Anyone who has ever attended a university knows that the quality of lecturers varies greatly. A few are very effective communicators, conveying the substance of their lectures clearly and interestingly and inspiring students to want to know more about the subject. Others produce dull lectures from which the students learn little and which are likely to kill any interest they may have in the subject. Lecturing is a major part of a university lecturer's job and it would seem reasonable that effectiveness in this task should be a major standard in assessing a lecturer for promotion. However, it is very often the case that far more weight is given to such factors as participation in research, number of publications and even performance of administrative duties. My point of view is that a lecturer's lecturing should be regularly evaluated and that the best people to carry out this evaluation are those directly on the receiving end.
It could, of course, be argued that students are not competent to evaluate the academic quality of lectures. If anyone should evaluate lecturers, it should be their colleagues. However, I am not arguing that students should be asked to comment on the academic content of lectures, but to evaluate the effectiveness.
I suspect that many of the objections to student evaluation stem from the fear some lecturers have of being subject to criticism by their students. However, lecturers should see such evaluation as an opportunity to become aware of defects in their lecturing techniques and thus to become better lecturers. Such a system should benefit both students and lecturers as well as help department heads to assess the strengths and weaknesses of their teaching staff.
Which of the following statements is true according to the passage?（ ）
参考文章第二段，可知作者认为学生有能力评判教师的讲课水平。
