Teaching Portfolio

Introduction

I’m a full-time, permanent faculty member in the Digital Design + Development (DGL) program area at North Island College (NIC) on Vancouver Island. I teach a wide range of graphic design and web development courses, with a strong focus on design thinking and digital pedagogy.

I am the department coordinator for our DGL program area and hold the position of Social, Organizing, & Job Action Chair on the North Island College Faculty Union. I am also scheduled to study a Master of Arts in Learning and Technology at Royal Roads University starting in March 2026.

I acknowledge that this work takes place on the unceded traditional territory of the K’ómoks First Nation, the traditional keepers of this land. NIC is situated on the traditional and unceded territories of the combined 35 First Nations of the Nuu-chah-nulth, Kwakwaka’wakw and Coast Salish traditions.

---

---

Teaching Activities

Our DGL program area offers one-, two-, and three-year credentials that prepare students for professional practice in design and development, with an emphasis on creative thinking, full-stack coding, and multidisciplinary collaboration. I teach across the design–development spectrum:

• DGL102 Graphic Design Foundations
• DGL112 Typography
• DGL103 HTML/CSS
• DGL111 UI/UX Design
• DGL233 Advanced WordPress Development
• DGL209 Capstone Project

Courses are 13 weeks long and delivered either face-to-face (one 4-hour class per week) or asynchronously online. I typically teach 60–80 students per term, in classes of about 20. Students vary widely in age, experience, and cultural background, and I design my instruction to support this diversity.

Learn more about the DGL program area: learndigital.dev

Back to top

---

Teaching Philosophy

Set the Stage for Learning

I approach teaching as a human-centered design challenge—one that blends the principles of UX, educational technology, and adult learning theory to create rich, responsive learning experiences. My classes are learner-centered, socially grounded, and deeply participatory. Whether online or in person, I aim to build a sense of belonging and purpose through respectful relationships and meaningful engagement.

I believe education should be flexible, personalized, and empowering. In a world saturated with content, teaching becomes about filtering information and facilitating connection, curiosity, and critical reflection. Guided by cognitivist and constructivist theories (Piaget, 1952; Bruner, 1960), I use real-world projects, reflective practice, and technology to support agency, relevance, and skill transfer. Learning, for me, is always a process of dialogue—between learners and ideas, between each other, and between individual purpose and collective insight (Freire, 1970).

My work is informed by the idea that learning is no longer confined to classrooms or traditional structures. Networks are the new classrooms (Siemens, 2005); learning is social, distributed, and lifelong. As such, I strive to create learning environments that are both rigorous and inviting—spaces where students can explore, collaborate, and grow. Much like my work in community theatre set design, I see my role as “setting the stage” for transformation. With empathy, intention, and curiosity, I design the conditions where real learning—and real magic—can happen.

Back to top

---

Evidence-Based Strategies

Aligning Course Design with How People Learn

Building Resources, From the Ground Up

I began teaching in 2018 and became full-time faculty in 2019. Over the next five years, I completed the Provincial Instructor Diploma Program (PIDP), intentionally pacing the coursework to apply each concept thoughtfully in the classroom.

The PIDP profoundly shaped my teaching. Starting with no inherited materials and no textbook gave me the opportunity to design every course from the ground up—integrating best practices from the start. I incorporated tools like DACUM analysis, BOPPPS lesson planning, learning outcomes, rubrics, and feedback strategies directly into my curriculum.


To keep pace with rapidly evolving tools, I create most of the student-facing content myself—custom lesson videos, demo videos, curated readings, exercise and assignment instructions—rather than relying on textbooks.

Rhythm and Accountability with TBL

I incorporate Team-Based Learning (TBL) strategies into flipped classroom planning to create a structured yet dynamic learning environment. Before class, students engage with core content through tailor-made lesson videos and readings, allowing in-class time to focus on application and collaboration. The course is divided into units, each unit follows a predictable cadence—individual prep, readiness assurance, team-based activities, feedback and then assignment work—helping students manage their time and expectations. This rhythm not only reinforces accountability and deeper understanding through scaffolded practice, but also builds social cohesion and trust among peers. The consistent team structure supports communication, shared problem-solving, and a sense of belonging. 

While I’ve successfully implemented TBL in face-to-face courses, asynchronous formats tend to be more self-paced and independent. I’m interested in how we might break down the distinction between in-person and online modes to design flexible, inclusive active-learning activities that can adapt to any learning environment.

Real-world Learning

Each course I design is clear, purposeful, and rooted in real-world relevance and evidence-based learning theory. Students develop meaningful projects that reflect industry workflows and standards—projects they can carry into portfolios and professional contexts. 

As our programs are geared toward employment, I design curriculum based on industry input from our Advisory Committee, labour data, and my ongoing work as a contractor. Projects are authentic, and guest speakers offer real-world insight, aligning with research that shows professionally grounded, context-rich tasks enhance engagement and promote the transfer of learning to practical settings (Herrington & Oliver, 2000).


