Category: Uncategorised

‘Studio Book’, it’s intended use within my teaching methodologies and it’s evolution:

Feedback

Following the collection of responses from students, peers, management and other institutions my thoughts turned to how they could be collated and utilised as a proposal for pedagogical change.

 The new Inclusive Reviews were seen as an evolving guide, meant to be evaluated and revised by each new cohort at the start of every academic year. The feedback proposed that the existing core Learning Outcomes (currently add to 100%and all need to be addressed) should equate to 50% of the grades only. Placing a greater emphasis on social, political and climate change in design proposals. They included new criteria for the presentation itself, to ensure the Review remains an immersive creative act. How would these ideas be perceived? I created a Miro board to generate feedback from the department peers and management:

The response from the department to date has been positive, they found the desire for grades ‘surprising’ and generally the feedback suggestions were ‘provocative’. The Stage 1 leader thought it was a good idea to award marks for the Reviews as proposed, suggesting we implement in the future.

Implementation and testing

Following my requests from other institutions for review guidelines, I was asked to share my research and findings. At Cambridge they responded by testing peer reviews for the first time for Stage 1, as suggested by UAL students for further pin ups to destigmatise the Reviews. The heads of year shared their feedback confirming:

Students responses were ‘what is my to do list ask the tutors – students felt it was missing from the feedback, they were thankful for being given that platform, it was difficult at the start with silence in the room, felt too floppy – wanted tutor feedback – scaffolding the experience’. Showing that the students were still actively requesting structure and guidelines, the plan is to devise a set of guidelines for the department.

Future Pedagogical Implementation?

The research has garnered interest following discussions at APSA (Association for Professional Studies in Architecture) back in November, members have invited me to present the feedback at their spring meet in 2024. In addition following meetings at UCL they have been encouraging me to formalise the findings into a report that could be presented at the annual RIBA Education Away day in 2024.

Conclusion

The design review (crit) is one of the most common pedagogical and feedback methods used in the architectural, arts and design disciplines. This research presented me with valuable experiences and learning opportunities that students have gained during reviews. The main attention gave the opportunity for more productive practices. While reviewing the literature, we learned that students often see design reviews more as a ‘rite of initiation’ as opposed to a learning experience, as an event for unconstructive feedback, as a source of stress and anxiety, and/or as an experience that reveals some asymmetrical relations of power: clearly much more work and research is needed to improve design reviews. I agree with Smith (2011, 63) in suggesting that design reviews should be a creative and flexible event in itself, but would add that a dialogic approach that tries to mitigate power imbalance is also an important goal. Other modifications to improve design reviews include: [1] A change in the physical arrangement and procedural format, [2] clear, constructive and objective feedback, and [3] a well-established set of rules and codes of practice can help to improve the learning experience during reviews. 

Bibliography

1. Smith, Charlie. 2011. “Understanding Students’ Views of the Crit Assessment.” Journal for Education in the Built Environment 6 (1): 44–67. https://doi.org/10.11120/jebe.2011.06010044.———. (ed) 2021. Progressive Studio Pedagogy: Examples from Architecture and Allied Design Fields. London: Routledge.

“the human mind will not be confined to any limits” Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

“we are educating people out of their creative capacities” How the classroom kills creativity, Ken Robinson

How can we listen to what people are feeling in a way that drives learning? How do we avoid turning ‘process’ and ‘experimentation’ into another performative task that students do to tick a box rather than to really explore the projects they are developing? Bruce Macfarlane argues teaching with integrity is crucial for ensuring the quality of higher education, ‘teachers have a responsibility to promote ethical behaviour among their students’. What if in this process of good intentions to add protocols to the Crit we sterilise and standardise not only the process but the creative output. With this concern my thoughts turn to how the Crit could be a creative act?

Creative acts are unique, crits must follow this logic, throughout my research a number of academics pointed towards MIT for their unique approach, I contacted them accordingly. At MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Architecture Department, Claudine Monique, Academic Associate, confirms ‘all of our critiques are different based off the faculty who is teaching the course‘ (2023-12-06 01:36:40 PM EST MIT ServiceNow) . This is in spite of providing a written guidance for students, staff and gusts reviewers, confirming ‘Holding a review is itself a creative act, and an evolving part of our design culture. While specific rules may not be appropriate to every review, the goals below (see image The review at MIT Architecture: Values and Goals) outline our expectations and overall tools for creating the best discussion in a variety of settings and contexts, according to our community’s underlying values of respect, courtesy, equity and inclusion’.

The Creative Crit

‘Scripted instruction is opposed to constructivist, inquiry-based, and dialogic teaching methods that emphasize classroom collaboration. To provide insight into these methods, the “teaching as performance” metaphor must be modified: Teaching is improvisational performance. Conceiving of teaching as improvisation highlights the collaborative and emergent nature of effective classroom practice, helps us to understand how curriculum materials relate to classroom practice, and shows why teaching is a creative art.’ – R. Keith Sawyer

What does it look like, is it organised, structured, does it follow rules and can it be applied across the cohort to express each student’s own creative identity? To find out, I spoke with a student who’s Review (2022, May Stage 2 Summative) had generated much attention. Peerada Liewchanpatana, currently a stage 3 student last year booked a room for her Review slot, decorated the room with her models, drawings and utilised a projector to create an immersive experience.

Crit Rules and Creativity Meeting 22.12.2023

12pm online via Teams

Crit Review as a performative act

0:1:2.190 –> 0:1:20.220
McCrory, Donald
So my aim was to try with the students to create some rules for the correct and and So what happened was is that they’ve come up with some really good rules and I will share those with you when they’re all completed and typed up for the holidays.

0:1:20.570 –> 0:1:29.180
McCrory, Donald
And what my concern was of doing it is if you make too many fixed rules, you might take away the creativity.

you took ownership of your review, What happened there? Can you tell me about?

0:1:47.20 –> 0:1:53.240
Peerada Liewchanpatana
Uh, so basically last year, so a traditional crit would be held in the in the studio with a screen.

Maybe a model on a table and some piece of paper on the wall. I think that’s why I traditional crit is and maybe a panel sitting on chairs and then people viewing it in a very passive kind of way.

But what I wanted to turn the crit is to become more of an exhibition space, more interactive, more engaging, because I felt that like doing this, you get the audience a bit more into your project.

You make them believe and more convinced by your ideas by taking them through.

what I did was I booked out one of the performance spaces in CSM which is like one of the studio big studio spaces that has lightings and projections and things like that.

essentially create that like in the middle was a space where all my works and my models were exhibited. So people set around that.

that’s where the place where people the audience were and they all sat on the floor, which I felt that created a sense of equality.

0:2:45.530 –> 0:3:3.770
Peerada Liewchanpatana
And also you, you they feel more like tactile with the space and also the things place in front of you almost like a round table kind of sitting almost like you’re eating together at the dinner but everybody’s on the same level and you don’t feel like there’s a barrier between one another you can like lean over and your friend is there you can go over and say hi.

I had two projections. One projection was where my slides of my works would be and they were like really huge. It was like so immersive and was like almost like in a cinema. And then there was another protection on the other side, which was the film that I made that was basically my project was in Shadwell last year. Well, this is kind of walking through where my design would be placed and then I had another film on the floor, which was like a water…. it looks like that there was a pool of water in the area that we just one more project was about because I’m not project was called the Nest Nature Sanctuary and school… it was a floating building on site well basin that uses a lot of natural materials and basically kind of creates a habitat for the nature in the area too.

0:3:53.460 –> 0:4:0.930
Peerada Liewchanpatana
that was what like led my concept like how do I take such an urban space like CSM and also transform people in. I had like a sound ping in the background of like birds and water and things like that, just like so people could be immersed in because one of the main things I felt from watching my friends present is like, people have very short attention span… like you want to keep them engaged and you want them to really feel like this presentations for them, not really just for you to get feedback. 

You know you want them to at the end of it felt like they made an impact or they were touched by something in your project whether they like it or not.  At least they felt something from it. That was what I feel like all art or architectures do that.  I think if you haven’t done that, then it’s not very successful in my opinion.

0:4:42.210 –> 0:4:49.640

Peerada Liewchanpatana
And I think in terms of the crit, if you’re tutors there too, you also want to honor them, like in a space that like they are…valuable people like, they get, so have so much like experience and knowledge… you want to get the best information out of them… want to feed them.. everything you have all the energy you have and then just like, give it to them so they, they’ll, they’ll give it to you back because I think tutors, they’re so smart… They can sense when the student cares about their work or not, and if the student doesn’t care about their work, then they’re like who?

