The activity
See session slides attached below:
And the activity outcome: conceptual map of a candle.
Context & reflection
When designing this Object Based Learning activity, I tried to think of how I could apply OBL in my own academic -but also research- practice, hoping that giving my micro-teaching session a purpose would help me envision how the OBL technique could be useful in the context of my practice, and when approaching this exercise in particular.
I decided to design this activity in the context of my teaching and practice which is in the field of trend research. The session aimed to trial this activity in a very condensed format, as it would only run for 20 minutes. Normally an exercise of this nature would take around a couple of hours, but I thought this as an opportunity to test the approach and application of object-based learning techniques with peers who, being in the task of exploring the same from their own practices, would be able to give me valuable, constructive feedback.
A few take-aways are:
- Too much context over not enough context? Not always.
When building the skeleton of the session, it seemed essential to start by providing the group with some context – this would be this was object-based learning brought in to trend analysis, in particular from a consumer culture perspective. So, I structured the 20 minutes starting with a 5 minute introduction to explain the approach for the session and the purpose of the activity – we will be looking at discussing and rethinking this object, and we’ll collaboratively create a conceptual map for it, that will hopefully help:
- Contextualise the item, and
- Decode main characteristics, which lead us to
- The implications of it in terms of value – that’d include, its use, meanings, etc..
After the session and aligned with some of the feedback from the group, I felt that maybe providing so much context wasn’t that necessary. Perhaps, presenting the object and driving the group through the different stages of the activity would have been enough to meet collaboratively the intended outcomes.
- Keeping it flexible and open: same object, different items.
As a workaround to the remote and online setting on the session, I asked the group to find their own item. We would all look at a candle as the object to explore, but working with different units of it, allowing for a variety of types, contexts, and personal insight.
This seemed to work well for the entire group: in record time, everybody managed to upload an image of their own candle –in most cases by taking a photo of the physical item in the moment- and was able to interact with the object as we worked together on building the conceptual board.
- Risk assessment: time constraints, technical issues.
Another aspect that was picked up on by my peers and tutor’s feedback was the time limitations and the risk of relying on digital tools such as Padlet. Only one person in the group faced some kind of technical issues at some point, but given the already tight time constraints, this could have been a challenge if technology had been more problematic. The format I chose to run the activity – on a collaborative Padlet board, accessible through a link and a QR code – was well received and reported positively; however, it is definitely something to bear in mind when running this type of exercise online, potentially with a bigger group, and against time constraints.
It was a very constructive session for me as a tutor. As it resulted in something in between a micro-teaching session with students and a briefing session with peers, I took a lot of points to reflect on and tips to apply when running an activity of this kind in real life.
It was also very interesting to see how everybody else planned and delivered their sessions. We had a very diverse group, which allowed us to experience completely different approaches and applications of OBL. The group was great to work with – everyone was so engaged, supportive and positive, and willing to help one another with thoughtful, honest feedback.
References
Chatterjee, H. J. (2009). ‘Staying Essential: Articulating the Value of Object Based Learning.’ University Museums and Collections Journal. Published online: 15/01/2009 edoc.hu-berlin.de/umacj/1/chatterjee-helen-1/PDF/chatterjee.pdf
Chatterjee, H. J. & Duhs, R, (2010). ‘Object Based Learning in Higher Education: Pedagogical perspectives on enhancing student learning through collections’ Centre for excellence in Teaching and Learning Through Design, University of Brighton, 3-6. Published online: 1/7/2010 arts.brighton.ac.uk/__data/…/pdf…/01-Object-based-learning-in-higher-education.pdf
Hannan, L., Duhs, R. and Chatterjee, H.J. (2013). ‘Object Based Learning: a powerful pedagogy for higher education.’ In Museums and Higher Education Working Together: Challenges and Opportunities. Eds. A Boddington, J Boys & C. Speight, Farnham and Burlington: Ashgate, pp. 159-168
Hardie, K. (n.d.). Innovative pedagogies series: Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching. [online] Available at: https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/hea/private/kirsten_hardie_final_1568037367.pdf