Skip to main content

Denise S. Holliday

Title: Adjunct Faculty

Department: Biomedical Engineering

College: College of Engineering

Curriculum Vitae

Curriculum Vitae Link

Education

  • BS, University of California, 2003
    Major: Chemical Engineering

Current Scheduled Teaching

BMEN 5150.001Medical Device Marketing and New Product IntegrationSpring 2025
BMEN 4312.001FDA Regulations and Quality Control of Biomedical SystemsFall 2024 Syllabus SPOT
BMEN 5100.001Standards and FDA RegulationsFall 2024 SPOT
Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.

Previous Scheduled Teaching

BMEN 5800.001Topics in Biomedical EngineeringSummer 10W 2024
BMEN 5800.001Topics in Biomedical EngineeringSpring 2024 SPOT
BMEN 4312.001FDA Regulations and Quality Control of Biomedical SystemsFall 2023 Syllabus SPOT
BMEN 5100.001Standards and FDA RegulationsFall 2023 SPOT
BMEN 5800.001Topics in Biomedical EngineeringSpring 2023 SPOT
BMEN 4312.001FDA Regulations and Quality Control of Biomedical SystemsFall 2022 Syllabus SPOT
BMEN 4312.001FDA Regulations and Quality Control of Biomedical SystemsFall 2021 Syllabus SPOT
Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.
,
Overall
Summative Rating		 Challenge and
Engagement Index		 Response Rate

out of 5
out of 7		 %
of
students responded
  • Overall Summative Rating (median):
    This rating represents the combined responses of students to the four global summative items and is presented to provide an overall index of the class’s quality. Overall summative statements include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 5 = Excellent, 3 = Good, and 1= Very poor):
    • The course as a whole was
    • The course content was
    • The instructor’s contribution to the course was
    • The instructor’s effectiveness in teaching the subject matter was
  • Challenge and Engagement Index:
    This rating combines student responses to several SPOT items relating to how academically challenging students found the course to be and how engaged they were. Challenge and Engagement Index items include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 7 = Much higher, 4 = Average, and 1 = Much lower):
    • Do you expect your grade in this course to be
    • The intellectual challenge presented was
    • The amount of effort you put into this course was
    • The amount of effort to succeed in this course was
    • Your involvement in course (doing assignments, attending classes, etc.) was
CLOSE