Click on the image below to open up my presentation slides:

According to McNiff (2002), action research “shows how you have carried out a systematic investigation into your own behaviour, and the reasons for that behaviour.” In order to complete the action research cycle, I will consider what I would do differently next time to improve the research.

Based on student feedback, I feel that the task was a success overall and despite not being perfect, it did largely achieve my two goals which were to create community in the online classroom and to aid understanding of the concept of sensitivity analysis. 

The main learnings going forward are:

• Take time to seek input from colleagues in advance of trialling a new teaching methdology. This not only gave me confidence in my idea but also helped to iron out some of the logistical questions.
• Give more time to the task overall. In total, I allowed 25 minutes for the task which included 15 minutes in the breakout rooms and 10 minutes for feedback. However, I hadn’t taken into account the extra time it took to explain the task at the start which led to the discussion element being rushed. When I repeat this task I will allow 35-40 minutes. As the total class time is 90 minutes with a number of other concepts to cover, I feel this is the maximum I could allocate while still getting through the content.
• I will simplify the task so that students can get to the key elements of discussing sensitivity analysis more quickly.
• To streamline the task, instead of asking the students to change each of the variables within their groups, instead I could allocate one variable (cost of production, price or demand) to each of the groups. This would also provide them with a very specific variable to feedback to the group in the discussion element. 
• The extra discussion points which I provided for the discussion were not needed and simply added a layer of complexity which wasn’t required. 
• The written instruction provided in advance could be expanded to include further information on sensitivty analysis along with an academic reference for them to read so that they are already aware of the concept in advance of the class.
• Having subsequently tested a different breakout group exercise with the class which used a padlet to hold informaton I would like to add a padlet element to the task.
• In future I could look to do more in-depth qualitative feedback with students following the task.

In summary, and in line with the reflective nature of action research, my main learnings were the value of talking to colleagues about my ideas, the importance of creating community in the online classroom and the potential for object based learning as a means to facilitate this. I have gained a lot of confidence as a tutor in going through this process and testing out new ideas.

References:

Mc Niff, J. (2002). Action research for professional development – Concise advice for new action researchers.

The students were advised both verbally and in written format that the object based learning task and the follow up feedback request would form part of my PgCert action research project.

Quantative Survey Feedback
I undertook both qualitative and quantative feedback with the group of nine students. Helen Kara (2022) supports this mixed method approach in her book, Qualitative Research for Quantitative Researchers, where she emphasizes the value of combining both quantative and qualative research for better insights.

At the end of the session, I advised students that the online class was over and that they were free to leave. I welcomed those who wished to stay on and offer further insights for ten minutes on the object based learning task in the form of a focus group. I also provided a link to the quantative feedback survey via the chat function directly after the task and again at the end of the class. Students were advised that they were under no obligation to provide feedback and also that their responses to the written survey would be anonymous.

Six out of the nine students filled in the quantative survey. I kept the survey short with 6 questions – four which were ‘tick box’ style and two which provided an opportunity for longer answers.

Plus some insights from the free-text questions:

• Did the objects help you better understand the principles of sensitivity analysis? Why or why not?
  “I found it very effective to see and describe an actual object, as opposed to thinking of one. Sales strategy development thoughts came to me easier than in theoretical examples.”
  “Yes, definitely. Better than referencing an image of an object as that could be something I don’t physically own or haven’t interacted with.”
  “I think more time was required to complete the task.”
• What would you suggest improving in this object-based learning task?
  “I’d suggest a more detailed instruction on how to quickly establish a base case (we didn’t quite work out how to do that in our group) and then calculate fluctuations in parameters.”
  “Would have appreciated more specific scenarios to run through. For example “raw material costs increase by 25%. What levers can you pull to maintain or even increase profit?”
  “We didn’t really get into the math of it all more just theorizing what would have the most impact – useful but might be good to do this in a small and large scale scenario.”
  “More time to share with Sinead.”

