Microteaching: Object-based Learning

1. Introducing the objects 2 mins
2. Describe what you see … – 3 mins
3. Research (in groups) – 4 mins
4. Memory (do the objects evoke memories) – 4
5. Write captions – 5 mins
6. Discuss – 2 mins

I initially planned to use a tin of Quality Streets to explore bias in data through 3D visualisations using the object. However, I reconsidered this due to potential food allergies and concerns about unfamiliarity of the object, considering how much time I would need to spend explaining the cultural/historical significance of the object.

Inspired by Dr Kirsten Hardie’s paper Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching (2015) I decided to use board games to explore the contextual theory of graphic design that relates to my practice as a Contextual Studies lecturer. Hardie describes the way in which objects that are unfamiliar or have unusual packaging can elicit lively discussions without much intervention from the tutor. (Hardie, 2015). The historically packaged board games ranged from the 1950s – 1970s, that I hoped would intrigue and provoke curiosity.

The session aimed to analyse board games through research and memory, writing reflections on them to create short pieces of texts as alternative museum labels. Contextual Studies involves lengthy essay writing which for some students can seem like a burden, writing short reflective pieces of text offers a method to ease into essay writing through shorter reflective pieces.

While slide presentations are common in my teaching practice, I opted out of using them and instead wanted to encourage students to openly discuss objects, to create lively interactions and spontaneity. This approach would challenge me to think on my feet, which I sometimes find difficult to do and would prevent an overreliance on structured presentations, ensuring focus remains on the objects rather than the slides.

Despite opting out of using slides, I did have a structured plan for my own reference. However, witnessing a micro-session, that was impressively orchestrated and articulated with a sense of drama and presented using slides led to a loss of confidence.

During my session participants observed the objects silently, the opposite of what I had intended. I filled the silence with poorly considered anecdotes. Hardie warns that unstructured discussions, devoid of teacher intervention, can pose risks. (Hardie, 2015). In this case, my own unstructured discussions became a high-risk factor for me. As a result, I lost track of time and where I was in my plan, I decided to continue the session from memory. When a participant asked a question about one of the games, I didn’t have the answer because I lacked detailed knowledge about them.

Feedback was useful; include more questions to help illicit discussions and avoid long periods of silence, knowing more about the objects. Rather than writing with memory, instead write about the packaging which they found intriguing. I considered sessions that used slides in a way that didn’t take the focus away from the objects, those without slides used thoughtful questions to facilitate thinking and discussions, while others used role play. These are all strategies that can be adapted for my teaching practice.

Going forward the experience of planning an OBL session, including the above points will be useful in seminars where the onus is on student discussions with less teacher intervention.

[549 words]

---