0:5:25.30 –> 0:5:30.60
McCrory, Donald
That sounds it sounds very immersive that you’re trying to get people to be in it.
And so, because that doesn’t sound like an easy thing for you to do…you had to learn how to book a room, is that right?

0:5:45.730 –> 0:6:4.60
Peerada Liewchanpatana
So basically I managed to have I have how I actually saw it was I was invited to model for one of my friend who does fashion in CSM and then they managed to book their room for their kid and I said ohh wait I didn’t know you could do that and then they were like yeah you just need a friend from performance and then they’ll book it for you… it’s very chill booking system.

happen to know someone from performance and they book it for me and he was very lovely and he managed to like help me set up everything because you need to do an induction for that space… all the lighting, the projections, everything. two of my other friends helped me bring all because I had, like a lot of big models, I had them to also help me bring all that down and set it up… it took me like quite like maybe 2-2 hours to really like fully set everything up in the space… I had my friend also helping me press the like the sound.. I put up like some posters to lead people because not a lot of people from architecture has ever been to the performance space before because it’s quite out of the way for them… I probably took like maybe 30 minutes and then I think my tutor encouraged me to just leave it on for the rest of the day.

I just left it until like 6:00 PM and then people just kept coming in even like people from non like architectural courses too is and they asked all sorts of questions… interesting to get such a range of ideas.. 

people they didn’t, they just never thought that architecture could be a performative space.

how do we display our works and that creates like a journey for people to walk through whether cuz like architecture is like representative course that you never actually like as a student.

how do we best represent what our product will be without actually making the products also. we have to like be mindful of the way we place our works, not just like you can just slap it on the wall or slap it on the digital screen and then expect people to, like, have a sense of like connection with it.

0:12:15.50 –> 0:12:18.980
Peerada Liewchanpatana
I definitely didn’t draw out the layout of my works. kind of improvised on the spot which made me really stressed actually, but it was also kind of fun because like, I didn’t go into the space beforehand.

Marks for the Crit / Review

0:13:54.300 –> 0:13:58.730
McCrory, Donald
You don’t get marked for your actual crit or design review.  Do you think that maybe that should be something that we should be looking at?

0:14:1.840 –> 0:14:12.60
Peerada Liewchanpatana
Yeah, I think so too cause basically I in my high school, which is an art school too in Singapore and we had like crits very regularly… one of the criteria in the mark scheme and that was… how well you presented too and that you…. it created a lot of pressure for the students, but also it you have to build up that confidence to present your ideas, because I think like wherever you go in life, like soft skills like presentation is at like gonna be used constantly.

I think like nowadays, people tend to be quite soft, I think like they then they know that like the world might be against them or like they don’t want to come into uni because they don’t want to get negative feedback like people were just like shy away from it.  They think it’s a personal attack, that kind of stuff.

0:15:31.940 –> 0:15:38.160
Peerada Liewchanpatana
And in terms of like the criteria I think could be interesting in terms of like social or environmental aspects where?  advocate for like social justice or like anti racism in the course, being aware of how diverse our courses could be, quite interesting to know how like the social aspects of the site of the surroundings was taken to consider in terms of the design projects I think could be quite interesting

Stage 1 advice

0:23:57.540 –> 0:24:7.440
Peerada Liewchanpatana
So like they have to, I will encourage them to just keep like drawing and like showing that even like bad sketch models I think is quite fun to take note also… if you do material tests or like just like a piece of paper, or if you make a Zine or something like that, like get, get that to pass them around the review panel

Bibliography

1. Robinson, Ken (2006) Do schools kill creativity? https://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_robinson_do_schools_kill_creativity?language=en
2. Bruce Macfarlane & Lesley Gourlay (2009) The reflection game: enacting the penitent self, Teaching in Higher Education, 14:4, 455-459, DOI: 10.1080/13562510903050244 https://moodle.arts.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/1079889/mod_resource/content/1/Macfarlane  Gourlay 2009.pdf
3. The review at MIT Architecture: Values and Goals https://architecture.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2023-04/The%20review%20at%20MIT.pdf – About | Architecture (mit.edu)
4. Sawyer, R. K. (2004). Creative Teaching: Collaborative Discussion as Disciplined Improvisation. Educational Researcher, 33 (2), 12 – 20.

‘Play… is something fundamentally larger than the individual player or their mental state; it is a pattern of movement that surpasses both the players, and is something to which both players belong.’ (p32) Vilhauer, M. 2017. Gadamer’s Ethics of Play: Hermeneutics and the Other. Plymouth: Lexington.

How to get the group to interact with an object that transcends cultural, subject, race, gender and any other boundaries, enabling the group to experience others learning through the object? Reflecting my proposed object, any proposed interaction had to be universal, I thought of play. Often viewed as childish, it is an invaluable ubiquitous tool for interlinking groups, allowing them to make sense of the world relating to Hegel’s ideas on education means the ‘ability to see things from the point of view of the other‘. Maybe it could also be fun, let’s see?

Takss with Stage 1 cohort

Task 1 – individual response

‘Memories are motionless, and the more securely they are fixed in Space, the sounder they are’ Gaston Bachelard The Poetics of Space 1958

Task 2 – work in pairs

Task 3 – work as a group

Incentives?

want to see tutors first design work

Bibliography

1. Bachelard, G., Danielewski, M. Z. (Contributor), & Jolas, M. (Translator). (2014). The Poetics of Space. Paperback edition. Penguin.

“the ultimate, hidden truth of the world is that it is something that we make, and could just as easily make differently.”
― David Graeber

The criticisms growing louder in voice are not new, as a result universities have been developing strategies to address these issues accordingly. It was important to understand what changes had been implemented and how effective they have been to address the issues previously identified. Currently I work at UAL, UCL, Cambridge and the London School of Architecture, I began by asking each of the heads of the school / department:

Aside from UCL’s Action Group (proposals for future crit experiences) it was surprising to find that none of the institutions had any formal guidelines for The Crit. From further investigations to UCL’s research I was able to meet with Prof Brent Carnell to discuss their research to what they had discovered.

Prof Brent Carnell was able to share that UCL were developing a ‘code of conduct’ for design reviews (architects adhere to a professional code of conduct, ARB sets out the legal framework and RIBA sets out the standards of conduct and practice that they require of its members). These were in the development stage following their action group research findings, he could not go into specifics but agreed that the responses from students and tutors were ‘in-line’ with my own research. He did share that they had developed feedback guidelines which they had started to pin up around the school to encourage feedback before formally updating their Course Handbook. The intention is to combine these with new set of conduct codes following feedback from both students and staff.

This approach of establishing a collective code of practices, rules and boundaries is, I feel, crucial for reforming how design reviews are in future conducted. For example, Sherwood (2022, 20) suggests that to achieve a successful review, it is important to:

1. ensure ‘consent and respect’ among tutors, guest reviewers and students, 
2. draw up ground rules as standard, confirming that all participants take collective ownership of their responsibility to each,
3. ask also the student what they would like to gain from the review.

Critical Codes in Practice

It was important to communicate with other institutions who had both established and implemented measures, confirming if they had addressed the concerns raised about crits, making them inclusive and student led. I began speaking with Sheffield University were I have been a guest critic for final reviews in May 2023.

Sheffield confirmed that their ethos of using ‘project reviews’ are, crucially, not ‘crits’, which is a word not used. They aimed to be ‘inclusive and encouraging…student-led as much as possible’, Year 2 Leader. In order to achieve this the order of commentary after each review ‘should be students, guest(s), then tutor. In terms of seating, guests and tutors sit toward the back of each room’ placing emphasis on the students and their work.

The ‘ethnographic present’ interview attempt.

