Critical absence versus critical engagement. Problematics of the crit in design learning and teaching

Abstract

This article describes a study which sets out to examine how changes in student patterns of learning, in particular the demise of the design ‘baseroom’ and the growth of online learning, might have on the crit. The study found that the crit constitutes a heightened moment of exchange between staff and students in the new landscape of learning. The crit, in this context, becomes a powerful vehicle for the induction and inculturation of students into the dominant mores and beliefs of a programme and its discipline. Paradoxically the research found that the crit was a poor vehicle for students to demonstrate their understanding of the context of their practice. The article argues for a reconsideration of the role and function of the crit in design pedagogy so that it might become a more effective vehicle for students to articulate their critical disposition to their discipline.

Visualizing the critique: Strengthening quantitative reasoning skills through design

“…Schrand and Eliason"s (2012) research indicates that the design critique does not always allow all types of students to participate, and students who are not confident enough to ask questions are left behind. Barrett (2000) and Percy (2004) cite frustration, alienation, and lack of student participation as outcomes of the traditional design critique. Further research yields a list of factors that may impede student learning, including the size (Blair, 2006) and dynamics of the group (Gray, 2013); language and cultural competencies (Lasserre, 2010;Wong 2011); and perceived self-efficacy (Gaffney, 2011).…”

The paradox of ‘teaching’ transformation in fine art studio practice: Assessment in the South African context

“…Bourdieu (1977Bourdieu ( , 1984Bourdieu ( , 1988 argues that education involves a strong current of acculturation, where 'habitus' (as disciplinary dispositions) 'leads us to "reproduce" the social conditions of our own production' (Bourdieu 1990: 87). Many studies have pointed to the exclusionary practices and unequal relationships between students and lecturers within fine art, where the tacit acceptance of this imbalance may even be crucial to the acculturation role of the crit (Percy 2004). Those with social and cultural capital are accepted as promising future members of the community, while those who are not, become alienated from the discourse and performance of the assessment practices.…”

“…However, some argue that a more positive view of 'cultural capital' may create possibilities for power differentials within communities to be recognised and reversed (Horton 2007). With revision, it is argued that the crit in particular can become an event that explicitly and consciously provides students with epistemological access (Percy 2004), and may promote political and social values amongst students (McCoy 1993).…”

We kind of try to merge our own experience with the objectivity of the criteria: The role of connoisseurship and tacit practice in undergraduate fine art assessment

“…Tacit practice has been identified as an important element of assessment practice (Sambell and McDowell 1998). In a study of studio-based dialogic feedback (otherwise known as the Crit), Percy (2004) identified that art and design lecturers use very imprecise language and that they often resort to gestural language when discussing students' artwork. The lecturers in Percy's study wrestle with the challenge of trying to 'name what they know' (Polanyi 1998).…”