Head of CSM Museum & Study Collection, Judy Willcocks, delivered an interesting and inspiring lecture that made me reflect on the current ways in which I incorporate object-based learning in my teaching practice as the CSM Museum & Study Collection’s Curriculum Development Curator.

Since I work part-time and teaching takes up the majority of my workload, I try to find a balance between introducing novelty and relying on tried-and-tested teaching methods for my workshop plans. I always try to tailor my sessions to the course and tutor’s request, which influence my object curation and object-based methodology choice. However, upon reflection, I notice that I mostly change my objects, but apply the same popular methodology, which is Jules Prown’s forensic object reading. It’s not that I haven’t wanted to try other methodologies, but I haven’t had the time to explore them properly. Doing my PgCert and it starting with object-based learning has given me an opportunity to pause, think about my teaching approach, and set myself new challenges that take me outside of my comfort zone.

Willcocks’ lecture made me feel inspired to use Gillian Rose’s visual analysis, the emotional or extra-rational reading, and Sarah Campbell’s opposites game, more often. Duh (2015) explains that emotional responses are an “important component of appreciation” and “needs to be encouraged” when perceiving artworks. Moreover, it helped me to understand and appreciate the distinct and unique contribution art and design brings to the field of object-based learning. I would also like to think about this more consciously when preparing my sessions and analysing the way students react and engage with the objects. Last of all, her lecture made me think more profoundly about the frameworks which form my teaching practice, particularly why it is important to share or not share information about objects depending on the methodology used. According to an article my tutor, Kwame Baah, recommended I read, sharing knowledge before students have had the opportunity to critically analyse objects limits the effectiveness of such workshops. “We believe that premature explanation of an artwork wastes the research capacity provided by the work of art. Research is reduced to the activity of receiving the knowledge provided about the work of art and is limited, at most, to seeking conformity between the heard and the seen,” Duh (2015).

References

Duh, M. (2015) ‘The Function of Museum Pedagogy in the Development of Artistic Appreciation’, Revija za elementarno izobraževanje, 1-17. Available at: (PDF) The Function of Museum Pedagogy in the Development of Artistic Appreciation (researchgate.net) (Accessed: 16 February 2024).

I really enjoyed the first morning of the PgCert because it enabled me to view teaching in Higher Education from a much broader, profound, and inclusive perspective. It was fascinating to learn about some of the key reports that have shaped and influenced the higher education landscape, such as the Robbins and Platt reports. Moreover, it was so refreshing to speak with my peers about their teaching backgrounds and personal motivations for doing the PgCert.

I enjoyed the task where we had to summarise our articles for one another because it helped to break down intimidating academic texts and introduce the key themes and concepts of each paper. I chose Archiving Critically: exploring the communication of cultural biases by Grout (2019) because it was the most relevant article to my teaching practice. Before reading it, I had gained a basic understanding of how cultural biases were historically formed in archives through a UAL Short Course I did in Exhibition Design. Grout (2019) explains it well in her article: “The patriarchal structures that exist in society have resulted in the absence of women from archives…Even today, the archives sector recruits low numbers of professionals who identify as coming from marginalised groups.” When I started my job at the CSM Museum, my senior colleague, Judy Willcocks, also informed me of the prevalence of cultural biases in our collection and the actions we are taking to diversify it, such as acquiring objects through the annual Graduate Award and working with a Japanese student to decolonise the Japanese print collection catalogue.

However, this article consolidated the information I already knew and developed my understanding of cultural biases within archives. Prior to reading it, I didn’t realise that archives are often perceived as “neutral spaces which hold the ‘truth’ about a society or happening” Grout (2019). I also learned the meaning of cultural bias, which is “the way in which phenomena are interpreted and judged according to standards inherent to an individual’s own culture” Grout (2019). When I plan a workshop, I made a conscious effort to ensure the object selection I curate represents artists or makers from different genders, cultural backgrounds, and speaks to underrepresented sociocultural issues. This article made me reflect on my approach and understand the wider problem of under documentation in archival holdings that relate to gender identity, minority ethnic backgrounds, disabilities, and religion. It helped to assert the importance of the work we do with the Graduate Award to ensure the new objects we acquire better represent the diverse and evolving CSM student community.

The article highlights solutions to overcome cultural biases within archives that I will begin to actively implement in my workshops. For example, I will treat them as tools to “confront issues surrounding social inclusion” and “facilitate critical discussion” Grout (2019). This guidance is especially pertinent to workshops that include objects by controversial artists or makers, such as John Galliano, Eadweard Muybridge, and Eric Gill. I feel fortunate to have a manager who encourages me to confront and discuss uncomfortable truths about our collection with students.

References

Grout, H. (2019) ‘Archiving Critically: exploring the communication of cultural biases’, Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, Issue 1, pp.71-75.

Although I was initially assigned a different article to read for this workshop, I struggled to grasp it in the time given and chose one that resonated with my teaching practice more since it was co-written by my senior colleague, Judy Willcocks. The article is titled The potential of online object-based-learning activities to support the teaching of intersectional environmentalism in art and design higher education and is co-written by Willcocks and Kieran Mahon.

I found this article really interesting because it made me reflect on my personal experiences of in-person vs online object-based learning, formerly as a student and now as a museum educator. Before reading this article, I disliked online learning due to the various challenges it presents for everybody involved. Willcocks and Mahon (2023) outline some of these problems in their article, including “perceived difficulties in building relationships, the risks of students getting lost, and the need for content to be parcelled up in manageable chunks.” However, with the overall student response to the Colonialism to Climate Crisis event being positive, it made me consider the ways in which online object-based learning makes museum collections and experiential pedagogy more accessible and innovative than in-person workshops.

As the Curriculum Development Curator, it is my job to organise, develop, and deliver all of the object-based-learning workshops we can offer. While I prefer in-person teaching when compared with my online micro-teaching session experience, I have also encountered the limitations of in-person object-based learning that were outlined in this case study. For example, the tedious nature of having to repeat up to four workshops in one day to get through an entire cohort, due to the space restrictions in our 15-person capacity study room. Moreover, there is a lot more responsibility and pressure on the tutor during an in-person workshop because you have to ensure all the students are handling objects appropriately as advised. This can be difficult to do with large groups and young students.

Overall, this was a fantastic article to read for my first workshop of the PgCert because it introduced me to new terms and ideas, but was accessible enough for me to feel like I could digest the material and take valuable points away from it.

References

Willcocks, J and Mahon, K. (2023) ‘The potential of online object-based learning activities to support the teaching of intersectional environmentalism in art and design higher education’, Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, Volume 22 Number 2, pp. 187–207. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1386/adch_00074_1