Computer supported novice group critique

Abstract

Groups of novice critiquers can sometimes provide feedback of the same quality as a single expert. Unfortunately, we do not know how to create systems for novice group critique in design education. We tested whether 4 principles: write-first scripts, critique prompts, interactive critiquing & formative framing, allow us to create systems that combine the advantages of face-to-face and computer-mediated critique. We collected observations and 48 interviews with 12 undergraduate design students who used a computer supported group critique system over 5 critique sessions, analyzed using grounded theory. We found that: (a) the write-first script helped overcome initial learning costs; (b) the interactive critique features created a dual-channel critique that increased the number of critiquers, duration of critique and interactivity; and (c) the system produced a greater volume of useful critique and promoted reciprocity among critiquers. The study provides improved principles for developing computer supported novice group critique systems in design.

Structuring, Aggregating, and Evaluating Crowdsourced Design Critique

“…Tinapple et al [26] developed CritViz, a system which enables peer critiques of designs. Kulkarni and Klemmer [16] also developed a peer critique system for use in a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC), and Easterday et al [10] developed a mixed faceto-face and online critique system for design students in a classroom environment. These systems were shown to be effective in a formal educational setting, with students of fairly uniform levels of knowledge and motivation.…”

Building Support Tools to Connect Novice Designers with Professional Coaches

“…In peer formative feedback similar-status learners consider and comment on the work of their peers in order to improve work and increase learning [30]. While socio-technical systems have been shown to gather valued feedback [11], and improve learning [8], peers by definition have limited knowledge in comparison to professionals. Likewise, cognitive tutors provide step-level feedback and have shown to produce learning gains rivaling that of one-on-one human coaching across many domains that do not initially seem well-defined [31].…”

“…We define feedback as a specific form of help directed at specific work [16], especially when iterating on creative work. Giving learners the opportunity to pose questions to direct the help they want on work in progress can illicit a great deal of feedback [11]. Project teams of learners in educational institutions [11] and practitioners [10] value these feedback routines.…”

“…Giving learners the opportunity to pose questions to direct the help they want on work in progress can illicit a great deal of feedback [11]. Project teams of learners in educational institutions [11] and practitioners [10] value these feedback routines. One advantage of these socio-technical systems is that they can structure interactions and create a record that supports review by helpgivers [17].…”

Crowd-based design activities

“…Others are designing novel platforms to help students learn the design process and share their work with each other through an online network [13]. The purpose of this work is to introduce to students via activity modules the growing practice of soliciting ideas and feedback online, thus preparing them for real world design scenarios in both industry and academia.…”