<p>The first applicant was very intelligent, though it seemed like he spent more time being nice than on teaching. I’m sure that, given time, he would loosen up some in order to provide more constructive feedback and knowledge not couched in compliments. That said, of the three theory IV lectures, his was the most interesting and informative; I just didn’t take a whole lot away from the lesson. As a side note, one thing I did like in particular was his comment on the goal of composition teachers shouldn’t be to evangelize their music or style through their students.</p>
<p>The second applicant was probably the most brilliant of the three, in my opinion, and this more than made up for his clear nervousness in class. In my lesson, he picked up my sheet of music and had clear and constructive advice within the second, which was one of the most impressive things I’ve seen in a while, and I someday hope to be able to take in music as completely after one glance in the future.</p>
<p>I feel a little bad writing this, because this applicant was clearly very smart, but I had a problem in that he seemed to know just how smart he was. This came off in his teaching style particularly in lessons (I did my level best not to take the ‘Well, tough!’ joke personally, but it was difficult to ignore), but also in class, when he would disagree with an answer in a manner too ‘chummy’ to be associated with a professor. However, his comments and suggestions were well thought out and helpful.</p>
<p>I preferred James David, the second applicant, above the other two. Although all three were very intelligent people, I think that I would learn the most from him due to his teaching style and my learning style meshing particularly well</p>
