Teaching · course design · student learning
Teaching
A deliberate, discussion-centered approach to philosophical reading, writing, and argument.
At a glance
Current teaching
The course joins close reading and structured discussion with repeated practice in reconstructing and explaining arguments.
Introduction to Philosophy
A course in arguments, questions, and intellectual practice
The syllabus moves through foundational philosophical questions while the Levels System gives students repeated, structured practice in reconstructing and explaining arguments.
Course materials
Materials built for practice
Syllabus and assignment materials for PHI 2010.
Introduction to Philosophy
Course purpose, learning outcomes, assignments, policies, and schedule for PHI 2010.
The Levels System
Repeated attempts, feedback, and revision in philosophical writing.
Assignment design
Four levels of philosophical writing
Seven attempts let students move from argument reconstruction to a concise explanatory paper through drafts, peer feedback, and revision.
Argument form
Reconstruct an argument in standard form.
Mechanics
Write a 100–150-word paragraph demonstrating formatting, mechanics, and citation.
Focused analysis
Write a clear, concise, focused paper of 250–300 words.
Explanation
Explain an argument in a paper of no more than 400 words.
This course’s Levels System is adapted from Dustin Locke’s work. Read Locke’s overview of the Levels System ↗ and see the publication record on PhilPapers ↗.
Pedagogical preparation
Graduate Instruction Methods
PHI 6945 · University of South Florida · Fall 2024
The seminar focused on practical course and lesson planning and on improving questioning, writing, discussion, and lecturing through research on learning and memory.
Selected student feedback
Listening as evidence
Comments are reproduced as submitted, with identifying information removed.
“Super good TA, loved how he was so responsive and open-minded. He was super helpful and really passionate, he stimulated conversation well and made sure we were prepared for our tests. He also didn’t shut down any new ideas or opinions and made sure everyones voice was heard.”
“Great TA and mentor”
“Great TA, very friendly. He is very good at explaining philosophy in simple terms, and helped me pass an exam.”
“Hyder is a respectful and welcoming TA, I appreciated him a lot this semester as he was reliable and understanding of the setbacks such as the hurricanes faced this semester.”
“Quite good at simplifying down concepts, which is a big thing for understanding in a subject such as philosophy.”
Evaluation data
Ratings at a glance
Ratings use a five-point scale. The available data combine more than one course or section and are presented without claims of statistical generality. Department and college comparisons come from USF Student Evaluations.
View the complete data table
| Statement | Excellent | Very good | Good | Fair | Poor | Mean | Dept. | College |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Course objectives & assignments | 64.7% | 29.4% | 0% | 5.9% | 0% | 4.53 | 4.2 | 4.3 |
| Communication of ideas | 52.9% | 29.4% | 11.8% | 0% | 5.9% | 4.24 | 4.2 | 4.2 |
| Expectations for performance | 70.6% | 17.6% | 5.9% | 0% | 5.9% | 4.47 | 4.2 | 4.2 |
| Availability to assist | 76.5% | 17.6% | 5.9% | 0% | 0% | 4.71 | 4.2 | 4.2 |
| Respect & concern | 70.6% | 23.5% | 0% | 5.9% | 0% | 4.59 | 4.3 | 4.3 |
| Stimulation of interest | 70.6% | 23.5% | 0% | 0% | 5.9% | 4.53 | 4.3 | 4.2 |
| Facilitation of learning | 68.8% | 12.5% | 6.3% | 6.3% | 6.3% | 4.31 | 4.2 | 4.2 |
| Overall instructor rating | 64.7% | 23.5% | 5.9% | 0% | 5.9% | 4.41 | 4.3 | 4.2 |