Skip to main content

The Efficacy of Object Deciphering in STEAM Education Beyond Encounters and Collisions Between Learners and Objects

Abstract

University museums have embodied that object-based learning, a mode of active or experiential learning with objects within museums, plays a decisive role in cross-disciplinary learning that involves collections and objects across diverse disciplinary fields. Therefore, contemporary university museums can function as academic hubs or cultural commons in their respective parental institutions. This study explores object-based learning while mainly focusing on object deciphering for interdisciplinary/cross-disciplinary learning with objects related to own culture and tradition between personnel in different specialties in both physical (in-person) and virtual (online) museum settings. This study aims to demonstrate the efficacy of object deciphering, which is an emerging learning method derived from object-based learning for interdisciplinary/cross-disciplinary learning with object-related own culture and tradition. To achieve it, nishiki-e was adopted as learning materials, because it is a well-known antique artwork among Japan. After the liberal arts lecture, it was shown that; (1) physical object handling, compared with online learning, plays a significant role in helping learners gain interest in a subject in accordance with previous studies, (2) it is suitable for interdisciplinary/cross-disciplinary learning with objects related to one’s own culture and tradition to deal and interact with learners who have different specialties, (3) object deciphering can prompt learners’ self-discovery through interdisciplinary/cross-disciplinary learning, so that they can find, explore, and love themselves. In the future, the author wishes to explore the relationship between the efficacy and modes on object deciphering in the pedagogical context and psychotherapy in the psychological context in university museums.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Stockholm Resilience Centre. 2016. https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2016-06-14-how-food-connects-all-the-sdgs.html. Accessed 31 Dec 2021.

  2. National Research Council. A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press; 2012.

  3. Breiner JM, Harkness SS, Johnson CC, Koehler CM. What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. Sch Sci Math. 2012;112:3–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Shanahan MC, Carol-Ann LE, Burke KF. Using a boundary object perspective to reconsider the meaning of STEM in a Canadian context. Can J Sci Math Technol. 2016;16:29–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sanders M. STEM, STEM education, STEM mania. Technol Teach. 2009;68:20–6.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bybee RW. What is STEM education? Science. 2010;329:996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Vasquez JA, Sneider C. STEM Lesson essentials, grades 3–8: integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Heinemann; 2013.

  8. Takeuchi MA, Sengupta P, Shanahan M, Adams JD, Hachem M. Transdisciplinarity in STEM education: a critical review. Stud Sci Educ. 2020;56:213–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Liao C. From interdisciplinary to transdisciplinary: an arts-integrated approach to STEAM education. Art Educ. 2016;69:44–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Segarra VA, Natalizio B, Falkenberg CV, Pulford S, Holmes RM. STEAM: using the arts to train well-rounded and creative scientists. J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2018;19:1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mujtaba T, Lawrence M, Oliver M, Reiss MJ. Learning and engagement through natural history museums. Stud Sci Educ. 2018;54:41–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Perignat E, Katz-Buonincontro J. STEAM in practice and research: an integrative literature review. Think Skills Creativity. 2019;31:31–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Rolling JH Jr. Reinventing the steam engine for art + design education. Art Educ. 2016;69:4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chatterjee HJ, Hannan L, Thomson LJM. An introduction to object-based learning and multi-sensory engagement. In: Chatterjee HJ, Hannan L, editors. Engaging the senses: object-based learning in higher education. London: Routledge; 2015. p. 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Paris SG. Perspectives on object-centred learning in museums. London: Routledge; 2002.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Kolb DA. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River: FT Press; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dewey J. School and society. Chicago: Chicago University Press; 1899.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Piaget J. The child’s conception of the world. London: Routledge & K. Paul; 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Honey P, Mumford A. The manual of learning styles; 1982.

