Enrollment: 23 | Responses: 4 | Global Index: 4.81
Students deeply appreciated my structured feedback, extra credit opportunities, and accessibility. One student requested more detailed experiment explanations and increased office hour options.
Action Plan for Improvement:
I will expand my weekly open office hours and introduce a “Purpose + Product” slide at the start of each experiment, reviewing experimental intent and expected outcomes. These enhancements reflect my broader aim to cultivate not just procedural competence but conceptual ownership of laboratory work
Enrollment: 24 | Responses: 5 | Global Index: 4.78
Students consistently rated my instruction as excellent across all categories, especially highlighting my patience, clarity, and understanding. Suggestions included providing more experimental context and increasing disease diversity in genetic topics.
Action Plan for Improvement:
I will integrate case-based modules into the genetics lab that draw on diseases beyond cancer (e.g., neurodegenerative and metabolic disorders). This diversification not only deepens student engagement but also supports the translational focus of my teaching philosophy centered on the blood-brain barrier and health disparities.
Enrollment: 24 | Responses: 6 | Global Index: 4.35
Students rated my teaching highly across core indicators, especially in availability (4.67), classroom atmosphere (4.67), and subject knowledge (4.83). They appreciated my clarity in grading rubrics, detailed feedback on lab reports, and ability to explain complex topics. However, some students suggested using pre-lab slides more as lecture tools to deepen conceptual understanding and offering more real-time clarification during lab activities.
Action Plan for Improvement:
I will enhance the lecture portion of each lab by integrating a 10-minute microlecture tied to each week’s experimental rationale, aligning with my commitment to building adaptable, critically thinking scientists. This strategy reflects my revised teaching philosophy, which emphasizes fostering inquiry through simulation and active learning. I will also pilot a lab walkthrough protocol where I pause during experiments to address common errors and conceptual misunderstandings in real-time.
Enrollment: 18 | Responses: 5 | Global Index: 4.48
Students valued my flexibility, clarity in explaining research papers, and encouragement. While scores were high in instructor metrics (4.9), the course objectives section had slightly lower clarity (3.4).
Action Plan for Improvement:
To address this, I will introduce a “What We’re Learning and Why” section at the start of each lab that ties objectives to broader research applications. This aligns with my philosophy of training students to not just absorb but critically evaluate and contextualize content.
Enrollment: 19 | Responses: 7 | Global Index: 4.5
Students described me as kind, approachable, and helpful. Constructive feedback suggested more detailed concept introductions and additional time for experimental purpose clarification.
Action Plan for Improvement:
I will introduce a weekly “Concept Preview & Debrief” cycle—brief pre-lab introductions and post-lab wrap-ups to bookend the hands-on work. This mirrors the constructivist principles that underpin my teaching philosophy and supports student confidence in data interpretation.