Qualitative Focus Group Feedback
Seven out of the nine students stayed for the focus group. These were not necessarliy the same students who filled in the (anonymous) quantative survey. I thanked students for their time and guided the discussion with a series of questions which addressed the instructions provided in advance the task, the execution of the task itself, the use of a phyisical object and questions around the creation of community in the classroom. Six students stayed to the end of the 10 minute focus group with one excusing herself early due to other commitments. I made sure to seek feedback from all members of the group. In summary, the insights were:

• They really enjoyed and embraced the object-based nature of the task.
• They liked the ability to chose their own object and share stories relating to their context or culture.
• Give more time for the task – students wanted more time to talk to one another and discussing their objects took up a lot of time.
• Provide full instructions at least a week in advance so they have time to think about the task fully.
• Overall the task did help with understanding sensitivity analysis as a concept although the specifics of the task could be improved and refined.
• Ask more tangible, directive questions in setting the task to aid with understanding of sensitivity analysis.
• They had no particular difficulties with the break out group format and thought that groups of three worked well.
• More time is needed for the whole group discussion at the end.
• The use of objects during a breakout task plus time for sharing with the wider group helps them to feel connected to their fellow students and opens up opportunities for further discussions.

Analysis

The findings from the two feedback methods were broadly similar. It should be recognised that the sample size for both methods was small and better insights would be available with a larger group. The main take-aways for me which I will use to further develop this task are as follows:

• It is worthwhile to use object based learning in this context not only to aid understanding of business concepts but also to increase feelings of community in an online class of international students from a variety of cultural backgrounds.
• Extensive written instructions should be provided at least a week in advance.
• More specificity is required when providing instructions for the how the variables of sensitivity analysis should be changed.
• Groups of three worked well.
• Allow more time for the task – I had allocated 25 minutes but it seems 35 – 40 minutes is more realistic to enable better discussions.

References:
Kara, H. (2022) Qualitative Research for Quantitative Researchers.

In preparation for my research, I briefed the students verbally when we were together in person for our intensive teaching weekend. I told them that we would be doing an object based learning task to gain a better understanding of sensitivity analysis as part of the upcoming online lecture the following Wednesday and asked them to bring along an object with the following credentials:

• You can hold it in your hand
• It has a story attached or it holds meaning for you
• It could be sold as a product.

As not all the students were present, and by way of reminder, I also repeated the instructions in written format 3 days before the class. I made sure to tell them that the task was a research project, forming part of my PgCert, that they weren’t required to take part. I also said that I would ask for their feedback afterwards but again, there was no requirement to feedback. 

On the day of the online class, there were 9 students in attendance out of a total of thirteen. The cohort live in a variety of time zones and the classes are always recorded and available afterwards. The attendance on that particular day was in line with the other classes. As part of my introduction to the class, I once again told them that we would be using an object based learning task to better understand sensitivity analysis. The task was scheduled for the latter part of the class following other content on business finances to allow any students who didn’t wish to take part to leave when they wished. 

That particular class was on the topic of business finances. I provided a brief explanation of the concept of sensitivity analysis using an example to demonstrate. In brief, sensitivity analysis can be defined as “a valuable tool for understanding the robustness of a financial model – evaluating how the output of a model is affected by changes in input values and assumptions”.

I reminded everyone about the object credentials, then I provided further instructions for the group task as follows: 

• Hold the object in your hands & show to camera if possible.
• Take it in turns to describe your object, include defining features and the assumed price if the object was to appear in a shop.
• Each person adjusts one variable of your choosing, for example: cost of production, price or demand

• Observe and share how that impacts your “profit.” Consider different percentages of variation (eg. +20% or -10%).
• As a group, offer suggestions or discuss strategies to counter negative impacts.
• If you have time, rotate adjustments.

Students were broken into three randomly assigned breakout groups – each with 3 students. They were given 15 minutes to complete the task. I stayed in the main room for the first 5 minutes in case of technical difficulties (based on Tim’s advice) then I paid a visit to each breakout group to observe the conversation. I had warned the students that I would pop in but wouldn’t contribute to the discussion so they could simply ignore my presence. I was delighted to see lively discussions taking place in each group. 

