In the library, with an Object….
For my microteach session I planned a research-skills based activity starting with a chosen object as a jumping off point. Students often start their research projects with a very narrow singular research interest such as ‘happiness’ or ‘science fiction’ and need help expanding to a researchable topic, for example by incorporating theory, social and cultural perspectives, and wider art and aesthetic lenses.
The UAL library catalogue is not intuitive to use – getting the most out of it requires some tips and tricks – lots of amazing resources are somewhat buried. Feedback we get from students, and staff indicates that the catalogue is underused partly because if it’s limitations, and so I focus on ways it can help users avoid frustration and save time in my sessions, also highlighting that it delivers resources to a much higher standard Google for example.
Having posted quite long detailed tutorials to Moodle pages, crammed with different search techniques in the past, I am shifting to shorter more focused bite-sized content just showing a few selected tips. This is to improve engagement and accessibility – building students skills up slowly over several short sessions rather than in an overwhelming deluge. This experience was a great test for this bite-sized approach.
The objective of the session stated at the outset was to build skills and confidence in expanding research themes and in navigating the UAL catalogue.
The timings of my session were planned as follows
- Introduction and learning objective : 5 minutes
- Choose a meaningful object : 1 minute
- Demonstration of library searches and ‘expert tips’ : 5 minutes
- Participants Research activity and post to padlet : 5 minutes
- Reflect on the research experience : 3-4 minutes
I used my library research skills slide deck as the initial basis for building my session, I find slides helpful for structure and visuals. I decided that using an object as an exemplar of the issue of research topic specificity would work, based on the idea that ‘objects …. can act as powerful metaphors, enabling abstract ideas to be communicated and understood’ (Barton and Wilcocks, 2017). I find research-skills engages students much more when we are using their own themes as examples (the material is very dry, we can’t expect anyone to enjoy library searches as a librarian would) and so I planned to ask the group to choose their own objects that have personal meaning for them as start points.
I tested the tutorial as I was concerned about the 20 minute length, and found that lots of content from the original research-skills pack was confusing the narrative of the session, and causing too much switching between screens. I included a padlet but on reflection I needed to learn more about how to set these up so that all participants can post whether logged in as UAL or not (one of the other micro-teachers did this successfully so it can be done!). It was not really necessary in the end as posting in the chat sufficed.
I decided, based on the object start point, to start the catalogue search demonstration with an image search and follow with a book search, which would be livened up with some really nifty tips that usually are not known about by many UAL library users: subject-tag reading lists, and the online shelf browse facility. I was surprised how much difference leading with the image search made – and I think I will change to this order for more of my research-skills sessions in future. It makes total sense now on reflection that UAL users as ‘visually orientated and visual thinkers’ (Hardie, 2015) engage with image search more readily than book and article searches.
In the session having covered the introduction and mentioned to participants to start to think about a meaningful object I explained that my glasses would be my research object and why, which was a chance to be a bit more warm and personal. Then I moved on to the library catalogue demonstration showing the need for multiple keywords by demonstrating how ‘glasses’ ‘eyeglasses’ and ‘eyewear’ deliver very different levels of results, on both image databases and book searches. In one of the other microteach sessions the teacher used some very impactful examples. This is something I’d like to give more thought to for future – it made a positive difference.
I then asked participants to do their own searches on their chosen objects, at which time I stayed in the room to re-demonstrate any search technique as needed. One participant asked me to repeat the image search which I did. I think leaving room to recap is useful and I will encourage recaps in online live sessions and face-to face going forward rather than relying on ‘any questions?’ which most often goes unanswered.
Instead of reflection time discussing the objects chosen and search experience as planned I reacted to the more functional research-skills questions the participants had, including showing a journal articles search. For me this was a great result as it showed the learning objective met an immediate need and was genuinely useful, even if it differed from my plan. I was really pleased with the feedback that everyone found the session helpful in a very practical, functional way – that they felt they now know about ways to research though the library catalogue that they were not aware of and are more aware of the wealth of content available which would help with PGCert research. Teaching from a service perspective this is the result I’m most often aiming for.
References
Barton, G, & Wilcocks, J. (2017) Object-based self-enquiry: A multi- and trans- disciplinary pedagogy for transformational learning. Available at : https://sparkjournal.arts.ac.uk/index.php/spark/article/view/75 accessed on 29/01/2025.
Hardie, K. (2015) Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching, Available at : https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/wow-power-objects-object-based-learning-and-teaching, accessed on 29/01/2025.