A ‘Great Teacher’ Who Makes Engineering Come Alive

Dave Vallancourt could be considered a “lifer” at Columbia Engineering -- he received his BS in 1981, his MS in 1983, and his PhD in 1987, all in electrical engineering (EE) at Columbia. He then became an assistant professor at the Engineering School from 1987 until he joined Bell Labs in 1992. While at Bell Labs and subsequent positions at Texas Instruments, Vitesse Semiconductor, and PMC-Sierra, he focused on analog and mixed-signal integrated circuit design for communications applications, for which he was awarded a dozen patents. During this time he maintained his ties to Columbia as an adjunct professor in EE. But he couldn’t resist the lure of full-time teaching at Columbia and returned to EE in 2005 as a senior lecturer in the discipline of circuits and systems, where he’s been ever since.

For the past two decades, Vallancourt has been teaching introductory courses in electrical engineering for engineers, including the senior “capstone” project lab, and electronics and laboratory courses for non-engineers. He created and teaches the Art of Engineering course, a one-semester Columbia Engineering-wide full-on introduction to engineering for all first-year students. He’s beloved by his students and has won several teaching awards, including the Columbia Engineering School Alumni Association’s 2007 Distinguished Faculty Teaching Award and the University’s 2013 Presidential Teaching Award, the top teaching honor given by the University to just five recipients annually at Commencement. This year he was honored with the Society of Columbia Graduates’ Great Teacher Award. Elected by the Society’s board of directors, the recipient is determined based on their abilities to stimulate, challenge, and inspire undergraduate students; their ability to relate positively to students outside the classroom; and for their recognized standing in their respective academic disciplines. 

We wondered how he does all this with an electrifying smile on his face, full of positive energy, and a “dad” joke for everything. Here’s what he told us.

When and how did you come to teach the ART of Engineering? Was it a new concept for the first-year students?

The course that would become the Art of Engineering (AoE) grew out of the “Gateway” course. I became involved with the summer high school version of Gateway in the mid-2000s. Seeing Gateway from the inside, I was concerned it wasn’t living up to its potential. I ended up on a faculty committee organized by the dean to review Gateway and consider replacing it. Since I fomented the process, I was then given the task of teaching the new course. It was a huge undertaking, but I had the freedom to create a course I could believe in. 

I called it the Art of Engineering because I wanted to tie the engineering school in with the liberal arts of the college and with the university as a whole, placing engineering in context. I took extra non-techs when I was an undergrad, mostly art history and literature, and wanted to model my experience. It’s also, of course, a play on words, the “art” of something being the skilled practice of it. There is beauty and elegance in great engineering design - it IS art. 

AOE has evolved continuously since I introduced it in 2011. There are many stories to tell about it but suffice it to say that it has been one of the most rewarding things I’ve done. My favorite part is the Game Expo, the first-year equivalent of the Senior Design Expo. I came up with that in the mid-2010s, and I think it’s one of the top contributions I’ve made to this School.

How have your teaching methods changed?

The technology has changed quite a bit. For example, I switched from using the blackboard to using an iPad, stylus, and projector as a virtual blackboard. This provides a better in-class and post-class experience for the students. I still deliver lectures in the classroom physically and “write on the board” live (no PowerPoint slides unless they are of schematics or other things I can’t draw quickly and well), but by switching to the projector I make it much easier for the students to see what I am writing, and I distribute the cleaned-up and annotated PDFs of the drawings within a day of the lecture. These take the place of textbooks (which I no longer require).

I also make much more use of computer simulation of circuits. These I show in class, as “virtual lab” experiments. I post the simulation files so students can run them on their own computers after class. I still use some physical experiments in class, when simulation won’t do the job. (And of course, we still have the regular physical lab courses ELENE3081, ELENE3083, and others, and the weekly labs of ELENE1201.)

What do you enjoy most about teaching– and teaching engineering?

I’ve always enjoyed creating the lectures, writing tutorials and other reference materials, and of course presenting lectures. It’s fun to introduce new topics but it’s equally exciting to present a new explanation of an old concept; it keeps me interested and I hope that means it’s more engaging for the students. My lectures are my “show,” and I approach them as a performer. 

Maybe it’s a cliche, but I view the lecture as a jazz performance in the sense that playing jazz requires tremendous musical sophistication and preparation, but then each performance is improvised. I have lecture notes, which I study and often modify for at least an hour and sometimes much longer before every class (even E1201, which I have taught more than 40 times). But then I set the notes aside for the most part and just “go” in the lecture. The result is most of my classes are “nominal” - I’m more or less satisfied with the delivery. Some are terrible - the improv didn’t work, or I forgot something (which, of course, I correct later in the published notes). But sometimes something new and interesting will pop up, like a new connection between topics, or new insight, or even just a new way of saying something, and that’s when I’m happy with the lecture.

I enjoy teaching engineering in particular because I can see the beauty of the concepts and I value knowing the material. I believe in what I’m teaching -- I can’t teach without believing in the message. Part of this is that engineering principles are based on physical laws, and are verifiable and testable, so I never feel like I’m telling the students how to build an arbitrary house of cards. This would not be the case if I was teaching something like business.

A key takeaway from your years of teaching?

I’m an introvert, so I’ve had to learn to interact with students. It’s a rather complex relationship if one is doing one’s job correctly. Emotional maturity, patience, and a certain amount of selflessness are the most important elements. Is that the definition of wisdom? I’m still working on all of these things!