We are pleased to announce that Ryan Tennant, a PhD student in Systems Design Engineering, is the recipient of the 2026 Certificate in University Teaching (CUT) Award. We had the opportunity to speak with Ryan about his experience in the Certificate in University Teaching program and his future plans.
What motivated you to join the Certificate in University Teaching (CUT) program during your doctoral studies?
Teaching is a really important part of any academic career, and we don’t really learn how to do that in our PhD unless you seek it out. The CUT program was a great opportunity to learn those skills. Especially in our math department, many of our TAs are purely marking-based, with little to no interaction with students. The CUT program really allowed me to gain that experience and knowledge about how to handle yourself in situations with students that I wouldn’t have had otherwise.
When you began the CUT program, one of your goals was to learn how to apply active-learning methods more skillfully in engineering education. How did your understanding of active learning evolve through the program, and to what extent do you feel you achieved this goal?
Early in the CUT program, one of the most clarifying things I learned was that active learning is strongest when students are doing something meaningful, thinking deeply about what they are doing, as well as clearly connecting the activity to the course learning objectives. A large, term-long design project is one example of a great active-learning method, especially in engineering, but that’s not always feasible; sometimes, small, intentional changes to a relatively short classroom activity can support active learning.
For example, a poll or clicker question can be useful for engagement and align well with a learning outcome. But by itself, it may not always encourage students to explain their reasoning or make sense of their thinking. Adding a one-minute conversation with a neighbour—where students compare ideas and explain their reasoning—can make that same activity much more reflective and give students a chance to learn from one another.
I also learned that active learning becomes especially meaningful when students can see how course concepts apply to real-world problems. During the CUT program, I designed a lesson in which students complete a Link Analysis of workstation design based on my research on mass COVID-19 vaccination clinics. I’ve taught this lesson in a human factors engineering course four times now, and students are always curious to learn what went on behind the scenes and excited to see how human factors methods can be applied to a locally relevant, real-world system. I think it works really well because it gives students a concrete way to connect course concepts to design decisions that could have impacted real people’s experiences.
Based on feedback from students, teaching observation reports, and my own reflections, I do feel that I’ve become more intentional in applying active-learning methods through the CUT program. I’m also looking forward to experimenting with new, evidence-based ways to create meaningful student engagement with course concepts that promote a more mastery-oriented mindset towards learning.
Can you share a story of a time when you applied something that you learned in the CUT program to your teaching?
Last spring, I was selected as one of three doctoral students to co-design and co-teach a new campus-wide, interdisciplinary course on The Wicked Problem of Accessibility. I was especially excited about this opportunity because it was closely connected to my CUT research project on Health-Inclusive Pedagogy (and gave me a chance to apply evidence-based work in practice!).
The CUT module on course design was particularly valuable in preparing me for this experience. At the very early stages, creating a course concept map helped us visualize the course’s structure over a 12-week term. It also helped us identify which foundational topics needed to come early in the course. For example, we recognized the value of introducing various models of disability early, so students could return to and build on those core concepts throughout later discussions and activities.
The other tool I used was the course alignment chart for the lessons I led on accessible environments, tools and technologies, and design and systems thinking. Since this was a flipped-classroom course, the synchronous component was heavily based on active learning, which was equally challenging and fun to design for. This tool helped ensure that those teaching and learning activities, the course learning outcomes, and the various diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments were clearly connected.
I would encourage anyone interested in teaching during their PhD to seek out opportunities to apply what they’re learning in the CUT program to course design and other teaching and learning contexts, regardless of whether that’s at Waterloo, through volunteer work in the community, or elsewhere, because that’s where the program’s value really comes to life.
One of the reasons you were selected for this award is your excellent work on the Health-Inclusive Pedagogy in Higher Education study, including your survey of students’ perspectives on health-inclusive learning environments. What inspired you to choose this topic, and what were the most meaningful insights you gained from conducting this project?
Thank you. It’s incredibly meaningful to have this work recognized as part of my selection for the CUT program award, because I think Health-Inclusive Pedagogy plays an important role in broader conversations about accessibility, well-being, and, importantly, feelings of belonging in higher education.
A major motivation for this project was the recognition that health can shape students’ access to learning environments in ways that are not always visible. I was especially interested in centering the experiences of students whose access, participation, and sense of belonging may be shaped by chronic illness, disability, immunocompromising conditions, caregiving responsibilities, and other health-related circumstances. I wanted to understand what the literature said about supporting inclusion in higher education from a health and disability perspective, particularly in the context of health emergencies and infectious disease safety, as well as what students were experiencing and feeling in 2025.
The literature-informed framework complements universal design for learning and trauma-informed pedagogy. The core idea of health-inclusion is to understand health needs and create flexible, predictable learning environments. In my study, which focused on university students in Canada whose learning experiences may be shaped by health-related circumstances, 34 of 95 respondents (36%) indicated that they do not feel current health and safety measures are effective in mitigating illness transmission in the classroom. Students described a desire for practices such as hybrid-flexible attendance options and supportive policies for students when they are ill, as well as improved ventilation, air purification, and easy access to high-quality respirator masks.
One of the most meaningful insights from this work is that health-inclusive teaching doesn’t need to be complicated. In my research, I identified some practical ways to understand health-inclusion needs, foster awareness around the shared responsibility for health-inclusion, and incorporate flexible practices, policies, and tools to enhance access and belonging. The best part is that health-inclusion can benefit the continuity of every student’s learning experience, not only those facing health-related circumstances.
Since presenting this research at the University of Waterloo Teaching and Learning Conference, I was invited to speak about Health-Inclusive Pedagogy at Waterloo’s Accessible Education Day, Western University’s Fall Perspectives on Teaching Conference, and as a guest lecturer for a disability studies class at the University of Houston. Across these varied audiences, I have been really encouraged by how many instructors and students are interested in the concrete, practical ways to make learning environments more health-inclusive for everyone.
I’m currently preparing this research for publication. In the meantime, anyone interested in learning more can watch my 10-minute presentation from Accessible Education Day, where I explain Health-Inclusive Pedagogy and show how I integrated some of these practices into The Wicked Problem of Accessibility course.
Is there anything you wish more graduate students knew about the CUT program?
If you’re interested in a career in academia, the CUT program is extremely helpful in preparing you to become a better educator and in showcasing your teaching skills.
For example, to me, one of the most valuable aspects of the program is that it provides a structured way to reflect on your teaching. By the time you’re writing a teaching statement for a job application, you’ve already spent a lot of time thinking carefully about how students learn and what you value as an educator. Combining this with your teaching dossier—where you’ll organize content like your teaching experiences and feedback to showcase your growth, as well as how you’ve engaged with pedagogical research to inform your teaching philosophy—gives you a strong foundation to build upon as you gain more experience. Creating and updating this living document not only helps you learn about yourself as an educator but also helps you identify how and where to enhance your teaching skills.
Do you have any future plans that you can tell us about?
I just recently finished my PhD, and although I can’t say too much at this time, I’m very excited about what’s on the horizon! Once my next steps are finalized, I look forward to sharing them with the many people who have supported and encouraged me throughout this journey.
Thank you again to the Centre for Teaching Excellence and the Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs for this recognition!