My object-based microteaching exercise is suitable for all students across the college, and is designed as the introduction to all inductions in our workshop space. The goal is to equip students with the ability to analyse paper or book objects and recognize the grain direction, along with understanding the significance and the context of why the choice of grain direction may have been chosen.

First, a brief verbal explanation on paper making and the concept of ‘grain’. Then, students will participate in a physical demonstration where they are given two pages from the same magazine. One page is torn vertically “across the grain,” resulting in an uneven tear that often results in tearing off a corner, with fibres “poking out” of the edge of the tear.
The second page is torn horizontally “with the grain,” resulting in an easy, clean and straight tear across the sheet.
This hands-on activity effectively highlights the nature of paper fibre’s and how they can affect the final publication, while also presenting a clear visual representation of paper grain.

After acknowledging the wastefulness of tearing paper to determine grain direction, we introduce an alternative method. Each student is given a fresh sheet of plain white paper and instructed to softly bend it in half vertically, feeling the paper’s resistance under their hand. Next, they repeat the process horizontally and note the difference in resistance.

The concept of grain direction in paper is further elaborated upon. I explain that the direction of weaker resistance experienced during the paper bending activity is parallel to the grain direction. We then discuss the terminology associated with grain direction, such as “long grain” and “short grain,” and their implications for publishing. It is emphasized that proper grain direction is essential for optimal printing and binding results, especially for high-quality publications such as books and magazines. The restrictions and recommendations for grain direction in publishing are also explored in-depth, including the optimal weight for different types of paper, the importance of aligning the grain direction of all paper components in a publication, and the potential consequences of disregarding grain direction guidelines.

My experience running this microteaching exercise was quite different from what I had expected. I thought it resembled more of a one-dimensional demonstration rather than the interactive activity and experience that I am used to.

Feedback from participants indicated that they could also imagine the difference between the two teaching environments, and that the atmosphere of the teaching space played a significant role in their willingness to engage and understand the concept.

I also think that I may have rushed through the delivery of the content, as I was subtly aware that the audience would not need the immediate relevance of the information. In a workshop setting with my students, I know they will use the knowledge of grain direction right away in a subsequent task, as well as in their future projects, given they all signed up for the course. As Csikszentmihalyi and Hermanson (1999) observe “after the individual’s curiosity is aroused, the exhibit must engage sustained interest in order for learning to take place” (p. 73) However, while teaching in the Micro-teach setting, I knew the participants wouldn’t utilize this knowledge beyond the session.

Consequently, I feel I failed to elaborate on certain aspects of the lesson, as I usually do when I sense any uncertainty, which is essential for a group of students who are unsure of the subject matter. The information instead seemed like a dismembered slice of information presented in an office room, without the context for its wider application and significance to skills usually acquired later in a lesson.

The current format of the exercise involves a single large group, which can sometimes lead to a herd mentality where participants simply agree with each other. However, based on the feedback I received, I could consider experimenting with different techniques for facilitating the activity. As Bonwell (1991) identifies “active learning involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing” (p. 68). One possibility could be to split the group into smaller sub-groups and have them test the grain direction of paper independently before sharing their findings and insights with the rest of the group. Another approach is to incorporate questions throughout the demonstration to encourage critical thinking and active participation. For example, I could ask the group to speculate on the reasons behind certain publishing guidelines related to paper grain direction, before presenting them with the information. These alternative techniques may help to foster a more engaging and interactive learning experience for the participants, and provide a more well-rounded understanding of the topic.