This interview was conducted with Andreas Lang, M Arch Course Leader, the interview took place after a few weeks of planning due to RIBA visits and fund applications, I was grateful for both his time and generosity ok knowledge exchange. I had wanted to meet with Andreas following a recommendation from Dr. Adriana Cobo Corey, Senior Lecturer in Ethical Practice, who drew my attention to a ‘deschooling the classroom’ programme run previously in March. Andreas and I meet online at the end of term, 11.12.2023 at 12.30pm. I explained I will attempt to record the interview utilsing The ‘ethnographic present’ (inspired form previous reading Jones, L., Holmes, R., Macrae, C., & Maclure, M. (2010). Documenting classroom life: how can I write about what I am seeing? Qualitative Research, 10(4), 479-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794110366814) confirming I will issue the following text (to him) prior to publishing for his approval. I am transcribing this over the Christmas holidays utilising notes from the Teams recording and my own scribbles (akin to a doctor’s handwriting) speed jotted from the time of the interview:

0:0:5.280 –> 0:1:29.410 McCrory, Donald – I’m researching into crits and the use…..surprising that despite being the sort of very, uh, necessary ritual, and most universities do not have any guidance on how to carry them out. (I explain I have been in contact with Bartlett, LSA, Cambridge, MIT. I confirm I will forward on my findings; I include the MIT research in my email to Andreas) …the idea is to try and collect that information and the way that we have a manifesto in the department is trying to present, I sort of some guidelines, .. confirming to him a lot of people(Kleanthis, Adriana, Fei) have pointed me towards M arch in terms of their approach.

0:1:56.680 –> 0:3:37.550 Andreas Lang – I mean, it’s a much smaller course obviously…we don’t need such big management structures (such as BA Architecture)…lot of the things are more kind of informal and organic, I would say, because of this….always been kind of a sense that it’s a traumatizing moment, and we have to be….one that needs to be rethought, along with other moments…unit system, we don’t have this idea of the kind of unit master or the studio system. (not so enshrined on the M arch as it is maybe in the BA, they don’t run units parallel)… you always complete one.. autonomous thing….and each unit has a slightly different learning format.

0:4:0.450 –> 0:4:12.290 Andreas Lang – For example, the construction unit which is currently run by material cultures, it’s very much about group work, hence on and that sets its own pedagogy….the way you learn is structured differently and that is also then the way you meet your tutors, the way you revise or scrutinize work is different. (I envied this approach, not simply for the consolidated chronological structure, also the opportunity to readdress learning methods after / before each unit)…what is an appropriate way for this unit to be assessed, reviewed?

0:4:50.980 –> 0:5:47.140Andreas Lang
the second year is what we call a major project, so it’s like the big thesis project that starts in the summer and goes then for about 16 months….there you write your own brief, but you’re in what we call tutor groups…..you have small groups of eight people, one tutor for half a day week….always understanding that this space is porous, that you also can move to other tutors for conversation, but also that each tutor gets to know your work throughout the course of the year….we’ve always encouraged tutors to be to put the work in to think about how crit looks

0:5:47.770 –> 0:6:4.980
Andreas Lang first unit Unit 1, (40 credits 14 weeks),studios where the shared overall brief, so everyone has the same brief, <Tutor> teaches that he would interpret it through a queer lens…. I would interpret it through the Forest School, for example, but there is a kind of always a kind of encouragement and open conversation to think how, how you structure a review and how the individual is heard as well as a group is understood 

…it’s completely always in students hands how that setting is designed, and there’s always an encouragement that that is part of the design task in a way you have to put work in.

it’s kind of nurtured from a very early stage onwards that it the way you present should embody your work and the ethos of how your work should look like, you know, ….. it should embody should be somehow performed as well in in that spirit…..the tutors are encouraged to support this, so it’s about creating that.

(crit / review) Ownership within the students of that moment and not as something that’s imposed on them. (that carries throughout the whole 2 years)….this idea that, OK, you’re you’re as much responsible for the situation as I am….. giving them (students) the kind of permission and to do so there is always.

0:7:59.200 –> 0:8:5.0
Andreas Lang (goes on to explain the struggle of conformity in crits possible from previous learning) Students are all often, you know, primarily concerned with their own work and how it looks on the wall…And they fall into this….Patterns of printing it, or quite conventional patterns they’ve learned either in previous schools or in in work, and to undo this is extra work and then also make space for work. That collective, it’s also extra work that takes all takes away from this….my project moment and getting that getting that registered with them as kind of necessary work to be done….Both for themselves, but also for the group is always.

…needs to be taught or meet needs to be made space for at least, and when the space gets tighter towards the end of the second year or towards submission, that sometimes they just want to present in the most normal way most conventional way and that’s fine. (I agree that this is what I have experienced in my BA and March teaching)….deliberate decision from them.

0:9:15.980 –> 0:9:52.650
Andreas Lang (discusses methods on March to circumnavigate this experience) we always have a symposium in the second year, which is…..with the situated learning that we encourage we there’s always a conversation around what is your community of practice? Who is in it with you?…creates a kind of an authentic way of learning…you do a project around Indigo dying, you should speak to it…..always an encouragement to go out and form a community of practice. (moving the conversation awy from your tutor to other stakeholders)an encouragement we have with students that they look beyond producing work purely for the institution, but also actually that becomes life in that sense so by. This is something I have been keen to explore with my teaching, reflecting my own practice.

0:10:21.920 –> 0:10:37.570
Andreas Lang By getting this kind of audiences involved, other audiences or other stakeholders, we also try to make space for where these audience can enter CSM, and that’s at the symposium that we used to run this year. might not run it, but again), where students take over the school on a Saturday. It collectively create a public event and share their work, and they’re takes off in the form of an exhibition or lecture or whatever, or quite mixed….a kind of strange festival….opening yourself up to a much broader audience, but also collectively producing that event with the kind of shared identity of a group of 30 odd people….that’s an important thing. (I found myself strongly agreeing, and both regretting not previously attending due to work conflicts)

At this point I redirect toward the ‘Deschooling programme, how that come about, apparently covid was a significant factor 0:11:27.760 –> 0:11:42.350
Andreas Lang We had to reduce the placement, so we suddenly had four weeks to play with and we introduced a project called Deschooling the classroom where for four or five weeks, we actively sought with them like, this is your course….How would you design it like each aspect of it?….we supported it with lectures, we had kind of talks on Bell Hooks, (our PG Cert regular!) et cetera, and students were tasked to in groups to design A component of the education. I opened up everything (budget) so you know everything …..they (students) came up with the kind of little publication called Deschooling the classroom, which gave a series of ideas and how we want to talk with each other, was part of it.

I think the ideas that came up with might not have been so revolutionary because it’s quite a big task to get to hand over, you know, design your own teaching. (at the time I was thinking how this had happened with my own attempts with the cohort, they needed some guidance)…what it did, it sensitized them quite a lot to how they want to be taught or how they want to learn together.resonated through the two years….middle of first year that resonated through that kind of independent project….what we’ve done since we’ve kind of this idea of designing a school and designing how you want to learn or at least making space for how you want to learn together…Become a kind of introduction project….the first exercise they do with it with us, and that again gives a chance of I’m designing a school but also performing it in an acting it and this is the values I wanted…..students would write manifestos…the crit is like often you would have manifesto on the door…These are the rules for today…Or they would introduce them…this is how we want to run this session today.

that goes from who should speak first. a rule that has introduced itself quite naturally over the years…student speak first, so the first person you hear is student, so it’s always encouraging the voice of student to be present and there’s a lot of conversation every year and every year’s slightly different.

Creating an opportunity to create an unique teaching approach to each year generated by the changing cohort
Uh, what were your experience? What are your needs? What do you want to try out?

0:14:20.480 –> 0:14:29.890
Andreas Lang
So it’s a kind of active culture of paying attention to how we talk to each other and that includes the crit.

0:14:34.200 –> 0:14:58.810
McCrory, Donald And that’s this is some fascinating information, from an outsider perspective, umm, I’ve sort of seen that and cause one of my, one area that I’m hesitant (became increasingly so through my ARP research) in is writing sort of a a guideline, a fixed guideline because I ultimately also want the crit or the review itself to be a creative act…don’t wanna be limiting certain parameters and that’s what’s been fascinating to see from the March (I confirm similar approach with work I’ve done with the Council bringing students to meet other teams explaining ‘Architects very rarely present to other architects’)
They present to you stakeholders as they like to call it local ones, the community and other sort of professionals.

0:15:32.30 –> 0:15:38.860 McCrory, Donald Here at this point I turn away from the professional setting to personal, curious to see what has influenced Andreas with his pedagogical approach? You mentioned the word trauma before this investigation of this sort of methodology. Is there any personal? (explaining the sharing with other peers and their experiences) Experience either studying or teaching. That’s led towards this…Or is this just been a natural progression (evolution)?

0:15:51.550 –> 0:15:52.280 Andreas Lang On my side. I would say…my own personal education. I went to a school that that were pedagogy was quite alive and where you didn’t have grades, for example, where you had…actively think what’s a good ways of learning or what is what. Ways of learning could be for different disciplines or subject matters, so I think that kind of was quite informative because it shifted the focus on learning and enjoying learning. I think that was an important experience.

