Microteaching – Audience Psychology
Teaching Plan
| Duration | ||
| 1 | Welcoming and starting the teaching | 1 minutes |
| Quick Ice breaker/Sampling participants knowledge on the topic | 2 minutes | |
| Learning outcome | 2 minutes | |
| Intro | 2 minutes | |
| First task/engagement | 3 minutes | |
| Discussing the first task | 4 minutes | |
| Second task/engagement | 5 minutes | |
| Analysing the outcome of the second task | 5 minutes | |
| Conclusion | 2 minutes | |
| Feedback | 10 minutes |
The micro-teaching was one of the most interesting parts of the TPP unit for me.
I taught on audience psychology from the perspective of a man called Kuleshov.
It was a small group of 5 consisting of 4 other PGCert students and 1 tutor.
Quick Ice breaker/Sampling participants knowledge on the topic
I started by interacting with the participants and asking them if they had ever heard of the Kuleshov effect before. It turned out that only one of the four people listening to me had vague knowledge of what I wanted to talk about.
To some extent, this is an advantage, likewise, it could be a disadvantage. It will be an advantage in the sense that the participants have a fresh mind on the subject matter, and I have the task of explaining it to them with little or no opposing perspectives that can throw me off balance during the teaching. The disadvantage, on the other hand, is that I must be as clear as possible and might struggle to get the right engagement from participants since they are not familiar with the topic.
Learning outcome
I went ahead to share the learning outcome, which is as follows:
- Understand basic audience psychology based on the “Kuleshov Effect”.
- Identify the basic concepts of shot sequencing, juxtaposition, and emotional impact.
Intro
It was time to briefly and quickly introduce the “Kuleshov Effect”. I introduced it as follows:
“Lev Kuleshov, a Soviet filmmaker, conducted an experiment in the early 20th century. It involved creating a short film sequence using the same shot of an actor’s neutral face combined with different images or scenes. The audience, when shown the series of shots, interpreted the actor’s expression differently based on the context provided by the preceding or succeeding footage.”
First task/engagement
The first task/engagement was to observe a headshot and describe the mood the man in the shot
Below is the response as described on a white board. The image is on the left, while the participants’ responses are on the right.
Discussing the first task
We had a quick discussion with everyone, talking about what they thought the mood of the man in the head shot was.
Second task/engagement
The second task/engagement was to add a second image from a pool of AI generated images to the first image, then, construct a new meaning to the mood when observed together in sequence with the second image.
Below is the image pool.
Analysing the outcome of the second task.
The participants returned to the main session with different perceptions of the man’s mood or feelings.
Below is a the response of the participants after being exposed to a supplementary image.
Conclusion
This experiment demonstrated the powerful impact of film editing on audience perception and emotions. It highlighted that the meaning derived from a shot is not only influenced by the content of that specific shot but also by its juxtaposition with other shots
Feedback
The feedback session was quite constructive. Below are some of the feedback on Padlet:
- The slides were simple and clear – was there a reference/citation for Kuleshov Effect in case participants want to read more?
- Great full circle moment to start with and return to the learning outcome. A feasible activity/well planned in the time available, although conclusions were short.
- Use of a whiteboard of a tool was appropriate and well-used in the session. Did all participants know how to use whiteboard from the start? Do you need to fold in introducing the tool to the session?
- Clear relationship between theory and the practical exercise and the use of the AI image(s) as the object(s).
- The workshop enabled different interpretations of the content/object (s), eliciting different empathetic responses. You were open and inviting to everyone’s responses though often spoke to fill the quiet time – how does it feel to sit in the pauses and silence?
- You came across with enthusiasm and verve in the session – well done Samuel!
Response To Feedback
- Reference/Citation for Kuleshove Effect
Kuleshove effect is one of the theories thought in film studies. I will have to factor
in the fact that more than half of my students have not been to film school and have probably studied something else in college which can make them clueless about Film theories.
Going forward, I will signpost the students to helpful resources on the topic at hand. This can be in form of ‘Pre-Session’ or Post-Session reading task.
- Short Conclusion
- Great full circle moment to start with and return to the learning outcome. A feasible activity/well planned in the time available, although conclusions were short.
This is well observed. I rushed the conclusion because I was already pressed for time. I will going forward try to improve on time management when teaching and also try not to pack too much in a session with short duration.
- Use of Whiteboard
- Use of a whiteboard of a tool was appropriate and well-used in the session. Did all participants know how to use whiteboard from the start? Do you need to fold in introducing the tool to the session?
During the session, I also noticed that some people were not as fast to respond on the whiteboard as others despite frequent use of whiteboard across the university.
I will be more intentional with doing a quick intro at the beginning and pay attention to supporting anyone struggling with navigating the task.
- The Silent Moments
- “The workshop enabled different interpretations of the content/object (s), eliciting different empathetic responses. You were open and inviting to everyone’s responses though often spoke to fill the quiet time – how does it feel to sit in the pauses and silence?”
Hmmmn! True that as interactive as I tried to make the session, some participants will still be quiet and not participate. I previously perceive the silence to mean I’m not doing a good job at teaching or the learning outcome is not being achieved due to the presence of some introverted participants.
My perspective has however changed based one of the pre session readings on ‘Embrasing the silence”.
In the journal, Harris, K (2022) highlights the necessity to rethink approaches based on online learning encounters, underscoring the significance of accommodating learning styles and recognizing the role of silence, in enhancing the educational experience.
I now appreciate silence and contemplation as essential components of the learning journey.
- AI Images
- “I really enjoyed it. It’s really important to get students to do the activity…it gets the activity to resonate further. I’d perhaps not use an AI image. It would be even more effective if you use a stock image or real photo. The actual activity was really effective.” – Billie
Thank you for pointing this out and letting me know you preference. I will consider a blend of AI generated images and real images in the future to take care of participants preferences. Just that AI is taking the creative industry by storm and I am trying to flow along. I might not have done a good job at creating those images but a well created AI image speaks volume and very resourceful.
I will learn and research more on AI generated images and learn how to use it in a better way to support my teaching.
REFERENCE
Harris, K. (2022) ‘Embracing the silence: introverted learning and the online classroom’, Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal [Preprint].