Scaffolded for Skill-building

My courses prioritize practice over high-stakes assessments. Courses build progressively, with each week deepening prior learning. This scaffolding supports skill development within Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (1978), helping students gradually gain confidence and independence. Projects are cumulative to support deeper learning and aligns with research showing that authentic, progressively structured tasks with instructor coaching at critical times, enhances real-world transfer (Herrington & Oliver, 2000).

Varied Assessment & Evaluation Strategies

Assessment in my courses is designed to promote continuous learning, not just measure it, and combines a mix of:

• Low-stakes formative assessments: weekly quizzes and in-class exercises
• Medium-stakes summative evaluations: authentic projects (and sometimes exams)
• Frequent specific feedback from peers and from myself

This approach aligns with Black and Wiliam’s (1998) findings that regular, varied assessment with feedback improves learning outcomes. By diversifying formats and pacing evaluation over time, I support accessibility, offering multiple ways for students to demonstrate understanding and build confidence.

Grades are required, but they’re not the driver. Inspired by ungrading models, I strive to make evaluation transparent, flexible, and rooted in growth and self-reflection. Students engage in peer critique, use rubrics for self-assessment, and reflect on their learning journey throughout the term.

Iterative and Feedback-informed Improvements

I approach teaching as a design process: research, prototype, test, and iterate. Student feedback is built into my practice at multiple levels:

• Weekly “Muddiest point” reflections to surface confusion early.
• End of unit self-reflections and anonymous surveys to identify pain points and opportunities.
• LMS data analysis to spot engagement patterns.
• Industry consultation to update course content, tools and learning outcomes.
• The QAPA Program Review process to evolve program delivery and outcomes.

This iterative approach ensures that my teaching remains responsive, inclusive, and aligned with evolving industry practice.

Back to top

---

Technology-Enabled Communities

Pedagogy-first, not Tool-first

Whether delivered in person or asynchronously online, my courses are grounded in consistent learning outcomes and clear expectations. I use educational technology not as a layer of convenience but as an agent that enhances how students engage, connect, and grow. 

Building Equitable and Connected Learning Communities

My digital learning environments are informed by the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000), which emphasizes the interplay of cognitive, teaching, and social presence. Across all modes of delivery, I design experiences that foster authentic student connection:

• Course live chat channels simulate informal, hallway-like interactions to encourage peer support and real-time questions.
  
• Persistent live chat channels connect alumni and current students, creating mentorship loops and reinforcing continuity across cohorts.
  
• Optional online drop-ins meetings offer inclusive and equitable access to coaching and feedback, especially for remote and working students.
  
• Social media extends classroom conversations and celebrates student work in public-facing, professional contexts.
  

This networked approach aligns with connectivist and distributed learning theories (Siemens, 2005), allowing students to learn from and with one another regardless of geography. As faculty at North Island College, where learners are diverse and geographically dispersed, I am particularly interested in how we can blur the boundaries between individual, collaborative, and hierarchical learning to create dynamic, distributed educational ecosystems.

Designing with a UX Mindset

Drawing on my professional background in UX design, I apply human-centered design principles (Norman, 2013) and usability heuristics (Nielsen, 1994) to structure every digital interaction:

• Interfaces are decluttered and organized, respecting how learners navigate online content.
  
• Course logistics are clearly documented to reduce cognitive load.
  
• Autonomy is scaffolded through rubrics, pacing guides, and checklists.
  
• Feedback is timely and actionable, using quizzes, discussion forums, intelligent agents, and GitHub and Figma comments.
  
• LMS analytics surface engagement trends and allow for targeted intervention.
  

While I experiment with interactive content (e.g., H5P), I favour update-friendly and agile formats that can evolve with the fast-moving digital landscape.

Balancing Real-World Tools and Cognitive Load

I integrate industry-standard platforms to expose students to authentic workflows:

• Slack or Mattermost – for live chats
• VS Code, GitHub Classroom, Codepen – for collaborative development, version control, and code critique.
  
• Adobe Creative Suite and Figma – for visual design, team-based iteration, and creative critiques.
  
• Google Workspace – for collaborative writing and file management.
  

That said, I’m mindful of interface overload. Thoughtful tool integration ensures that students build digital literacy without being overwhelmed by fragmented platforms and too many logins. I also prioritize privacy and data sovereignty, favouring Canadian-hosted tools when pedagogically appropriate.

Back to top

---

Inclusive Learning Environments

Designing for Diversity, Agency, and Belonging

Designing for all students

My courses are built around the learner experience. North Island College attracts a diverse student population, including many international students and learners with varied digital fluency, goals, and life responsibilities. In response, I use strategies inspired by Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (CAST, 2018):

• Multiple means of representation: slide decks, captioned lesson videos, written and demo video tutorials, and readings.
• Multiple means of engagement: choice in project topics, formats, and tools.
• Checkpoints for understanding: low-stakes quizzes, self-reflections, discussion forums, and peer reviews.
• Pacing flexibility: clear timelines combined with white space for catch-up and self-regulation.

