In observations of my classroom teaching each semester, my department colleagues consistently assign an overall rating of “excellent.” These observations provide critical feedback for my improvement as a teacher. I appreciate my colleagues’ thoughtful input each semester and do my best to implement changes and improvements they suggest from semester to semester.
For example, my observations for the past few years rate my student-instructor interaction as “excellent” and explicitly mention students’ engagement. I focused specifically on improving my student-instructor interaction based on some observation reports from my first year at CityTech, which offered specific recommendations to engage more students in the class.
A summary of my peer evaluations of teaching appear in the table below.
Highlights from peer evaluations of teaching:
“Prof. Poirier called students by name to draw out answers. It is so evident that the interaction between Prof. Poirier and her students is of respect. She was supporting students individually at their computer and checked their work. Students were engaged in the lesson and activities.”
—Estela Rojas, MEDU 2010, Fall 2016
“The presentation of the subject matter was exceptional. Prof. Poirier provided time for students to work collaboratively on problems while she circulated the classroom answering questions from the groups. After a few minutes, she allowed students to generalize what they had discovered in their groups…Students were engaged and highly motivated to learn…Prof. Poirier is an experienced educator. It was a pleasure to observe her class.”
—Janet Liou-Mark, MAT 2440, Spring 2017
“Professor Poirier did a fantastic job of presenting the material. Students spent a great deal of the class engaged in the material in small groups with the instructor circulating to provide individual assistance, balanced with class discussion and brief lectures. Students demonstrated their work on the board and this was used as a basis for the discussion. Alternative approaches to problems were encouraged and in many cases Professor Poirier asked multiple students to show their work for the same problem, using this to highlight different solution strategies. In introducing a new topic she moved from informal discussion, to motivating examples, to the general case, and highlighted multiple modes of representation (algebraic, geometric), using the new topic to review and reinforce prior knowledge (equations and graphs of circles and lines). She drew many connections between conceptual (“What does it mean to solve a system of equations?”) and procedural (“What step should we do next?”) domains, and called on her students to make these connections explicit. Professor Poirier created a dynamic lesson with many opportunities for learning in a variety of modes.
“The instructor asked many questions to provoke engagement with the material (“What does it mean? What form will the answer take?”) and listened carefully to student responses. During group work she circulated the room, asking encouraging questions and providing gentle guidance. It was clear from the atmosphere and behavior in the room that the students respond well to this instructor, asking questions and volunteering feedback…Professor Poirier presented a dynamic, well-balanced lesson incorporating a variety of teaching techniques in an engaging manner. An outstanding lesson!”
—Jonas Reitz, MAT 1275, Fall 2017
Summary of peer evaluations of teaching:
| Semester | Course | Observer | Overall Evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fall 2018 | MAT 1375 | Boyan Kostadinov | Excellent |
| Spring 2018 | MAT 1275 | Hans Schoutens | Excellent |
| Fall 2017 | MAT 1275 | Jonas Reitz | Excellent |
| Spring 2017 | MAT 2440 | Janet Liou-Mark | Excellent |
| Fall 2016 | MEDU 2010 | Estela Rojas | Excellent |
| Spring 2016 | MAT 2540 | Jonathan Natov | Excellent |
| Fall 2015 | MAT 2680 | Urmi Ghosh-Dastidar | Excellent |
| Spring 2015 | MAT 1575 | Marianna Bonanome | Excellent |
| Fall 2014 | MAT 1575 | Huseyin Yuce | Excellent |
| Spring 2014 | MAT 1575 | Neil Katz | Excellent |
| Spring 2014 | MAT 1575 | Arnavaz Taraporevala | Very Good |
| Fall 2013 | MAT 1475 | Sandie Han | Satisfactory* |
| Fall 2013 | MAT 1475 | Nadia Benakli | Satisfactory* |
| Fall 2013 | MAT 1375 | Henry Africk | Satisfactory* |
* Please note: the options for overall evaluation ratings on peer observation reports from Fall 2013 were satisfactory and unsatisfactory only.
