Exercise: Practicing Skills for Critique
Context
Critical feedback and critique culture in design education are fundamental and vital for nurturing creativity, fostering critical thinking, facilitating an iterative process, and encouraging interdisciplinary thought. This culture not only equips students with the essential skills to evaluate their work but also instills in them the ability to receive and apply feedback constructively. Through thoughtful critique, students gain a deeper understanding of their creative choices, learn to adapt and refine their ideas, and develop a more holistic perspective on problem-solving. Moreover, the practice of giving and receiving critical feedback fosters self-awareness and growth, as students are challenged to reflect on their work, identify areas for improvement, and continuously evolve their skills and ideas. In this dynamic learning environment, students become better equipped to thrive in the ever-evolving, interdisciplinary world of design, where innovation and adaptability are key to success.
In this context, it is crucial for educators to not only impart knowledge but also to master the art of giving critical feedback effectively. Educators must provide feedback that is constructive, specific, and well-balanced, focusing on guiding students towards self-discovery rather than imposing "correct" solutions. The process of critique should be a bidirectional exchange, fostering a collaborative and equitable relationship between educators and students. It is not about the authority of the teacher dictating the path, but rather about valuing and elevating the students' intentions, ideas, and creative choices as the central focus of critique and growth. When students learn to receive feedback with an open mind and view it as an opportunity for improvement, it empowers them to take ownership of their learning journey, ultimately enhancing their critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and self-awareness. This transformative partnership between educators and students creates an environment where creativity flourishes, and individuals are prepared to thrive in the complex and diverse landscape of design.
Method
To foster a structured and accessible approach to critique in our design education program, we will utilize the Critical Response approach, developed by Liz Lerman. While this approach is primarily focused on artistic work, it offers an exceptional entry point into the world of critique. It enables students to engage in a clear, safe, and understandable manner with their peers' creative work. However, it is important to note that the Critical Response approach is not an all-encompassing model for critique and feedback, especially in the context of design education where educators play a crucial role in guiding students through the process. This approach, with its emphasis on asking questions, sharing personal reactions, and deepening understanding, sets the mindset for the type of critique we aim to foster. Our primary objective is not only to evaluate creative ideas but also to help students understand and implement the critique process, emphasizing growth and learning throughout their creative journey. Through this approach, students will gain the skills necessary to provide and receive feedback in a constructive and supportive manner, nurturing a culture of continuous improvement and collaboration in our educational community.
The Roles
The artist offers a work-in-progress for review and feels prepared to question that work in a dialogue with other people.
One, a few, or many responders -- committed to the artist’s intent to make excellent work -- engage in the dialogue with the artist.
The facilitator, initiates each step, keeps the process on track, and works to help the artist and responders use the process to frame useful questions and responses.
The Process
The Critical Response Process takes place after a presentation of artistic work. Work can be short or long, large or small, and at any stage in its development. This is adapted from The Basics on Liz Lehrman’s website.
The Core Steps
Statements of Meaning: Responders state what was meaningful, evocative, interesting, exciting, striking in the work they have just witnessed.
This is not simply praise. It is the opportunity for the responders to express what they understood and how they understood it. This will give the creator vital insight into whether and how they manifest their intention.
Artist as Questioner: The artist asks questions about the work. After each question, the responders answer. Responders may express opinions if they are in direct response to the question asked and do not contain suggestions for changes.
This is the opportunity for the creator to understand how their intentions (both conceptual and technical) were understood and to be precise about their creative or design decisions. These questions are vital and show the thoughtfulness and intentionality of the creator. There should never be a situation where the creator has no questions. At the minimum they should ask “My intention was to make you feel/understand/experience X through the implementation of Y. Was that successful? Why or why not?”
Neutral Questions: Responders ask neutral questions about the work. The artist responds. Questions are neutral when they do not have an opinion couched in them. For example, if you are discussing the lighting of a scene, “Why was it so dark?” is not a neutral question. “What ideas guided your choices about lighting?” is. * These fill in any intention/execution questions not covered in the Artist as Questioner.
This is where the critic can bring critical and expert experience to helping the creator understand both the process and how to frame both intention and execution. It is perfectly acceptable (and, in fact, necessary) to hold the creator accountable for taking a clear design or creative stance on their work
Opinion Time: Responders state opinions, subject to permission from the artist. The usual form is “I have an opinion about ______, would you like to hear it?” The artist has the option to say no.
In the In the context of teaching AEBL through creative projects, during this stage the responder can and should offer refinement of existing or alternative creative approaches to the problem as stated by the creator. If the responder believes that there is a fundamental flaw (due to contextual biases of the creator) they should point those out. These comments are about the quality of process NOT about how subjectively good the solution and is very different from offering an opinion as to whether you like the solution aesthetically or conceptually.
Exercise
Goal: To introduce, practice, and roleplay critical feedback in the context of creative work. We will be using the photography project you completed since the previous session
In break out groups of 4, divide roles: 1 artist, 2 responders, 1 facilitator
Critique the photography work of the artist using the process above.
Rotate 2-3 times.
Individually or as a group, answer the following questions in the comment section below:
How did this feel in each role?
What was difficult?
What was seamless?
How did this approach foster a sense of community and mutual respect?
What were the most valuable insights or perspectives gained from hearing other participants' feedback during the discussion? Did any of these insights surprise you or challenge your initial perceptions of the creative work?
