statement of teaching philosophy

I view my teaching about design as an inseparable extension of my ideas about it as a practice and body of knowledge. in terms of a philosophy, i value and believe a lot of things about design, most of which are evident in my actions and behavior in the classroom [aka “the proof is in the pudding”].

  • visual form has meaning.

  • that meaning is derived from the larger, ever-changing cultural context.

  • design serves living, breathing people – not anonymous market demographics.

  • design shapes behavior and our understanding of the world.

  • design is a powerful way to demonstrate “what could be”, and in so doing, move us from existing to preferred situations.

  • it is as much a [imaginative, iterative] process and relationship as a final product.

as a design educator, I strive to:

  • expand students’ fundamental knowledge of design;

  • elevate students’ critical and contextual thinking about design and its wide-ranging uses and impacts;

  • cultivate empathy and a researched understanding of, and respect for, audience;

  • impart an understanding of the theories and principles underpinning design and how they determine visual form;

  • engage students with the topic on multiple levels and modes through their thinking and making;

  • build a holistic understanding of professional practice expectations, from technical to soft skills;

  • develop students’ sense of internal motivation for their work;

  • help students learn how to learn

approach to student engagement

in my classroom, i seek to involve students as much as possible in their own education. to that end, i strive to make education as multi-modal as possible. that multi-modal engagement is where students discover their strengths, motivations, and begin “learning how to learn.” i am a firm believer in neil postman’s notion of “the inquiry method”, whereby learners practice curiosity by engaging in a question-led process. i model this in most all classroom settings and build it into the design process wherever possible, including our course titles. questioning uncovers possibilities rather than zeroing in immediately on solutions.

further, sister corita kent’s “immaculate heart college art department rules” [collectively created by her students] offer a great philosophical guide for an engaged learning environment:
rule 2 – general duties of a student: pull everything out of your teacher; pull everything out of your fellow students.
rule 3 – general duties of a teacher: pull everything out of your students.

a few things i regularly do to foster strong engagement from students in their studies:

  • aim for question-peppered, dialogic “lectures”, not monologues.

  • vary resource types [reading, podcasts, videos] and follow-up with group discussion, allowing for written input by those who prefer that channel.

  • software and practical “how-to” demonstrations

  • field trips

  • peer group ideation sessions

  • self-selection of project content to maintain motivation

  • work with outside groups when appropriate

  • visiting designer critiques, presentations, and/or q&a

  • student-led critiques, often responding to pre-set criteria

  • lectures, discussions, reviews of work - self-assessment for grading [students are responsible for half of their grade]

our department recently shifted to an “engagement policy” rather than strict attendance policy. students can demonstrate engagment with their studies beyond merely being present in the classroom at the required time. in my classes, this is measured weekly by three criteria, stated generally here, for simplicity:

1. engagement through dialogue of all types

2. engagement through class-based attention and activities

3. engagement with your own design process

students who miss class often email us about the nature of their absence. they are encouraged to get themselves up to speed on missed activities and share process work with us as a way to stay engaged.

approach to learning outcomes

curriculum, course, and project design is an exercise in macro- and micro-relationship building. program learning outcomes are established, from which flow a series of scaffolded courses with their accompanying descriptions. i search for key words, phrases, and concepts in course descriptions to inform the creation of course learning outcomes. those outcomes inform the design of assignments, ideally focusing on one or two outcomes each. good outcomes are discrete, measurable units, understandable to both instructor and student if co-grading occurs. as chair, i took a leadership role in re-writing our sophomore course learning oucomes, guiding younger faculty once my own courses were re-written, asking for analysis from the evpaa, and filling in gaps where needed. i immediately implemented the simplified, more direct and assessable outcomes into my sophomore courses for spring 2026 as a test of their effectiveness. i am excited at their potential as easy and clear assessment guidelines.