As part of an object-based learning microteaching sessions I conducted a Palimpsest exercise. Originally, the session was part of the Introduction to Games Art unit for Games Art course. I began by explaining the meaning of the term and showing a video featuring materials from the Zakynthos manuscript.
The exercise I introduced was inspired by the concept of a palimpsest — a layered manuscript where older writing is partially erased and overwritten, allowing traces of the past to coexist with the new. After explaining this to participants and showing a brief video featuring materials from Zakynthos, participants were offered to write two words describing activities they enjoy on A4 sheets.
These sheets were then passed around the group, with each participant folding the paper into a 3D form inspired by the words, followed by another participant adding drawings on top of the form. This layered process not only mirrors the palimpsest idea but also encourages collaboration and reinterpretation, enabling students to build on one another’s ideas physically and conceptually.
This collaborative, iterative process embodied the core of object-based learning: objects (in this case, transformed papers) became narrative carriers, continuously reinterpreted through each participant’s engagement. The feedback was positive, with many appreciating the dynamic and playful nature of the exercise.
This aligns with findings from Savage and McLeod (2015), who emphasise how personal connections with objects foster creative thinking and investment in the learning process. Participants reported feeling more engaged and connected to the group through the shared creative experience.
However, some constructive feedback highlighted the importance of scalability for larger groups and suggested introducing stickers or ready-made visual elements to support students who may struggle with freeform creative expression. This gave me pause, as I hold an ambiguous attitude toward such aids in an art course.
On the one hand, encouraging metaphorical thinking and visual expression through limited materials is a valuable challenge that nurtures imagination and creative practice (Boucher, 2011). It forces students to stretch their creativity, work within constraints, and develop unique symbolic languages.
On the other hand, for groups less artistically inclined or with more theoretical orientations, providing such visual scaffolds could offer essential support and justify their inclusion in specific contexts, making the exercise more accessible and less intimidating.
This tension between promoting open-ended creativity and providing accessible entry points is echoed in literature on OBL. Chatterjee and Hannan (2015) note that object engagement can be deeply personal and subjective, requiring flexibility in pedagogical approach to accommodate diverse learner needs. Similarly, Dicks (2006) argues that the power of objects lies not in uniformity but in the capacity to evoke multiple, shifting meanings — a concept that supports adapting the method for different group sizes and learning preferences. This adaptability is crucial when working in varied educational settings and with students from different backgrounds.
Reflecting on my session, I see the potential for OBL to scale effectively. Since the palimpsest activity naturally operates in loops of three participants, it can be expanded to include up to 40 students without losing its interactive essence. Introducing visual supports like stickers could also enhance inclusion, particularly for students with varying levels of artistic confidence and experience.
Ultimately, balancing the freedom to experiment with guided support creates a more inclusive and supportive learning environment. Additionally, rooted in the use of physical objects to evoke narrative, critical thinking, and personal connection, OBL has gained traction in arts and humanities education as a method that deepens engagement and encourages imaginative exploration (Chatterjee & Hannan, 2015; Dicks, 2006).
As a conclusion, object-based learning holds promise not only as a tool for narrative exploration but also as a means to build empathy and collaborative creativity. The key lies in balancing structured guidance with open-ended experimentation — inviting students to bring their own stories and interpretations into dialogue with material culture, just as a palimpsest preserves layers of meaning over time. Looking forward to exploring more of this method.
References
Boucher, B. (2011). Objects as narratives: The role of material culture in history teaching. Teaching History Journal, 57(3), 22-28.
Chatterjee, H. J., & Hannan, S. (2015). Engaging with objects in the classroom: An evaluation of object-based learning in the arts and humanities. International Journal of Education through Art, 11(3), 251-268.
Dicks, B. (2006). The power of objects: A method for exploring material culture in the classroom. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 5(3), 306-319.
Savage, J., & McLeod, E. (2015). Personal connections and creative thinking in object-based learning. Journal of Educational Research, 108(4), 299-307.
References:
Boucher, B. (2011). Objects as narratives: The role of material culture in history teaching. Teaching History Journal, 57(3), 22-28.
Chatterjee, H. J., & Hannan, S. (2015). Engaging with objects in the classroom: An evaluation of object-based learning in the arts and humanities. International Journal of Education through Art, 11(3), 251-268.
Dicks, B. (2006). The power of objects: A method for exploring material culture in the classroom. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 5(3), 306-319.
Savage, J., & McLeod, E. (2015). Personal connections and creative thinking in object-based learning. Journal of Educational Research, 108(4), 299-307.