I’m halfway through my BKO (Basic Teaching Qualification) at UHasselt, and honestly? It’s one of the best decisions I’ve made as a postdoc.

Here’s why that might seem strange: I’m already teaching four courses. I’ve supervised 17+ master’s and doctoral students. I’ve been guest lecturing since 2022. So why pursue formal teaching certification now?

Because I was winging it. 🎯

Sure, I was getting decent course evaluations. Students seemed engaged. But I was relying entirely on intuition and mimicking professors I’d liked. I had no framework for why certain approaches worked and others didn’t.

The BKO is changing that. Here’s what I’m learning:

Making the implicit explicit So many teaching failures come from unstated assumptions. When I told students “acceptable AI use” without defining it, we ended up with that painful ChatGPT incident I wrote about earlier. When evaluation criteria stayed vague, students guessed—often incorrectly. Now I’m learning to articulate everything that lives in my head.

From individual to collective I used to think good teaching was about my preparation. The BKO framework emphasizes team coherence. The positive Bioinformatics evaluations came not from my lectures alone but from how our interdisciplinary team created a unified learning experience. That shift in perspective has been huge.

Evidence-based pedagogy There’s actual research on how people learn. Who knew? 😅 I’m discovering why certain approaches work (spaced repetition, retrieval practice, concrete examples before abstractions) and adjusting my teaching accordingly. It’s scientific thinking applied to education—exactly what should appeal to a researcher.

The meta-skill of reflection The BKO forces systematic reflection on teaching practice. Not just when problems arise, but continuously. That habit—examining what worked, what didn’t, why, and how to improve—is transferable to research, mentorship, everything.

But here’s what surprised me most: it’s made me a better researcher.

Teaching federated learning to computer science students forces me to explain it more clearly. Teaching bioinformatics to biomedical students helps me understand what clinical researchers actually need. That clarity feeds back into how I design studies, write papers, and communicate findings.

Is formal certification necessary for good teaching? No. Some of the best teachers I’ve had were never formally trained. But for me, the structure and evidence base have been transformative.

I’m watching my teaching evolve from competent-but-inconsistent to intentional and evidence-based. And that matters—not just for my students, but for my own growth as an academic.

To other postdocs considering teaching certification: yes, it’s time-consuming. Yes, it feels like one more thing on an already overwhelming plate. But if teaching is part of your future (and for most academics, it is), investing in doing it well pays dividends.

Plus, the next generation of AI researchers in healthcare deserves better than us just guessing what good teaching looks like.

I’m currently completing my BKO at UHasselt while coordinating Bioinformatics, teaching Federated Learning and Data Science in Healthcare, and guest lecturing on Brain-Computer Interfaces at KU Leuven. If you’re pursuing teaching certification or thinking about it, I’d love to hear your experience.

#TeachingExcellence #AcademicDevelopment #HigherEducation #PostdocLife #PedagogicalResearch