0:16:48.950 –> 0:16:53.880
that’s what the student said to the external examiners this year. ‘I trust my work because I feel the staff trusts’, firstly important is my well-being and then the subject matter, because I have trust that my tutors have my well-being in mind, therefore I have more trust in my work in something it was phrased more elegantly and differently, but the spirit was the same and I think that’s in a way not leading purely with the subject matter continuously, but dealing with, OK, where in nearly kind of the subjectivity of the student, where are you, how are you, what’s going on, what is your concern? What do you want out of it? Opens up another conversation and another kind of journey with them, so it for me personally that that was experience in my high school education, but also I would say through public works, my own practice learning has always been quite an important. Component of how we work….exploring different forms of learning formal, informal in different settings….always been, yeah, part of the practice…that came into the course, I guess through me. (Explains that the world Jeremey Till, former Head of Central Saint Martins, created, enabled and encouraged)
I would say more than in other schools.

Being the end of term, I was conscious of Andreas’ time. I move the conversation to a final intersection 0:19:46.0 –> 0:19:55.730 McCrory, Donald
I tie my teaching with my learning and vice versa. For me, it’s a necessary symbiotic relationship. I need the two to influence each other and push back against each other and either being either too idealized or too conformist with practice, particularly bad practice, which can affect us all.

(Explaining how I will share this (research) with the whole department is and I’ve been allowing our students to do reviews on site directly on the sites that we’ve been having them but the paperwork is frustrating as is relationships (or not) with other departments or other courses)

Are you, is there any sort of constraints at the moment that you’re frustrated by?

0:21:4.190 –> 0:21:11.280
Andreas Lang Umm, I think the biggest is time as a resource I would say so. It’s great to have reviews on site, which means everyone has to go there. It takes more time. You have guests more like all. The resources. Time. How much you can give to that? 

But no, I don’t know what’s the constraints are.  For me, the biggest constraint is kind of grading, assessing. I would love to have just a pass fail grade. (At this moment I wished I had met with Andreas before the Design Charrette to query if the students would be happy to proceed on this basis?)

0:21:42.180 –> 0:21:46.790
Andreas Lang
Umm, because that’s always hangs (assessment) in the room. it’s always the kind of institutional power structure. It’s always present somehow, and that’s if that’s a bit softened by pass fail. That would be really good, because sometimes students see the great and devalues their learning. They’re learning. They’ve done and the kind of experimentation that has gone into it.

I confirm to Andreas that he is not the first person to say that to me, tutors confirming a lot of the questions they get now from students is ‘how do I get a first’ attain something? Grades, not to do with the learning, which, I say I suspect but don’t know if that’s a consequence of the higher fees and a more capitalist system.

0:22:52.110 –> 0:23:1.470
McCrory, Donald If we could end it on one thing, how would you like it to evolve?
What would be your ultimate goal from a student? (I would like to see them take ultimate ownership)

0:24:2.360 –> 0:24:4.870
Andreas Lang
I don’t know if it’s to do with the crit so much. I would like that students, umm like I mean it feels like every year we have to teach it again and so there is a culture that you know people understand.
OK, let’s talk about the crit, and let’s do it differently so that they really see they really take experiment with it more extremely.
Maybe it sometimes becomes still then quite conventional, because students decide, like actually I just want to do it like this, but that would be that would be nice.
To ingest more experimentation into it or keep it, keep the experiment till nature of it present.I think is important to turn to is it’s so much about like this movement. There’s so much about where are you? How do you feel?  How do you make it safe? How do you make it empowering the data and that’s great.

0:25:10.570 –> 0:25:11.920
Andreas Lang
And I think it’s really important.

0:25:12.250 –> 0:25:15.390
Andreas Lang
And then who is the community to your work with? You’ll find you create this kind of bubble of shared purpose, but really now it’s so contested the world and it’s so much in conflict. How do we meet even with the crit? How do we meet the kind of violence that is out there? Yeah, I don’t know how where that goes or how that might look like in the crit format.

0:25:58.590 –> 0:26:15.470
Andreas Lang
It’s the personal to the shared, to the very public, and I don’t know if I don’t think I have seen crits, where the very public where maybe nearly where it’s like a kind of debate where you have really charged opinions either side.

0:26:18.760 –> 0:26:20.430
Andreas Lang
Everyone’s still quite fragile. Uh, and I wonder how we get that confidence to really have have that kind of open debate where you have really not polarizing, but you have kind of really opposite views and the students can feel confident enough to hold this.

0:26:38.910 –> 0:26:43.550
Andreas Lang
Maybe it’s too much to ask for in an educational setting, but you know what I mean.

I feel like I know what he means.

0:31:13.650 –> 0:31:33.160
Andreas Lang
Like what you’re doing to raise the conversation more broadly, UM amongst colleagues in the discipline itself, because I think that we’re probably change is needed and I guess that’s what we are quite conscious of, that we are trying an alternative route to say other universities. So it’s not that we are doing it right or the best, but maybe conversation around it with other educators would be quite nice.

0:31:57.560 –> 0:32:3.370
Andreas Lang
So yeah, so I think the that we speak out of our echo chamber, I think that’s important.

 I tell him ‘I agree. I think that’s a good sentiment to end it on.’

Bibliography

1. Graeber, D. (2004). Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology. University of Chicago Press.
2. Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice Legal Architects Code: Standards of Conduct and Practice https://arb.org.uk/architect-information/architects-code-standards-of-conduct-and-practice/ RIBA Code of Professional Conduct https://www.architecture.com/knowledge-and-resources/resources-landing-page/code-of-professional-conduct
3. Sherwood, Calum. 2022. “Crits and Inclusive Learning at UAL.” London. https://www.arts-su.com/asset/News/6013/Crits-and-Inclusive-Learning-at-UAL-1.pdf.
4. https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/2023/architecture-ba#coursedescription

Rationale, participating in design reviews are often considered an important part of ‘becoming an architect’ (Sara and Parnell 2011; Doidge, Sara, and Parnell 2000; Webster 2006b). Testing ideas, providing and getting feedback, design reviews can be seen as a ‘ritual’ in which students are supposed to gain ‘critical design thinking’ from someone who ‘acts’ or ‘thinks’ like an architect, in this case, design tutors or guest jury, seeming like an ‘act of initiation’ or a ‘rite of passage’, as

Since the crit is the principal place in which critical design thinking is made visible and explicitly valued, it has the potential to both facilitate learning a fundamental architectural skill and act as a liminal stage in the passage to becoming an architect. Sara and Parnell (2011, 102) 

Personal Reflection

How do my fellow peers, Studio tutors who have autonomy of their crit delivery and what of their students, how do they feel about this rite? First I reflect on my own experiences, ‘self reflection is central. In traditional forms of research – empirical research – researchers do research on other people. In action research, researchers do research on themselves’ McNiff, J. (2010). When I begin with emailing my peers, I share my experience:

Tutors Peer Reflection

I am overwhelmed by the response from the other tutors, from social situations it is almost a cliché for architects to tell of their ‘horror’ experiences, each trying to outdo one another, it was refreshing to read about it in the context upon effects upon the person and how it has affected or evolved their pedagogical practice. I asked the following:

1.What are your memories / experiences as a student of the ‘crit’ from your Architecture education, how inclusive were they?

Crits have always been some of the most challenging moments in the academic year. As a student, I felt I had to develop my work the most I could within the given time beforehand. This encouraged a culture of many all-nighters. There was the social challenge of public speaking. During my first year, at times, I had to present to the whole year of about 100 students. There was the unforeseeable reaction the critics might have to your presentation. This could come as praise and a feeling of reward, plane good criticism, or public shaming. I definitely felt that some students were more targeted than others by critics. There was not an awareness and acceptance of mental health considerations. Some students were also targeted based on their appearance, gender, or level of confidence.

I remember being always very nervous ahead of the crits, but once I started presenting my project the nervousness would suddenly transform into excitement and a burning passion.Despite being a scary event for us students, where we were asked to confront our fear of public speaking and exposure to international practitioners, the ‘crit’  was always quite a celebratory moment. The crit would take place in the theatre and the entire student cohort would attend the entire crit session. Students were asked to be active participant in the discussion, sharing their feedback on each project. The tutors would encourage students to share their opinion, before or after the guest’s input and feedback. The inclusive way of conducting crit was a core aspect of the university’s ethical stand and pedagogical agenda where students’ participation played a fundamental role.

my university time in Italy there was no such thing as the Crit, I have only experienced what was very new for me during my post grad MSc at GSAPP at Columbia University. I had already a MArch and work experience at the time, so perhaps it was a different experience to me than It might be for young students, but I remember it a as overall positive experience. I must say there wasn’t much students’ involvements in the discussions but the guests crits but internal from the school and invited were mostly (not always) respectful but most importantly relevant and useful to the project and the student.