When I brought the students back to the main room, I asked for someone from each group to provide a summary of what they discussed along with any questions. I also put up the following questions to guide our discussion: 

• If production costs go up, what could you do?
• Which variables had the biggest impact on profitability?
• What strategies did you consider to maintain or increase profitability when variables changed
• Do you think sensitivity analysis is also a useful tool for services?

Each group was engaged with the task and they had brought an interesting range of objects. Examples were: 

• A student who is originally from Hong Kong, residing in the UK who brought a teddy bear dressed in Scottish attire along that she got when she completed her undergraduate degree at Edinburgh University. 
• A student who is from Egypt who brought along traditional tea cups used in celebratory cultural events. 

 I would have liked to have continued the discussion for longer but had to conclude it fairly quickly as we had reached the end of the scheduled time for the class and I was conscious that I wanted students to stay on longer to provide me with feedback on the task. 

At that stage, I ended the task, provided a link to the quantitative feedback survey in the chat and advised students that they could leave, or alternatively stay on longer to talk about the process of the task. I will write about the process of feedback in my next blog post. 

I was pleased with how the task worked although it felt a little rushed at the end. I was relieved that I hadn’t encountered technical issues with the breakout groups and I felt that the energy of the group was lifted by providing them with an opportunity to talk to one another directly. I loved seeing the variety of objects the students brought along with them and although the timing was a challenge, it was encouraging that they had embraced the task so much and wanted to carry on talking about it for longer. Carrying out this task increased my own confidence in utilising breakout groups and trialling new methods with students.

A semi-structured interview is a conversation with a set of open-ended questions where the interviewer is happy to go ‘off-script’ to see where the discourse leads. According to Helen Kara (2017), “semi-structured interviews allow participants to participate in setting the research agenda, which may be more politically acceptable, lead to more useful data, or both.”

In preparation for my object based learning intervention, I chose to conduct semi-structured interviews with two critical friends. The first was with Yasi Tehrani an Open Learning Designer at UAL. Yasi is colleague on the PgCert and her role involves working with departments to assist them in developing digital teaching resources. Yasi completed a participant information and consent form in advance and the interview was conducted, recorded and transcribed via Teams (recording linked below).

I had prepared 7 questions for Yasi which were useful to start the conversation but we ended up following a meandering path.

Yasi was very positive and complimentary about the plans for my activity which I found to be very confidence inspiring and reassuring. The key points to come out of conversation were as follows: 

• The opporturnity for students to bring something linked to their culture or location is really helpful for community building.
• Pre-session instructions should be detailed before the task to include the type of object to bring along and ideally delivered in both verbal and written form.
• The tutor providing an example is really helpful in explaining a task.
• We discussed whether students could also upload an image of their item but wondered whether this may add unnecessary complexitiy.
• Yasi questionned the size of the object I wanted students to bring and whether they would need to be able to hold it in their hands. I hadn’t previously considered this.
• We discussed whether the tutor should visit the breakout rooms and what impact this can have on the discussion and concluded there were pros and cons.
• Yasi advised against telling the students about the objective of creating community in the classroom as it’s another layer for them to consider which might be too much in the context of the task.
• The importance of story-telling as a way to build community – a key quote from Yasi on this topic was: “storytelling, personal experiences and sharing lived experiences is always something that can bring people closer together. Even though that’s maybe a good thing to explore, we don’t really have time for that in the curriculum because we’re so limited by the amount of hours that we have to teach.” (Tehrani, 2024).

The second semi-structured interview I conducted was with Tim Morgan, the digital learning technologist on my course, MA Arts & Cultural Enterprise. Tim provides technical assistance in online teaching and having recently completed his PgCert, he is also familiar with the concept of object based learning. Tim is very supportive of tutors trying out new methods of digital engagement with students. Furthermore, Tim was in the classroom with me in Hong Kong when I trialled an in-person, object-based learning session based on the micro-teaching we did as part of the PgCert. That particular session was about using objects to come up with ideas for a social enterprises and it was very successful.