  20. Coles A. Teaching in post-compulsory education: policy, practice and values. London: David Fulton Publishers; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Falk JH, Dierking LD. Learning from museum: visitor experiences and the making of meaning. Lanham: Alta Mira Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hein G. Learning in the museum. London: Routledge; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Jacobs CJ, Andrews J, Castle MC, Meister N, Green W, Olson K, Simpson A, Smith R. Beyond the field trip: museum literacy and higher education. Mus Manag Curatorship. 2009;24:5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hooper-Greenhill E. Museums and education: purpose, pedagogy, performance. London: Routledge; 2007.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Csikszentmihalyi M. Finding flow: the psychotherapy of engagement with everyday life. New York: Basic Books; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Willcocks J. Pedagogic prescription: art and design teaching practice and object-led well-being. In: Kador T, Chatterjee HJ, editors. Object-based learning and well-being: exploring material connections. London: Routledge; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Chatterjee HJ, Noble G. Museums, health and well-being. Farham: Ashgate; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Todd C, Camic PM, Lockyer B, Thomson LJM, Chatterjee HJ. Museum-based programs for socially isolated older adults: understanding what works. Health Place. 2017;48:47–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rowe S. The role of objects in active, distributed meaning-making. In: Paris SG, editor. Perspectives on object-centered learning in museums. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2002. p. 19–36.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Matthews JC. Somatic knowing and education. Educ Forum. 1998;62:236–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Critchley H. Emotional touch: a neuroscientific overview. In: Chatterjee HJ, editor. Touch in museums: policy and practice in object handling. Oxford: Berg Publishers; 2008. p. 61–71.

    Google Scholar 

  32. McGlone F. The two sides of touch: sensing and feeling. In: Chatterjee HJ, editor. Touch in museums: policy and practice in object handling. Oxford: Berg Publishers; 2008. p. 41–60.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Csikszentmihalyi M. The flow experience and its significance for human psychology. In: Csikszentmihalyi M, editor. Optimal experience: psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1988.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Thogersen J, Simpson A, Hammond G, Janiszewski L, Guerry E. Creating curriculum connections: a university museum object-based learning project. Educ Inf. 2018;34:113–20.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Hannan L, Duhs R, Chatterjee HJ. Object-based Learning: a powerful pedagogy for higher education. In: Boddington A, Boys J, Speight C, editors. Museums and higher education working together: challenges and opportunities. London: Routledge; 2013. p. 159–68.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Kador T, Hannan L, Nyhan J, Terras M, Chatterjee HJ, Carnell M. Object-based learning and research-based education: case studies from the UCL curricula. In: Davies JP, Pachler N, editors. Teaching and learning in higher education. London: U C L IOE Press; 2018. p. 157–76.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Oxford Internet Institute. 2015. https://www.cabinet.ox.ac.uk. Accessed 2 Jan 2021.

  38. The University of Tokyo library system. https://www.lib.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en. Accessed 31 Dec 2021.

  39. Malraux A. La Musée immaginaire, Gallimard; 1996 (orig 1947).

  40. Styliani S, Fotis L, Kostas K, Petros P. Virtual museums, a survey and some issues for consideration. J Cult Herit. 2009;10:520–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. ICOM. ICOM news. 2004.

  42. Gaylord-Opalewski K, O’Leary L. Defining interactive virtual learning in museum education: a shared perspective. J Mus Educ. 2019;44:229–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Tanabashi S. Old nishiki-e as learning tool for contemporary digital object-based learning in STEAM education. In: International symposium on educational technology. 2021. pp. 219–22.

  44. International image interoperability framework. https://iiif.io. Accessed 31 Dec 2021.

  45. Omeka S. https://omeka.org/s/. Accessed 31 Dec 2021.

  46. IIPImage server. https://iipimage.sourceforge.io/documentation/server/. Accessed 31 Dec 2021.

  47. Simpson A. Rethinking university museums: material collections and the changing world of higher education. Mus Austr Mag. 2014;22:18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Kador T, Chatterjee HJ. Object-based learning and well-being: exploring material connections. London: Routledge; 2020.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  49. Chatterjee HJ, Noble G. Museums, health and well-being. London: Routledge; 2016.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  50. Sharp A, Thomson L, Chatterjee HJ, Hannan L. The value of object-based learning within and between higher education disciplines. In: Chatterjee HJ, Hannan L, editors. Engaging the senses: object-based learning in higher education. London: Routledge; 2015. p. 97–116.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Tanabashi S. Object-based narratives with Japanese traditional academic artworks at university museums and libraries of agricultural and life sciences. Univ Mus Collect J. 13 (in press).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Early-Career Scientists (Grant number 20K13253) to S. T. from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

Funding

This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Early-Career Scientists (Grant number 20K13253) to S. T. from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sayuri Tanabashi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No competing interests were reported by the author.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tanabashi, S. The Efficacy of Object Deciphering in STEAM Education Beyond Encounters and Collisions Between Learners and Objects. SN COMPUT. SCI. 3, 484 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-022-01403-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-022-01403-7

Keywords

  • Object deciphering
  • Object-based learning
  • University museums
  • STEAM education
  • Digital technologies