Crits were not inclusive. They were led by lecturers, usually white men, with authority. The atmosphere was intimidating many times. I remember feeling scrutinised more than having positive or constructive feedback.

A mixture of excitement and trepidation, as an engaged student I was usually relatively confident that feedback wouldn’t be completely negative but I would always nominate to go early in the day when I knew critics attention and attitudes would likely be at their best. They were often held in a large open format, creating a spectacle which anybody could engage in. At times this meant witnessing some overly harsh responses to student work with critics occasionally not allowing students to respond to comments. This created a negative and humiliating atmosphere which in very rare moments caused some students to become visibly emotional. It should also be mentioned that I had friends who refused to take part in any crit as a result of experiences they had had at other schools.

Crits never felt inclusive in my student experience (2009-2015). At the Estonian Academy of Arts where I did my BA, it was clear that students are not to speak nor express their opinions about others’ projects during the crits. I remember being very dis-intersted in others’ projects and not finding it important to engage with other people presenting their projects (although I did care about my colleagues as friends and also knew their projects, but the crit didn’t feel like a time to engage with their work). At my BA course, crits were also highly patronising events where there was a strict hierarchy, which included panel members joking between themselves if a presenting student said something ‘wrong’ or ‘naive’. It didn’t feel like a respectful environment at all and in hindsight, it makes me think that this is why by the end of the 3^rd year, we lost our respect towards the crit too (started turning up late, were not careful in prepping etc). At my MSc course at Delft, the crits felt respectful and were very interesting to listen to and engage with, however, they still didn’t feel like a time that I am expected to offer my opinions.

My first crit in architecture was carried out in groups. I have a positive memory of it. I was very vocal and was bringing some of the confidence that I had gained in the previous year completing my Art Foundation. Presentations in Art Foundation had no associated risk. We weren’t marked based on how we presented our work. Instead, there were about holding conversations around people’s work.  My second crit in architecture was done individually. I was instantly nervous even though I was relatively confident following tutorials that the project was positively perceived by tutors. We were marked afterwards, and there would be this unpleasant waiting around at the end of the day for the marks to be pinned up. I’m not sure what exactly I can pin it down to, but I immediately became someone that lost confidence in public speaking generally. It became a high-risk affair regardless of whether I would be assessed or not. In my mind, public speaking means I will be judged.

2. Have these memories / experiences affected how you now conduct your ‘crits’ and any procedures you implement to make them inclusive to all students?

Yes. These experiences have made me not want to repeat them. Within my studios, I try to make crits become more celebratory and encourage students to be proud of what they have achieved. Opening up the floor to their peers for comments also breaks the hierarchy and makes everyone more relaxed. 

These memories have certainly impacted the way I conduct ‘crits’/reviews…sitting all together in a circle, rather than in a ‘frontal’ arrangement of seats contributes to the creation of an inclusive and generous atmosphere when discussing the presenter’s project, where everyone is invited to have a say…inviting the guests and tutors to take a secondary sitting position, whilst allowing the students to sit in the front rows helps shifting the connotation of the event as a more inclusive one…asking the students to initiate the feedback session with a couple of comments makes the students feel engaged an important participant in the discussion.

My personal experience with the crits is informing the way I try to conduct my crits and the way I ask my invited guests to act during crits. Most importantly I tried to ensure that any comments made during crits are useful to the progress of the student project. Comments can be positive or negative, and at times might be tough, but they must be to the benefit of the student learning experience. And also encouraging student sto actively participate during crits can be an important way to make the experience more inclusive and less intimidating. The truth is, however, that there is barely ever enough time to have a meaningful discussion on the student project if there are, say, two or three crits in the session and the students often feel they only have time for a very quick comment rather than engaging really in the discussion.

Yes! Definitively do not want to replicate these. I think and approach them as a positive experience for students to be able to share their developments, their work but also, their questions and what they do not know or feel confused about. I aim to break the hierarchy usually asking for student feedback first, before me or any of the guests speaking. And sitting not in the front row – when possible.  

Yes, I always attempt to establish a comfortable atmosphere, use a conversational tone and only invite critics who I know will take a positive position. I will often have a chat with guests beforehand to set the tone for responses and cover any particular subjects or approaches which may need to be avoided. I have also taken to inviting students from other years to be guest critics in order to give a relatability to the feedback.

100%, although not always meaningfully or successfully. We are always asking students to comment or ask questions first, we are also trying to encourage them already during normal tutorials to offer their opinions on their peers’ work, so that the crit isn’t the first time for them to express themselves. We are trying to prepare them for crits more profoundly and talk explicitly about why these events might be useful, and joyful, and what sort of preparation should go into it. But there are also patterns that I bring into organising crits that I myself was subjected to (anxiety, which to an extent is maybe OK; hierarchy (I still take the role of the host, as well as sit in the first row) etc.). I don’t think I have had a very meaningful chat with applicable conclusions nor learning session about the importance, impact, potential of the crit during my time as a teacher (evem though with colleagues we kind of do talk about it often).

It has affected how I conduct crits. I let students know that it should be conversational. I sometimes also allow students to influence how the crit runs, so for example, at the internal studio review this year, students expressed a strong preference for everyone including tutors to stand, which we did. That soon changed as soon as they got tired of standing. The point is that we allowed them to say what they were comfortable with to help take the edge of the nervousness.

3. Do you have any advice or guidance you would pass on to students who are about to experience their first ‘crit’?

Think of the ‘crit’ as a place where you are all coming together to discuss ‘a’ design. Avoid understanding the ‘crit’ as the space where ‘your’ design is being critiqued. This is not a ‘jury’, it is rather an event that supports everyone’s understanding and growth in the design practice as a spatial practitioner. 

See the ‘review’ as an opportunity to ask questions and ask for guidance to support with the aspects of the project in which you feel ‘stuck’.

Prepare the oral speech ahead of the review so as to be confident and clear about the narrative through which you want to present your project.

Ask friends to support you in the display and set-up of your presentation, ask them to take notes for you and record the key points of the discussion. 

Bring both digital and analogue materials, models and tests to give a holistic understanding of your project.  

Bring your passionate self at the review and honour your work whilst being open to the comments arising.

Sleep the night before the ‘crit’ so as to arrive fresh and energised at the review.

Dedicate some time to breathe and focus on your objective. Use breathing techniques, pranayama, and/or ‘meditative practices’ the morning before the review, this will help you nurture a calming inner environment and a positive attitude towards the review. 

After the review, ensure to celebrate the review, your work and the discussion derived from it with your friends. This is key to acknowledge the big step you have achieved.

A couple of days after the review reflect upon the feedback received and the points raised during the discussion. Take notes and plan how to best move forward implementing those comments into your work. 

Sleep well the night before. Eat well in the morning of the crit. Don’t leave printing for the same day – something always goes wrong with the printer! Don’t let stage fright take the best of you – you may discover public speaking is not that bad in a supportive environment! The crit is your moment to get the most out of your tutors and peers – use it for your benefit. 

My advice is: any comment, any feedback should only be to the benefit of the project, listen carefully but learn to ‘critically’ decide what’s best for your project. You don’t have to take on board every single suggestion you receive during a crit. If something is absolutely critical you will (hopefully) understand.

To enjoy it as much as possible. To sit in the place of their classmates, and think what kind of feedback would they like to receive. To think about feedback that is constructive and not destructive, and to think of the ‘crit’ not as an experience where students hear from the tutors, but where students share their work and through it establish a conversation with their tutors and fellow students. 

Remember that it is an opportunity to share your work with your peers and receive constructive feedback. The presentation is a celebration of the efforts you have made and is a moment for you to reflect upon your portfolio as a whole, it is an achievement which will be recognised by your tutor and your peers. Treat your work and that of others with respect, it represents a significant undertaking, and an expression of one’s personality so listen respectfully to presentations and engage in conversation, as this will build better projects, critical voices and personal confidence.