Tim completed a participant information and consent form in advance and the interview was conducted, recorded and transcribed via Teams (recording linked below). I used the same 7 questions that I devised for the conversation with Yasi to scaffold the interview.

Key points from our discussion were.

• Tim asserted that “the story is everything” when it comes to discussing objects. We discussed the value of an object with meaning as opposed to a generic object.
• We talked about some of the technical nuance of using breakout rooms and whether (or not) allowing students to move between breakout rooms is useful. Tim advised that the tutor should stay in the main room for a while after they have been set-up in case anyone’s connection drops as I would need to place them back into the relevant group.
• Tim advised that students lose any notes they create in break-out rooms when returned to the main classroom.
• We discussed whether there was any meaningful way for Padlet to be incorporated into the task – perhaps as a way to store images of the objects or record observations. Tim presented a number of different options for this.
• We also discussed Miro Boards as a tool and why they weren’t more widely used. We discussed more generally why tutors in this context tended to stick to more traditional delivery methods in the online space.
• Feedback mechanisms were also covered and the best methods for this (ie. at the end of the session).

What I found really enlightening about this process was the benefits of talking ideas through with colleagues and having ‘critical friends’. It was a really helpful process for me in defining the task. As someone who works largely alone and remotely (teaching online), this is of particular value to me. I debated whether to conduct a third interview but time was running short and I felt I had enough input to conduct the task at this point.

References:

Kara, H. (2017) Research and Evaluation for Busy Students and Practitioners: A Time-Saving Guide (2^nd edn; Policy Press).

Morgan, T. (2024) Recorded semi-structured interview. 19/11/24 – The recording of the interview along with the transcript (via Teams) can be accessed here.

Tehrani, Y. (2024) Recorded semi-structured interview. 15/11/24 – The recording of the interview along with the transcript (via Teams) can be accessed here.

This is the plan that was submitted and approved in advance of starting my action research project.

I have based my action research project on the community of inquiry framework (Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000). It was really helpful to find a framework that specifically covered the online classroom in such a logical and rational way with a framework that seemed feasible to implement in practical terms. They put forward the idea that online and blended learning environments are built upon the interaction of three interdependent elements:

• Cognitive Presence: “the extent to which the participants in any particular configuration of a community of inquiry are able to construct meaning through sustained communication”.

• Teaching Presence: “the design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educational worthwhile learning outcomes.”

• Social Presence: “the ability of learners to project their personal characteristics, engage with others authentically, and create a sense of belonging in the learning community.”

Figure one shown below is a useful visual representation of the framework:

Figure 1: taken from thecommunityofinquiry.org/framework

The social element is particularly difficult to craft in the online environment with an international cohort who are on different time zones and limited time to cover a range of topics. There are always people who talk more in online situations and those who stay quiet. By utilising breakout groups, it gives everyone a chance to talk and to share something which is personal to themselves. Wenger also supports the theory that engagement in social practice is essential for learning to take place – “learning is a process of participation in a community of practice, participation that is at first legitimately peripheral but that increases gradually in engagement and complexity.” (Wenger, 1998, p. 95)

The social justice issue I have chosen to tackle is how to create inclusion, belonging and equity of access in the online classroom fostering a sense of community within an international cohort. It is important that students who have chosen the online learning mode have an equitable opportunity to learn and build relationships with their fellow students. Student experience can be impacted when students feel marginalised in the classroom, they are not provided with an opportunity or perceived safe space to contribute or connect with one another and as a result, effective learning does not take place. Leewis and Ross (2021) conclude that “successful virtual learning environments are spaces which encourage connection, co-creation, and shared ownership” following their research on achieving belonging and engagement in online learning spaces. These are key values that I seek to create in my online classroom. They also put forward the idea that the tutor has a responsiblity to foster relationships between students to facilitate effective learning.

