Teaching Statement
My academic training during high school, bachelors and Scout movement was strongly shaped by the principles of the Ignatian pedagogical paradigm[1], [2] (S.J., Jesuits – Catholic congregation) that combines a holistic view of the world, with a deep concern for the person to be form, structured in five fundamental elements: Experience, Reflection and Action, preceded by Context as a pre-learning element, and succeeded by Evaluation (Assessment) as a post-learning element. This paradigm is more than 400 years old and still valid, but in the modern context of teaching at university level it is possible to observe the same structure in the constructive alignment theory[3], were the experience is the center of the learning process (easy to understand why I believe the strongest resource for successful learning is the experimentation) and the intended learning outcomes are the fundamental glue that connects all the steps of the learning process. I understand that my role as faculty is to describe these learning outcomes and to recreate teaching/learning activities that fulfill them. Perhaps my strongest strategy to embrace and apply this philosophy is through mentoring. I’ve been mentoring volunteer undergrad students at University of Florida (MIST makers), and help them design IoT (internet of things) applications for gardening, lake environmental monitoring and low-cost weather station. Students learn by solving real problems with real “customer-like” challenges.
Translating these elements into engineering context, three steps are needed to structure any pedagogical process with my students: (1) To define educational objectives and learning outcomes oriented towards development competences in engineering. (2) To implement teaching strategies (laboratories, experiments, demonstrations, case studies, individual and team projects). I personally believe one of the best strategies are active learning, because it reinforces the concept that the student must participate at class by taking actions during the process (once again linked with experimentation) and creating activities that enable the student to “practice by doing”. The other strategy I promote is problem-based learning (PBL) with strong emphasis in design methodology. (3) To incorporation strategies for formative assessment. I am not the biggest advocate for exams, but I believe in student assessment, feedback and rubrics. My conviction is that these steps are fundamental to educate the future generation of engineers. It is important to highlight that those steps can be implemented in classroom (graduate and undergraduate) as well as in the research advisor context. I experimented for two years with PBL method (guided by researchers at the Department of Education at Universidad de los Andes) in semiconductor material courses. Student devoted class hours to solve problems (individually or in groups) rather to receive lecture. I also implemented active learning by creating challenging design projects in digital logic and processor architecture courses.
All these steps must be aligned through the entire process. To guaranty this alignment and the overall quality of this teaching process is precisely the intention of the ABET accreditation. Having an ABET accreditation is taking by granted at most programs in United States, and the accreditation is so absorbed by the institution’s members that most of the guidelines are no longer discussed; I had the advantage of participating actively in changes required by my institution (Universidad de los Andes) to obtain this accreditation. Therefore, I had to study these guidelines and materialize the implementation of objectives and competences for the courses that I was teaching at that time.
An additional component that I envision to include as my teaching signature is the leadership and entrepreneurial mindset. By creating projects and homework’s oriented towards real problems and problem-solving ideas (customer oriented). Today more than ever, it is necessary to work and collaborate in interdisciplinary teams to solve the most complex problems in engineering. Consequently, developing leadership competences is fundamental for the student’s success in building effective teams to solve those problems. Moreover, some of those future engineers will also require the entrepreneur spirit to create companies and lead projects that will address those issues at a commercial and industry level. In some way, this is a natural extension of the problem-based learning environment.
TEACHING BACKGROUND
- I have extensive experience as teaching assistant for more than 20 courses at graduate and undergraduate level at 3 different universities. I have theoretical and practical skills in more than 13 different areas, ranging from microfabrication, MEMS, digital logic, process architecture, semiconductor devices, digital and analog electronics, electronics design.
- I was co-author in the development of a lab course for semiconductor microfabrication (graduate level) at University of Florida where I designed the laboratories and wrote the course documentation.
- With 9 years of experience working with COMSOL multiphysics I have created tutorials and videos for multiphysics simulation (finite element method - FEM) training at graduate level.
- I have formally mentored five graduates, six undergraduates and three high school students at 4 different universities, some of those students were mentored online. Mentoring resulting in conference paper, poster, patent and undergraduate capstone project.
- I have experience teaching/tutoring users in industry as well as academia. I have six years of experience as a freelance tutoring for mathematics, physics and engineering courses.
- Nine years of experience leading extracurricular activities for big groups of children (between 7-18 years old) and training other volunteers in pedagogical techniques for non-formal education, supported by a combined history of more than 20 years in the World Scout movement as participant and volunteer.
I can strongly contribute with existing courses at your department.
- Strongest preference based on my research experience
- Microfabrication Technology
- Introduction to Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS)
- Advanced Topics in Mems, Microsensors, and Microactuators
- Introduction to Digital Electronics
- Introductory Microcomputer Interfacing Laboratory
- Microelectronic Devices and Circuits
- Future courses
- Mentoring and advising students
By any means, I believe I have all pedagogic tools and teaching skills for creating a successful learning environment, therefore I want to continue my education in teaching strategies and I will always welcome interaction, cooperation and feedback from other colleagues, faculty and students to keep our classes at the leading edge of the learning field. Therefore, I envision two fundamental collaborations at your institution: 1) Department of Education, to continue improving my classes and pedagogic skills through constant assessment. 2) Innovation and Entrepreneurship organization (specially in Engineering), because I believe the positive impact that bridging the gap between engineering research and entrepreneurship will bring to the university.
REFERENCES
[1] G. W. Traub, A Jesuit education reader. Loyola Press, 2008.
[2] M. McAvoy, “Training Faculty to Adopt the Ignatian Pedagogical Paradigm , IPP and its Influence on Teaching and Learning : Process and Outcomes,” Jesuit High. Educ. A J., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 62–109, 2013.
[3] J. Biggs and C. Tang, Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Third Edit., vol. 9. McGraw-Hill, 2007.