The crit is about you and your work, and should never be about the critics. If the critics’ comments remain unclear, you have every right to ask for clarification, or just recap what was said and how you understand it to confirm this is what was meant. It is you who should be walking away from a crit with new useful insights on your project. Be open to all sorts of comments and ideas, don’t feel like you need to defend everything you’ve done – try to engage in the crit as a conversation, and engage with an open mind. Most people, critics are very interested in your work and how to help it along and make it even better – help them do it by preparing well, talking calmly and putting effort into editing and structuring your presentation.

Don’t overthink it and see it as an opportunity to have a conversation about your ideas. See it as an opportunity to get other perspectives to yours that can help develop your own thinking. And if you have a preference for how the space can be organised to make the experience comfortable, share it with your tutor and peers. They might also be thinking the same.

Students – Pre first Crit / Review

This year due to personal circumstances I am teaching in Stage 1, this has given me the opportunity to meet and speak with students to understand what is their perception and feelings about the crit before they encounter process.

Students frequently approach design reviews after enduring extended periods of intense work, including days or even weeks of long working sessions or ‘all-nighters.’ This heightened workload can contribute to a range of emotional and psychological states among students, including feelings of intimidation, fear, defensiveness, anxiety, fatigue, and stress. Recent pedagogical studies, such as those conducted by Dannels and Martin (2008), Marie and Grindle (2014), and Flynn et al. (2019), have documented these prevalent emotional and mental states experienced by students during design review sessions.

Thoughts and impressions from the cohort prior to their first Review:

The feedback from the students demonstrated that the stigma surrounding the crit remains as seen by the comments and links to satirical videos of trial like reviews. There is a continued perpetuation of the myths / stress surrounding crits which are ultimately damaging to students mental health. It seems that we must demystify the crit, perhaps by implementing dry runs are allowing students to witness crits in action.

Students – Post first Crit / Review

Following the first reviews we (media tutor and I) sat with the students for a post review conversation with the studio, at their request. They were interested in hearing our thoughts. We sat informally (tea, coffee, snacks etc.) and invited questions and comments about the day. Many of the students commented that the perception they held prior to the reviews did not materialise. They mentioned how the reviews were not as ‘scary’ of ‘judgmental’ as they imagined, the prior ‘pins ups’ were helpful to managing expectations. We asked how we felt it could be changed e.g. students giving their opinions first or ”tutors not speaking until the end? The students responded by requesting ”more time for tutor feedback’, the majority of their questions related to types and forms of feedback they receive, wanting to know ‘how it is formulated’ and what is ‘essential’. As a result I will add this element to the design charrette workshop.

Students – How do other students feel about the crit process through the rest of UAL?

‘Crit is for critique not criticism, feedback should be productive and informative’ ‘lack of consistency of how crits are run across UAL.. why are students still not told why we are doing them and how are we doing them?’ ‘how do we critique work how do we critique work about someone’s identity without attacking their identity about without attacking who they are ….this is why a lot of students are avoiding crits’.- Minna Ellis (CSM Officer, 2022-24)

‘rebranding of the crit, at goldsmiths is called a ‘conviena’, three independent crit collectives have been created after reaction of bad crits’ ‘ I think that has changed the way that teaching takes place all of a sudden there are Stakes involved right money Financial risks you walk in the door and you owe people money already so like you’ve got to come into these crits and kind of get something out of them it creates this transactional model of Education where like you want something’ – Sophia Nasif (LCC Officer, 2022-24)

whether a crit can ever be a safe space and also whether it should be because I think sometimes like critique is not always a pleasant experience I think sometimes growth is painful and like you’re hearing information that you might not agree with but that is ultimately even if you reject the critique that comes your way and your like you discard it important that you figure out how you feel by receiving information that you disagree with….maximum equality if you have maximum Freedom with no equality that’s the jungle if you have maximum equality with no Freedom that’s prison what you need is like both at the same time’ – Zarina Muhammad (The White Pube)

“If you have ever encountered art school, you have heard of crits. ‘Crits,’ the shortened version of critiques, are famed for being difficult, intimidating, gruelling, and “character-building” by some. And yet crits are universally recognised as an integral part of becoming a successful artist.”

What a ‘good crit’ should look like, how crits should be conducted, and how to make them more inclusive for students from minority or marginalised backgrounds. Indeed, Blair writes, “with the exception of architecture, there has, within design disciplines, been minimal research into the role and function of the crit in student learning.” Crits therefore have thrived in art schools through a combination of ‘always having been done’ and as a word-of-mouth inheritance of them as a teaching method, without a great deal of academic scrutiny as to their role.

‘The design sector has drifted apart from the limited skills taught by the design schools. Having to deal with professionals that come from clearly outdated school benches, the industry started to take the matter into action, to make available the designer that is needed for today’s market’

This lack of research  has meant that assessment in architecture and creative arts schools has traditionally adopted a ‘one size fits all’ approach by using the ‘crit’, where students pin up their work, make a presentation and receive verbal feedback in front of peers and academic staff. In addition to increasing stress and inhibiting learning, which may impact more depending on gender and ethnicity, the adversarial structure of the ‘crit’ reinforces power imbalances and thereby ultimately contributes to the reproduction of dominant cultural paradigms.

Bibliography

1. Sara, Rachel, and Rosie Parnell. 2011. “Fear and Learning in the Architectural Crit.” Field Journal 5 (1): 101–25. http://www.field-journal.org/uploads/file/2013 Volume 5/Field 5(1) Sara & Parnell.pdf.
2. McNiff, J. (2010). Action Research for Professional Development. London: Sage Publications. https://www.jeanmcniff.com/userfiles/file/Publications/AR%20Booklet.doc
3. Dannels, Deanna P., and Kelly Norris Martin. 2008. “Critiquing Critiques: A Genre Analysis of Feedback across Novice to Expert Design Studios.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 22 (2): 135–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651907311923.
4. Marie, Jenny, and Nick Grindle. 2014. “How Design Reviews Work in Architecture and Fine Art: A Comparative Study.” Charrette 1 (1): 36–48.
5. Flynn, Patrick, Miriam Dunn, Maureen O’Connor, and Mark Price. 2019. “Rethinking the Crit: A New Pedagogy in Architectural Education.” In ACSA/EAAE Teachers Conference Proceeding, 25–28. https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.teach.2019.5.
6. Blair, Bernadette (2006) Perception, Interpretation, Impact – An examination of the learning value of formative feedback to students through the design studio critique
7. Flynn, P., O’Connor, M., Price, M., & Dunn, M. (2022). Rethinking the Crit: New Pedagogies in Design Education. Routledge.

‘I tell my students, when you get these jobs that you have been so brilliantly trained for, just remember that your real job is, if you are free, you need to free somebody else. If you have some power then you need to empower somebody else.’ (Morrison, 2003)

The Crit, why does it matter to me? Why does it matter to the world? What is the role and definition of an architect & educator, what is their duty of care. I see Architects as activists, agents for change ‘always changing, always evolving in dialogue with a world beyond itself’ Bell Hooks. As an educator I feel it is imperative to instill such values while questioning my own practice, challenging our understanding of the profession in social, political and ethical terms. 

Contextualising spatial practice within the current historical moment becomes an imperative, as my students and my own journey through architecture will be marked by shifting times where the profession must engage with global socio-economic and ecological imbalances e.e attainment gap in architecture studies https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/young-gifted-and-blocked-the-ajs-latest-race-and-diversity-survey

As future architects I believe we must be aware, take responsibility and learn to articulate and visualise our contribution to society and the environment, responding to these multiple challenges through critical innovation and sensibility.  A consistent teaching method for evaluation has been the Crit. Short for critique, it is a controversial (for some) method of practice, widely debated amongst academics, practitioners and students, being the subject of criticism in recent decades.

History of the Crit

Crits, now more commonly known as Design Reviews (UAL 2023, The Bartlett UCL 2023, London School of Architecture 2023) are deeply rooted in the education of architecture, arts and other creative disciplines (Anthony 1991; Webster 2005, 2006a; Marie and Grindle 2014; Newall 2018; Brandy 2018; Smith 2021). The term ‘crit’ has historical weight, master-apprenticeship relations can lead to power imbalances. 

In the early nineteenth century, the concept of the ‘jury’ or ‘critique’ system in education emerged, notably at the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris, educators or juries assessed students’ work privately, without input from apprentices (Anthony 1991, 19). This closed-door evaluation evolved over time, transitioning into an open format in the mid-twentieth century, allowing students to actively participate in reviews (Doidge, Sara, and Parnell 2000, 7). The tradition of crits and design reviews has persisted in architectural education, adapting to contextual, technological, and economic factors, such as the imperative to reduce costs for students facing high tuition fees. The landscape of design reviews underwent further transformation during the COVID-19 pandemic, necessitating the shift to online education for all formal teaching interactions, including tutorials, reviews, and juries (Grover and Wright 2022).