Students are encouraged to shape their learning journeys. I create room for autonomy while providing structure and ongoing support.


Value-Based Education

Many of my assignments connect directly to real-world issues. I invite students to align their work with the UN Sustainable Development Goals, supporting civic engagement and personal meaning-making in their projects (United Nations, n.d.).

I actively work to create inclusive and safe learning environments, both in-person and online. My teaching materials include diverse perspectives, and students are given voice and choice wherever possible.


Indigenization

Indigenization is an ongoing responsibility in Canadian post-secondary education and I recognize that I have a lot of progress to make in this area. I feel that by prioritizing respect, self-expression and agency in my classes, I have implemented pedagogical approaches that foster a deeper understanding and appreciation of different cultures and ways of knowing.

In courses like Graphic Design Foundations, I embed discussions of visual culture, representation, and decolonizing the design process. In more technical courses like web development or programming, I find it a lot harder. I’m exploring how to critically examine the colonial roots of computing and imagine what Indigenized or decolonized tech education might look like. For example, programming languages such as HTML, CSS and PHP reflect Western systems of logic and classification. Indigenization invites us to question these systems, consider what’s been excluded, and explore new ways of thinking about knowledge and systems design – this extends to UI design and Ed Tech solutions generally, not just the content and tools of my specific coding courses. 

Back to top

---

Educational Leadership

Designing for Trust, Adaptability, and Purpose.

My educational leadership approach blends user-centered design with relational trust and distributed collaboration. I see leadership not as control, but as creating structures and cultures that support autonomy, experimentation, and shared vision. Like teaching itself, leadership must be adaptive—responsive to people, context, and change.

At North Island College, I work within a hierarchical collective structure but subscribe in equal proportions to the hierarchical collective, distributed individual and distributed collective modes of leadership depending on the context of the work to be done (Elmore, n.d.). Through my work as Social, Organizing, and Job Action Chair for the North Island College Faculty Union, I bring a growing understanding of how to bring people together to collectively create change into my leadership practice. As department coordinator, I value cross-functional collaboration among faculty members, support staff and administrators.

Most public post-secondary institutions are large organizations and, due to their scale regardless of their leadership model, they are not able to adapt quickly to the future of education and the needs of students. However, large institutions are also usually organizations of organizations. Creating small, nimble learning communities within these large organizations allows us to build learning spaces that are both learner-focused and adaptable.

Post-secondary institutions in Canada invest heavily in physical infrastructure, yet learning increasingly happens beyond traditional facilities. As digital access expands, institutions must rethink their role—not as buildings, but as networks of relationships and learning. This shift calls for investment in multimodal delivery and distributed access. We are at a pivotal moment to reimagine the college model, guided by learning science, focusing less on traditional spaces and more on access, engagement, and how people truly learn.

I am also interested in creating international communities of learning and have been working on developing partnership agreements with French post-secondary institutions. I’m learning from the structure of the French Metiers du Multimedia et de l’Internet curriculum, which prioritizes multidisciplinary group work and project sprints far more than most North American program stuctures. Courses are short—often just three weeks—allowing for deep focus and quick iteration. I’m especially drawn to the value placed on studio thinking, where process, critique, and cross-disciplinary collaboration are central to learning. This approach aligns closely with my belief in experiential and social education and offers exciting possibilities for reimagining course design across borders.

Back to top

---

Next Steps

Growth in Teaching & Learning

Teaching is an iterative, user-centered and design-driven process. Recent roles as Department Coordinator and Social, Organizing & Job Action Chair on the faculty union are expanding my understanding of academic structures and policy, giving me valuable insight into how institutional decisions shape teaching and learning.

In spring 2026, I begin a Master of Arts in Learning and Technology, a next step in my commitment to advancing inclusive, innovative, and tech-enabled education. My goal is to eventually bridge UX and education more intentionally—applying human-centered design to reimagine learning systems. I hope to contribute to an organization nimble enough to experiment with new structures, responsive enough to evolve with learners’ needs, and bold enough to challenge the status quo.

Back to top

---

References

• Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.
• Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children (M. Cook, Trans.). International Universities Press. (Original work published 1936)
• Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10. http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm
• Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). Continuum.
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
• Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
• Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02319856
• Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability engineering. Academic Press.
• Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things (Revised and expanded ed.). Basic Books.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press.
• CAST (Center for Applied Special Technology). (2018). Universal Design for Learning guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org
• United Nations. (n.d.). The 17 goals. United Nations Sustainable Development. https://sdgs.un.org/goals
• Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation.
• Elmore, R. (n.d.). GSE2x: Leaders of learning [HarvardX course]. edX. https://www.edx.org/course/leaders-of-learning