enthusiasm is hit, so teachers’ energy is not entirely focused on teaching. But strenuous efforts to consider how to cater to students to get a good evaluation of students, The teaching atmosphere is disturbed, and the teaching quality is affected. How to make the evaluation of science, objective, fair and impartial reflection of the teacher’s teaching level, to make it more effective to improve the quality of teaching is very important. Relevant departments can be fully considered, to avoid some of the subjective, one-sided and other limitations, to establish a set of reasonable and effective evaluation of the teaching system.
4. Specific Recommendations Are as Follows
1) Mobilization of students
Mobilization of students in the assessment of teaching, to abandon the impact of personal emotions, pay attention to the teacher’s teaching, fair, impartial, objective and comprehensive evaluation of the teacher’s teaching results. Teacher’s teaching methods, teaching methods, teaching attitude and so on, whether really helps students to learn, effectively impart knowledge, to mobilize the enthusiasm of students learning, interest, inquiry, etc, and ignore some of the actions that are not related to teaching.
Every student should fully exercise their right to comment, rather than a monitor instead of the class to do the evaluation of teaching. Take effective measures to reduce the occurrence of the above situation.
2) Principle of lateral comparability
Principle of lateral comparability is taken, such as the results were compared with the grade of the same grade, and the teachers in the similar subjects were compared. This can greatly reduce the differences in grades and different disciplines.
3) Evaluation of colleagues
Teachers’ peer assessment is made up of teachers’ teaching experience. At the same time, in the assessment of teaching, in the objective and impartial manner, to reduce the impact of subjective thinking, equal to the teacher to carry out a fair, impartial and objective evaluation, and give sincere valuable advice. There is a need to be kept confidential, in the case of non-public acceptance of the teacher to teach the teacher to be able to accept the advice, rather than cause some unnecessary contradictions. Make teacher peer evaluation of teaching as a process of mutual learning and common improve, rather than a mere formality, a laugh at each other, attack, retaliation, manufacturing source of the contradiction.
4) Teacher’s teaching attitude
In the teaching system, Teacher’s teaching attitude should be included, such as the preparation of teaching materials, the attitude of classroom teaching, the responsibility of student management and so on. If the attitude is more serious, with the classroom teaching effect is slightly worse, can also be appropriate to increase the assessment of teaching scores. This could encourage some young teachers, although teaching experience in various aspects of worse than the old teacher, but if a serious attitude, improve evaluation scores can make the teacher encouraged, thus greatly improved space, rather than negate, lose confidence, has suffered a severe blow.
5) Feedback from graduated students
Feedback information of the employment of students should be properly increased, to investigate whether teaching can help students to adapt to the society and the ability to apply.
The problems and influencing factors of the students’ evaluation of teaching and peer assessment were analyzed in this study. Due to the influence of many factors, the resulting data is not reliable, not objective. So the teacher’s teaching level cannot be reflected truly and fairly. If the results of teaching evaluation are used to evaluate the teacher, serious negative effects may be caused. How to make the evaluation of science, objective, fair and impartial reflection of the teacher’s teaching level, to make it more effective to improve the quality of teaching is very important. Some suggestions are put forward in this paper.
 Wachtel, H.K. (1998) Student Evaluation of College Teaching Effectiveness: A Brief Review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 23, 191-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0260293980230207