The design review stands out as a quintessential pedagogical approach in the education of architecture, design disciplines, and the arts. In these sessions, students frequently exhibit their drawings on walls and position their models adjacent to these drawings (Doidge, Sara, and Parnell 2000, 6–7), a process now extended to digital platforms using TV screens. Models and drawings, presented in various formats (printed or digital), serve as students’ responses to project briefs. Typically, this presentation unfolds before a panel comprising design tutors, guest ‘critics’—often other tutors or practitioners—and fellow students. In the traditional setup, tutors and guest critics sit facing the student under review, their backs to the peer audience (Smith 2011, 61). Students usually have a brief opportunity to introduce their projects, followed by verbal feedback from tutors and guest reviewers. While there may be an invitation for other students to provide comments on the presented work, this is not consistently practiced (we explore the limitations of this traditional approach below). Feedback thus emerges as a pivotal element within the design review process.

Design reviews take place at the end (final crits) or mid-point of a studio project (interim crits), however can come at any point where feedback is needed.

Design Review Criticism 

Criticism has increased over the years with emerging anecdotical reflections from previous student experiences:

At one crit during my fourth year at the [a UK institution], the student collapsed whilst his project was being energetically ridiculed by a visiting critic. The critic did not notice this event until a dreadful silence caused him to turn round some moments later. At [another UK university], girl students had sometimes burst into tears and locked themselves in the laboratories under similar circumstances… At Beaux-Arts, some students had committed suicide. My own route, as you have gathered, was to go mad.

Martin Pawley, British architect, critic and scholar, on ‘My lovely student life’ (cited in Anthony 1991, 1) 

As a result articles have been written to try to help students overcome the perceived and real challenges of design reviews, often talking about ‘survival’ tips e.g. https://www.archisoup.com/how-to-survive-an-architecture-crit How do former and current students feel about this pedagogical tool?

Design Review Value

Despite negative connotations, many students are aware of the reviews’ potential as a learning experience. Focus groups consisting of undergraduate architecture students from Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU) in England (Smith 2011, 48–49), participants mentioned some of the positive attributes of reviews, as some students said:

It [the crit] gives me the opportunity to say, ‘Why?’ and ‘How does that work?

I think that the way that we are reviewed now is good because it gives you a chance to defend your ideas.

Similarly, survey research conducted at different schools of architecture in London, Scotland and continental Europe reported that participants expressed the value of reviews, events where they can gain helpful and constructive feedback on their work and improve their presentation skills (Sara and Parnell 2011, 119–120). This research suggests that design reviews and constructive feedback in a supportive environment should have a positive impact on learning. Reviews provide an opportunity for students to 

1. develop critical and argumentative thinking,
2. see and learn from other students’ work, 
3. hear comments from guest reviewers, and in some cases, from students from other modules or studios, 
4. build potential networks across students, tutors and guest reviewers, and 
5. establish dialogue between students, tutors and guest reviewers, as a way to co-develop new understandings of ideas and co-produce knowledge.

Furthermore practitioners still view design reviews or crits as a fair reflection of the professional experience of an architect, presenting ideas to clients, stakeholders and member of the general public to demonstrate or defend their ideas.

If the practice of crits / design review both have value both for education and the profession, I must understand what are the specific issues surrounding the criticism and what can be implemented, detailing my own experiences, my peers and the current cohort.

Bibliography

1. Morrison, T. (2003) interview in O, The Oprah Magazine. Available at: https://www.oprah.com/omagazine/tonimorrison-talks-love/all (Accessed: 9 September 2019)
2. Hooks, Bell. (1994). Teaching To Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. Routledge.
3. Anthony, Kathryn H. 1991. Design Juries on Trial: The Renaissance of the Design Studio. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
4. Webster, Helena. 2005. “The Architectural Review: A Study of Ritual, Acculturation and Reproduction in Architectural Education.” Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 4 (3): 265–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022205056169.———. 2006a. “A Foucauldian Look at the Design Jury.” Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education 5 (1): 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1386/adch.5.1.5_1.———. 2006b. “Power, Freedom and Resistance: Excavating the Design Jury.” International Journal of Art and Design Education 25 (3): 286–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2006.00495.x.
5. Marie, Jenny, and Nick Grindle. 2014. “How Design Reviews Work in Architecture and Fine Art: A Comparative Study.” Charrette 1 (1): 36–48.
6. Newall, Michael. 2018. “Crits, Consensus, and Criticality.” In The Routledge Companion to Criticality in Art, Architecture, and Design, edited by Chris; Brisbin and Myra Thiessen, 14–31. London. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315623412-3.
7. Brandy, Ross. 2018. “To Fix Architecture, Fix the Design Crit.” Common Edge, May 29, 2018. https://commonedge.org/to-fix-architecture-fix-the-design-crit/?utm_medium=website&utm_source=archdaily.com.
8. Smith, Charlie. 2011. “Understanding Students’ Views of the Crit Assessment.” Journal for Education in the Built Environment 6 (1): 44–67. https://doi.org/10.11120/jebe.2011.06010044.———. (ed) 2021. Progressive Studio Pedagogy: Examples from Architecture and Allied Design Fields. London: Routledge.
9. Doidge, Charles, Rachel Sara, and Rosie Parnell. 2000. The Crit. An Architecture Student’s Handbook. Oxford: Architectural Press.
10. Grover, Robert, and Alexander Wright. 2022. “Shutting the Studio: The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Architectural Education in the United Kingdom.” International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09765-y.

“The goal of research is to inform action, but action is impossible without the conscience of the researcher.”

– Jane Jacobs 1

”Ethical research means culturally safe research.” (Caroline Lenette)

How can I operate within the branch of philosophy, do no harm, retrospective ethics looking at past or prospective future rules and ethical frameworks ( Research Ethics @ UAL https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/sites/explore/SitePage/97782/research-ethics – legal aspect, rules and principles, Educational Ethics @ UAL https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/sites/explore/SitePage/81716/educational-ethics-policy-and-guidance-for-staff )Ethics of care – holistic aspect of work, situation and context polyvocal narratives, who are we bring in to share the lived in experience. In response to the BERA’s guidelines (Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research, fourth edition (2018) https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018-online#transparency) I approached in a ‘full and open transparent manner’ to gain consent from managers, supervising all possible participants.

Ethical Enquiry Form 2023_Donald McCrory_final SIGNED

Bibliography

1. Jacobs, J. (1994). Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerce and Politics. Paperback edition. Random House.
2. Lenette, C. (2022). Participatory Action Research: Ethics and Decolonization (Research to the Point). Hardcover edition.  OUP USA.
3. British Educational Research Association (2018) Ethical guidelines for educational research. 4th edn. Available at: https://www.bera.ac.uk/researchers-resources/publications/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018 (Accessed: 17 May 2022)

What is a “practitioner-researcher”?

‘[…] someone who holds down a job in a particular area and at the same time carries out […] inquiry which is of relevance to the job.’ (Robson, 1993, p.446) 1

The ‘Action Research Project’ (ARP) aims for us to undertake a small-scale social/climate/racial justice oriented action research project, which addresses an issue we have identified in our Teaching and Learning practice. It is is both a philosophy and a methodological approach, a form of simultaneous action and enquiry, which enables experimentation with creative and innovative methods. I am new to research, as such I will utilise this blog to continuously document my learning and work for this unit, a ‘warts and all’ open dialogue.

Unit Preparation

Review of Text – Action research for professional development Concise advice for new action researchers by Jean McNiff 

Action research is becoming increasingly known as an approach that encourages practitioners to be in control of their own lives and contexts…a practical way of looking at your own work to check that it is as you would like it to be…is done by you, the practitioner, it is often referred to as practitioner based research;….you thinking about and reflecting on your work, it can also be called a form of self-reflective practice. The idea of self reflection is central. the basic action principle underpinning action research. It involves identifying a problematic issue, imagining a possible solution, trying it out, evaluating it (did it work?), and changing practice in the light of the evaluation.

Synergies between Action Research and Systems Thinking – Encountering Jean McNiff’s perspective on action research as a means to influence social change was not only enlightening but also resonates profoundly with the ethos of cultivating a collective commitment to bettering our world. McNiff’s assertion that if individuals collectively engage in small acts of kindness, the world could instantly become a happier and more productive place echoes the transformative power of fostering a sense of shared responsibility.

