Amir’s Teaching Portfolio
Let’s connect
Email AmirLinkedIn ↗Contact information

Challenges and Growth

Student feedback informs changes to pacing, activities, assessment, and assignment expectations.

Change 01

Pacing

Slow down software labs, revisit examples, and plan the pace around class size and material difficulty.

Feedback & response
  1. Pacing

Student Feedback 

  • “The teaching style moved way too quickly through slides at points.”

  • “One weakness would have to be the speed that he went sometimes. It wasn't all the time, but sometimes he would cruise on through”

  • “Sometimes the speed of examples was too fast”

Improvement Strategy 

  • The issue was mostly highlighted early in my career during software labs. To address it, I began prioritizing quality over quantity, revisiting examples as needed, planning pacing based on class size and material difficulty, and incorporating review examples.

Change 02

Enthusiasm and Engagement

Break lectures into shorter parts, with activities, discussions, and games between them.

Feedback & response

Student Feedback 

  • “It was hard to maintain interest and concentration on the slideshows.”

  • “The lectures were boring at times; however, there is really no other way to make them more interesting”

  • “The material can be dry and could maybe be presented a little better to help students stay interested.” 

Improvement Strategy 

The issue was mostly raised during presentations. To address it, I began:

    • Breaking lectures into smaller parts.

    • Interjecting lectures with activities and discussions.

    • Understanding students’ motivations early on.

    • Incorporating gamification where possible.

Change 03

Application of Theory

Use cases and industry contexts to move from understanding a concept to analyzing, evaluating, and creating.

Feedback & response

Student Feedback 

  • “Due to the theoretical nature of the material, it is difficult to understand if I am really understanding it in the way that I am suppose to understand and apply it.”

  • “Lack of real world examples. The textbook wasn't always the most detailed, so I had to lookup techniques on my own. I wish there was more details on some techniques.”

  • “The course felt way more research paper like with the discussion posts and papers then application. I would have enjoyed having some optional readings on how companies’ systems are separated. Like actual system maps instead of just theory so that I could better understand.”

  • “The one weakness I can think of is the lack of application to real-life scenarios. I understand how to perform different actions in Excel, but I’m not exactly sure when I would want to use it in the workplace.”

Improvement Strategy 

This feedback was common during theoretical/conceptual classes. To address it, I began:

  • Incorporating case discussions.

  • Contextualizing concepts (e.g., business continuity) in various industries.

  • Focusing on higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (analyze, evaluate, create) rather than just the foundational levels (apply, understand, and remember).

Change 04

Group Work

Use check-in forms and group-work guidelines before the final peer evaluation.

Feedback & response

Student Feedback 

  • “I'm not the biggest fan of group work. Not because I'm not a team player (I am) but because it's hard to get together as a group with differing schedules and you are dependent on team members timely and adequate input.”

  • “Group work can be tricky... Personally would have preferred a solo project so as to not have to worry about other group members contributing equally”

Improvement Strategy 

To address common issues in group projects, I began:

  • Using group check-in forms during the semester, instead of waiting for final peer evaluations.

  • Allowing group referenda to retain or vote out non-contributing members.

  • Providing guidelines and best practices for group work.

  • Creating an environment where groups collaborate more frequently.

Change 05

Assessment and Content Connection

Provide study guides, identify assessment sources, and share sample quizzes where possible.

Feedback & response

Student Feedback 

  • "I thought the concepts in the quizzes were not very closely related to the concepts we were taught in class."

  • "I felt that I understood what was going on in class and was taking notes, but I still thought some of the quiz concepts came out of nowhere."

Improvement Strategy 

This feedback was common earlier in my career. To address it, I began:

  • Providing detailed study guides for quizzes.

  • Noting the precise sources quizzes are based on.

  • Providing sample quizzes when possible.

Change 06

Assignment Length

Divide large assignments into milestones and distribute deadlines across the semester.

Feedback & response

Student Feedback 

  • "The SAM projects are too long. The last 2–3 SAM projects took me 2–3 hours to complete."

  • "Lots of big assignments instead of smaller ones."

  • "The only area that I feel to be somewhat of a weakness is that there are a lot of big assignments fit into the end of the semester, which can be difficult to manage."

Improvement Strategy 

This feedback was common early in my career and reappeared in one course later. To address it, I began:

    • Breaking down assignments into smaller parts instead of 1–2 large ones.

    • Creating a precise timeline for assignments throughout the semester to prevent students from feeling overwhelmed.

Change 07

Expectation Transparency

Share detailed instructions and grading rubrics before assignments are due.

Feedback & response

Student Feedback 

  • "Assignments could have a bit more detail on how to complete them."

  • "The assignments were very open-ended, which is nice because you can personalize your answers, but it was also confusing to know exactly what he was looking for."

Improvement Strategy 

This feedback was raised for specific assignments. To address it, I began:

  • Providing detailed instructions for all assignments, even those based on instructor resources.

  • Sharing grading rubrics prior to assignment deadlines to ensure transparency.

Effectiveness of Improvement Strategies

The supplied evaluation record reports higher yearly averages over this period. These figures describe evaluations rather than student performance, and the course mix changed between years.

Evaluation record through courses taught in 2026Earlier reported yearly averages: Spring 2020 4.12; 2021–22 4.67; 2022–23 4.71; 2023–24 4.71; Summer–Fall 2024 4.79. UW–Madison reported course averages: OTM 300 4.81 and OTM 452 4.74. Semester-specific Madison scores were not supplied. Vertical axis spans 4 to 5. The line connects displayed observations; it does not imply equivalent reporting periods or a yearly Madison average.44.554.12Spring 20204.672021–224.712022–234.712023–244.79Summer–Fall 20244.81OTM 300 · 20264.74OTM 452 · 2025–26

Earlier yearly averages come from the supplied summary table. The Madison points are reported course averages, not a combined yearly average. The course mix and reporting basis differ; the graph does not establish a causal effect of teaching changes.

See the semester-by-semester score record
Evaluation scores · semester records and Madison reported course averages · out of 5
CourseSpring 2020Fall 2021Spring 2022Fall 2022Spring 2023Fall 2023Spring 2024Summer 2024Fall 20242025–26 reported course average
COMM 2054.12—————————
ITSCM 280—4.564.704.784.84—————
ITSCM 320———4.404.774.624.88—4.80—
ITSCM 382—————4.734.40—4.83—
CYBER 733——4.75—4.78—4.91———
ITSCM 780—————4.69——4.62—
ITSCM 785———————4.92——
ITSCM 763———————4.79——
OTM 300—————————4.81
OTM 452—————————4.74

The Madison records supplied do not separate the averages by semester. These course averages are not a combined 2026 yearly score.