In their article on the potential of online based learning activities to support the teaching of intersectional environmentalism in art and design higher education, Willcocks & Mahon (2023) discuss some of the challenges of online teaching. These include, “perceived difficulties in building relationships, the risks of students getting lost, and the need for content to be parcelled up in manageable chunks.” These are all very valid points and challenges I can relate to – particularly the last point as lack of time with a lot of topics to cover leaves little time for social focussed activities in my experience. Willcocks and Mahon put forward the idea that object based learning can help to tackle some of these challenges and can be an effecitve means of creating online interaction and community while also facilitating learning. I am setting out to test this further through my action reasearch project.

The methods I have chosen include semi-structured interviews with critical friends, a quantative survey and a focus group. I used Helen Kara’s (2020) book on creative research methods to inform my approach taking note of her warning of potential challenges with focus group data, such as the possibility of dominant individuals influencing the discussion and the difficulty in ensuring that all voices are heard. I will make sure I am conscious of seeking feedback of all of those taking part in the focus group.

Reference list:

Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. and Archer, W. (2000) ‘Community of inquiry framework’. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Kara, H. (2020). Creative research methods – a practical guide.

Leewis, L. and Ross, S. L. (2022). ‘Home sweet home: Achieving belonging and engagement in online learning spaces’. Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 5(1), 71–81.

Mitchell, P., & Mason, M. (2019). Object-Based Learning and Digital Curation in an Online Context: Opportunities and Challenges. In Innovations in Digital Learning (pp. 51-70)

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity.Cambridge University Press.

Willcocks, J. & 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, 22(2)

Prior to starting the ARP unit, I had made the decison to focus my research on the online element of my teaching. In thinking about the challenges of online learning and topics I would like to address, I landed on student participation and how to encourage more of it in the online environment with an international cohort. 

During the earlier units, I took note of Paolo Freire’s (1970) concept of tutors as facilitators rather than the more out-dated ‘banking’ model of education. From an idelogical standpoint, I fully subscribe to this model. I work on a blended teaching course and I programme my in-person teaching weekends with a focus on interaction, group work and student contribution. However, in the online classroom environment I have found that this is much harder to recreate. Students often participate with camera’s off, it tends to be the same voices responding to the questions posed and we have limited time to get through the content.

There is a pre-requisite for students on the course (MA Arts and Cultural Enterprise) to have a certain level of work experience so theoretically students have a lot of valuable experiences to share from their own contexts. I work with them over a 10 week period which represents the half way point of their 2 year Masters course. 

My initial idea was to test a variety of ways to encourage students to contribute to the class including inviting student presentations on a paritcular topic, utilising digital tools such as Padlet and Miro and using breakout rooms to discuss pre-determined tasks. Utilising the action research cycle, I could test each method over a 3 week period and then seek student feedback to determine which method is best for facilitating learning, sharing and interaction. 

My starting points were: 

• Online learning environment with an international cohort
• Finding ways to encourage meaningful engagement 
• Tackling a social justice challenge – Inclusion and Belonging and equity of access- fostering a sense of community within online classrooms for international cohorts.

During the second workshop of the ARP unit, we spent time in groups discussing our ideas and the scope of the research we planned to undertake. I realised that testing a variety of methodologies would be challening given the timeframe and my limited contact time with students so it would be necessary to narrow the focus or change direction with my research.

The next iteration of my idea came as I relayed a story to a classmate who utilises object based learning in her role at the CSM Museum and Study Collection, about my recent success using object based learning during a trip to Hong Kong to work with a student group face-to-face. I wondered whether it might be possible to trial this methodology in an online setting as a way of engaging students and creating more interaction between students. My ideological starting point for this work is the Community of Inquiry framework (Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000, 2001) which sets out how teaching presence, cognitive presence and importantly social presence are required for online learning to take place. I set out to test whether the use of object based learning in the online classroom environment could foster community and facilitate teaching of a particular topic

References:
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed.
Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. and Archer, W. (2000) ‘Community of inquiry framework’. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.