The notion of heightening our awareness of our impact through our individual practices aligns seamlessly with the principles inherent in Systems Thinking and Systemic Design, areas central to my teaching. The strength lies in the idea that while we strive to enhance our own lives, the broader objective is to positively impact others, ensuring that our practices are fundamentally rooted in the well-being of the social collective.

In disciplines like sustainability, where the presentation of negative information often induces feelings of powerlessness and inertia, the emphasis on action becomes paramount. Both in action research and sustainability, the crucial focus is on understanding the role each of us can play as individuals in catalysing meaningful change. By shifting our focus towards actionable steps, we empower ourselves and others to break free from the paralysis induced by overwhelming challenges, fostering a proactive and collective pursuit of positive transformation.

Action research begins with values. As a self reflective practitioner you need to be aware of what drives your life and work, so you can be clear about what you are doing and why you are doing it. You might need to spend time clarifying for yourself the kinds of values and commitments you hold. This would be a firm starting point for your action enquiry. 

What issue am I interested in researching? Why do I want to research this issue? What kind of evidence can I gather to show why I am interested in this issue? What can I do? What will I do? What kind of evidence can I gather to show that I am having an influence? How can I explain that influence? How can I ensure that any judgements I might make are reasonably fair and accurate? How will I change my practice in the light of my evaluation? 

The Action in Action Research – The concept that resonated most profoundly is the idea that knowledge isn’t merely acquired for its own sake but serves as a catalyst for action and, ultimately, change. The iterative and open-ended structure of Action Research, illustrated in the Action Research Cycle diagram below, aligns with certain tenets of Systems Thinking. Here, outcomes are not viewed as static solutions but rather as a sequence of interventions that collectively contribute to broader and more impactful change on a systemic level.

I am eager to delve deeper into the integration of Design Thinking and Systemic Design principles into the realm of Action Research. Particularly within the domain of Design Thinking, there is an ongoing exploration of methods to adapt our approaches, incorporating tools and mindsets that enhance our ability to navigate increasingly complex and ambiguous contexts. The rise of Systemic Design and Circular Design stands out as a responsive strategy to address this growing need, and further investigation into how these principles can enrich the landscape of Action Research holds promise for fostering more comprehensive and effective methodologies.The aim to understand how I can influence social change, in Marx’s idea that it is not enough only to understand the world; the intent is to change it for the better. 

 

Review of Text – Documenting classroom life: how can I write about what I am seeing? By Liz Jones, Rachel Holmes, Christina MacRae and Maggie MacLure

Seeing and writing fieldnotes

Truth is inseparable fromthe procedure establishing it … but what constitutes procedure?… The process is that of seeing. (Deleuze, 1988: 63)

This article addresses the question, ‘how can I write about what I am seeing?’ from an ethnographic research project, addressing the difficulty of avoiding customary habits of seeing and thinking, such as ‘our own tendencies to lapse into realist or objectifying modes of description that see only what is already assumed to be ‘there’.’ Highlighting the importance of the subjectivity of the individual observer, ‘our attention is not just on what is observed but also what is going on within the observer’ (Devereux, 1967).

In our Workshop discussion group we discussed ‘PoV in field notes and biases in note taking during observations for focus groups or interviews, ield notes are difficult not to be impacted by personal biases, discussing how written observation can register tone, space, gestures and reciprocal knowledge and how to give back in interviews or focus groups and not just take – decolonial approaches to research methods‘ (ref: Workshop 1 27.09.2023, Group 7, https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVMhNzmZg=/). The discussion raised questions about each of our own positionality as researchers, and to consider that of our chosen participants.

‘In entering the classroom we are not curious tourists visiting a foreign land (Crick, 1985);’ it’s true I have been an educator for nearly a decade, it will be important to frame my positionality prior to conducting my research, enabling for the observed to know my background and enabled for clear self reflection. Jones reflections on her notes are helpful, trying to capture events as they happened, adding dates, times, opinions in the present tense, providing ‘an air of authenticity – of BeingThere’, in Geertz’ phrase, I will aim to do the same.

The reading made me think about forms of non extractive note taking, or non extractive interviews methods or ways of running focus groups, I questioned what do the others get from my research other than be extractive, I thought of play e.g. deck of cards designer critical alphabet (https://www.etsy.com/listing/725094845/a-designers-critical-alphabet), prompting discussion through games.

The ‘ethnographic present’

using the present tense is that it ‘freezes’ the events within the classroom at the time of observation; at worst ‘it contains assumptions about the repetitiveness, predictability, and conservatism’ (Fabian, 1983: 81) of both the teacher and the children.

the meaning of the ethnographic present cannot be ascertained simply from the ways in which the present tense expresses conceptions of time and temporal relations through the construction of sentences. Rather it must be derived from the intentions and functions of a total discourse of which sentence are parts. (1983: 76)

From the present tense to retrospection…New directions: towards a baroque method

For an aspiring ethnographer, this entails engaging with data characterised by varying degrees of ambiguity, recognising the implication that a comprehensive understanding cannot be derived through linear logic alone. Therefore, I conclude with another inquiry: Can I actively manipulate field notes, stretching and compressing them to stimulate more nuanced understandings? In doing so, can I navigate away from repetitive responses to what is observed, what is documented, and instead cultivate pathways toward the generation of novel insights and knowledge? I am a novice researcher, as such feel I must understand the basics before approaching further complex interpretations of what I see, I am curious to see how this develops.

Methodology – Everyday Methods of Research

Thinking about where I can start to begin thinking of my topic and how to plan my research:

Ask a colleague; – Ask a friend; – Use the library catalogue; – Use Google Scholar; – Use databases; -Read the resources; – Library Twitter / X (though not much any more!); – Teams (in passing); -Email alerts; – General “how are you conversations” with randomers. – deep listening – Google / duckduckgo – Watch and observe – Observing peers/colleagues or lessons/workshops ran by other members of staff – observing processes (e.g. workshops) or outcomes (shows etc.) – Physically making something, returning to it, changing it or making it again and again – observing processes (e.g. workshops) or outcomes (shows etc.) – Personal Tutorials, [coffee] break, chatting with peers and students, informal conversations, sometimes also random and by chance – Visiting people / places – Email conversation – Psychoanalysis – doing stuff, failing, trying again – listening – regarding how enthusiastic people are about things – behaviours in casual settings -how do people interact with others and with surroundings – observing – Taking time to be silent, dancing and being in nature -Conversations with colleagues, students and friends and family. Reading books/articles (physical and online), watching films/documentaries. lectures. Internet :). Observations – of the environment and reflections on all the above. Use of mind maps, spreadsheets, MS Teams, attending meetings/conferences, libraries. – mind mapping to extend the reference and links of thinking – Searching the library catalogue or browsing shelves – chat GPT – doing stuff, failing, trying again – chit chat – watching/ observing – Searching the library catalogue or browsing shelves – Visiting places such as galleries, archives and museums – podcasts – Sketching ideas / throwing the paper away / starting again – Making lists/sketches from data already collected / what you know – noticing patterns – picking up on what’s missed – Networking – Empathic Listening – Instagram / Social Media – reflecting on teaching and learning experiences – observing students and colleagues – Holding the space, creating pauses, asking for feedback in smaller ways – Visiting spaces that are both connected to what you’re researching and in contrast/external to it – observing and learning from other industries – LinkedIn articles – Universal methods of design [electronic resource]: 100 ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions https://libsearch.arts.ac.uk/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=1505474 – Inventive methods [electronic resource]: The happening of the social. https://libsearch.arts.ac.uk/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=812606 – Creative research methods in the social sciences [electronic resource]: a practical guide https://libsearch.arts.ac.uk/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=1451005

Bibliography

1. Robson, C. (1993) real world research:a resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers (1st ed.). Oxford: Blackwell
2. McNiff, J. (2010). Action Research for Professional Development. London: Sage Publications. https://www.jeanmcniff.com/userfiles/file/Publications/AR%20Booklet.doc
3. Jones, L., Holmes, R., Macrae, C., & Maclure, M. (2010). Documenting classroom life: how can I write about what I am seeing? Qualitative Research, 10(4), 479-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794110366814
4. Crick,M. (1985) ‘Tracing the Anthropological Self: Quizzical Reflections on FieldWork,Tourism and the Ludic’, Social Analysis 17: 71–92.
5. Fabian, J. (1983) Time and Other. NewYork: Columbia University.