I was the last speaker in a long chain of presenters.
I was tired (just before me was a presentation that I expected to relate to excellently, yet instead my brain was completely unable to process any information).
Hence, despite limited time and a hard time-frame (I was the last speaker) – I chose to prompt the attendees to start with a short movement exercise. They were invited to open their window, and maybe shake their limbs for a moment.
“Only 20 minutes to go, we can do this!”.
One participant even did a small yoga exercise on screen, which impressed me deeply. Their comfort and enjoyment of acknowledging their body was what I had anticipated my audience would be comfortable with.
For this reason my prompt was to “open their windows” which entails a movement aspect that, I assumed, everybody would be comfortable with.
My presentation was an abbreviated version of the OB1 class.
My slides were ready, and I used a brief video-game extract to introduce the key idea “object oriented ontologies” to my colleagues.
The video was subtitled (as are all my class videos) and it was a nice opener (I was told later).
All slides followed UAL guidelines and my colleagues complemented me on these. (Quote: The slides could not be faulted.)
I included a preamble which I called “housekeeping”.
Housekeeping here refers to good practices of being a “considered host” when giving a class. It is my responsibility that my students (or “guests”) feel safe and comfortable when they are in my class. I want to insure safe and honest learning environments.
I declared that I will (on slide 19) make mention of a nuclear bomb and that I invite everybody who
(quote) “currently hasn’t got the emotional space,
or doesn’t want to make emotional space for this topic, ……
they are invited to turn their camera off,
leave the room and have a coffee or tea instead.
I will still be here in 20 minutes once my presentation is over, and I want them to make their own informed decision if they consent to engage with my presentation”.
My slides were shared via link in chat and I offered to be approachable by anyone, should they be so inclined to want to take this conversation further.
—-
MOVE:
Open windows.
Acknowledging our body.
Overall I found this peer review and observation extremely useful, and much more engaging, interesting than the lectures in the sessions before.
Unlike the lectures, which were modulated not at the right tone for me, the observation and active listening and critiquing were occasionally very challenging.
There were certainly aspects that I didn’t like in some of the presentations, and some practices that I follow which were not executed by my colleagues around me.
This sparked me to engage into a fairly nuanced process of active reflection.
On one hand I try to appreciate another teacher’s work on its own merits (i.e. trying to minimize my own biases and preconceptions) –