Reconstructing the critique. Using inclusive formative feedback in face-to-face and online communities of practice to improve knowledge acquisition in design education

Abstract

Design teaching originated as a practice-based activity centred on reviewing the visual for its aesthetic appeal. This process has enabled students to produce opportune visual outcomes that lack research, academic rigour and rely on stylistic imitation of contemporary design trends. We identified that this occurs due to two underlying problems: 1) design pedagogies have developed without solid educational foundation; and 2) assessment remains linked to the end product rather than process. To address these issues, we reviewed learning design and reconstructed the design critique to shift the learning focus toward process. We developed four stages of engagement; Investigate, Apply, Explain and Share (IAES). These stages enabled us to create educational experiences that used reflective processes to improve knowledge acquisition. Student results and feedback show this application has improved understanding of key design processes and facilitated learning relevant to future design careers.

How future proof is design education? A systematic review

“…Although the learning-by-doing approach of PPBL is valued (Dominici, 2017 ), researchers also raise transferability concerns. It is found that students are in need of support systems to transfer acquired knowledge between multiple projects and contexts (Miceli & Zeeng, 2017 ; Whelan et al, 2017 ; Yuan et al, 2018 ). This can be achieved through learner-centred coaching that shifts the role of the teacher to a coach and mentor, or by fostering peer-learning style migration, in which lower-level students are paired to higher-level students.…”

“…Ultimately, the value of critique is pointed out as it establishes tacit knowledge transfer, but it is found that students sometimes find it hard to make this knowledge explicit and are not able to apply it in other contexts (Mohamad et al, 2016 ). Therefore, literature calls for a student support system that will enable them to transfer their learning between and across courses (Miceli & Zeeng, 2017 ), and to support teacher-student interactions through visual means (Ferreira et al, 2016 ).…”

Critique: A Workshop to Establish Shared Understanding and Clear Responsibilities Between Design Students and Their Lecturers

“…Additionally looking at critique as feedback can benefit students on multiple other levels. Students have the opportunity to learn new skills [10] and refine their way of thinking about design [15][16]. However, many instructors did not realize that looking at critiques as a learning moment can have all these impacts.…”

Effective Critique through Affective Peer Engagement

“…As future practitioners, students must be able to speak about their work, but they must also be able to critically respond to questions and criticism as well as critique the work of their peers. Strategic and systematic integration of peer critique and feedback engages both the cognitive and affective domains of learning, enabling students to emotionally engage with the process as well as think critically about their work and the work of their peers (Dannels et al, 2008; Miceli & Zeeng, 2017; Thiessen, 2017).…”

“…However, they often view the process as stressful and humiliating (Anthony, 1991; Cameron, 2003; Scagnetti, 2017), and note confusing feedback or a lack of constructive criticism (Blair, 2006; Smith, 2011). Emphasis placed on outcomes and artifacts in design education can also cause students to focus on presentations that will please their reviewers, rather than engaging the critique as a learning experience or honest reflection of their ideas and process (Anthony, 1991; Blair, 2006; Cret, 1941; Miceli & Zeeng, 2017; Percy, 2004; Scagnetti, 2017). Furthermore, students who “play the game” or perceive critique as a “performance” are likely to be reluctant to question or engage faculty and reviewers in critical dialogue (Anthony, 1991; Blair, 2006; Megahed, 2018; Schrand & Eliason, 2012).…”