This section includes feedback from tenure committee members who observed my classes as part of the tenure evaluation process. Their insights focus on areas such as teaching effectiveness, student engagement, and classroom management.

1st Year Summary (Fall 2023)

Observation by Professor Joe Selzler, Professor Jeffrey Wood and Dr. Aaron Jones

• Strengths Recognized:
  • Effective use of digital presentations: Utilized dual screens and on-screen annotations, providing clear visual aids for students.
  • Student engagement: Created a welcoming, non-intimidating environment that encouraged student comfort and participation.
  • Constructive feedback: Provided timely and constructive feedback on assessments and assignments.
  • Professional Development: Actively engaged in professional growth, including diversity, equity, and inclusivity training.
• Areas for Improvement:
  • Increased Interaction: Suggested to increase direct interaction with students during lectures.
  • Encouraging Participation: Recommended moving closer to students, using a microphone to enhance audibility, and incorporating more movement to maintain engagement.
  • Note-taking Cues: Advised writing down more critical concepts (e.g., “wavelength and frequency are inversely related”) to support students’ note-taking and comprehension.

2nd Year Summary (Fall 2024)

Observation by professor Malia Rose-Seisa and Professor Ryan Petitfils

• Strengths Recognized:
  • Positive Learning Environment: Successfully established a comfortable, engaging atmosphere where students felt encouraged to participate.
  • Clarity in Visual Aids: Enhanced clarity in visual explanations by adding more on-screen notes, supporting students in note-taking.
  • Student Comfort and Engagement: Increased efforts to make the classroom more accessible for students, leading to improved student participation.
• Areas for Improvement:
  • More Written Notes: Continued recommendation to increase the frequency of writing key terms and explanations on-screen to aid students.
  • Practice Opportunities: Suggested incorporating brief breaks for students to practice problem-solving, reinforcing lecture content.
  • Peer Interaction: Encouraged structured peer discussions to foster student-to-student interaction during class.

Analysis of Changes (Lecture Evaluation)

In the second year, there were clear improvements in student engagement, particularly in creating an environment where students felt more comfortable participating. Enhanced clarity in visual aids helped students better follow along and take notes. Going forward, incorporating structured peer activities and brief problem-solving breaks could further enrich student interaction and reinforce learning.

1st Year Summary (Fall 2023)

Observed by Professor Malia Rose-Seisa and Professor Ryan Petitfils

• Strengths Recognized:
  • Student engagement and responsiveness: Showed high engagement with students, actively anticipating and answering questions.
  • Clear lab organization: Provided well-structured lab instructions and maintained a clear, organized environment.
  • Adaptability: Demonstrated adaptability to unexpected situations in the lab.
  • Effective use of visual aids: Made use of slides and diagrams to clarify lab instructions.
• Areas for Improvement:
  • Voice Projection: Recommended improving voice projection to avoid monotone delivery and maintain student attention.
  • Increased Participation: Suggested increasing active participation and engagement through more student-centered activities.
  • Student Checks: Advised conducting periodic checks to ensure students were following and understanding instructions.

2nd Year Summary (Fall 2024)

Observation by Professor Jeffrey Wood

• Strengths Recognized:
  • Interactive Lab Environment: Created a positive, safe learning environment, constantly moving around to be available for student questions and monitoring progress.
  • Detailed Lab Guidance: Offered specific instructions for safe and effective lab practices, including visuals and hands-on demonstrations.
  • Encouraging Student Independence: Encouraged students to check each other’s work and provided ample opportunities for questions, fostering a collaborative learning atmosphere.
• Areas for Improvement:
  • Consistent Voice Projection: Continued recommendation to maintain strong voice projection, especially during pre-lab discussions.
  • Maintaining Engagement: Suggested using visual cues and other engagement strategies to keep students attentive and focused throughout the lab.
  • Structured Peer Review: Recommended implementing more structured peer review within lab groups to strengthen collaboration and understanding.

Analysis of Changes (Lab Evaluation)

In the second year, there was a marked improvement in fostering a supportive, interactive lab environment. Increased movement and interaction allowed the instructor to be more accessible to students, enhancing engagement. Detailed instructions and encouragement of student independence helped students feel more confident and collaborative. Moving forward, maintaining strong voice projection and further structuring peer collaboration can help sustain and deepen student engagement during lab sessions.