The Digital Desk Crit

I have been experimenting with different ways to give my design studio feedback.  Here is what today's effort looked like.



And here is the process I used.



The next step is to figure out a way to do all of this live, with the students virtually present. Because the down side to this process is the delay.  The students send me their work.  I mark it up, save it, and send it back.  And then we need to meet to discuss it.

Pre Covid-19 I just used trace paper in real time.  Where a 10 minute desk crit would take 10 minutes - this process is taking multiple days.

April 13th Update:

Over the past few classes I have tried several different techniques.

First, as described in the video above, I have been using adobe acrobat on the ipad, using the markup tools to give drawing feedback to my students.  This process has been fairly effective, although there are drawbacks mostly related to the time delay, as discussed above.  It has held the students accountable for getting work to me in a timely manner, and then forces them to meet with me to discuss the markup drawings, which has been an interesting positive outcome of this experiment.

Today I began playing with the ipad and MAC app "notability".  I have found the drawing controls to be more responsive in "notability" than with the basic ipad pdf editing tools.  Notability is not a free app, but it has been worth the cost so far.

I also successfully experimented with using notability on my MacBook, and sharing (screen mirroring) the app screen in BlackBoard Collaborate.  This allowed me to draw and critique in real time with the student's work. I could also save a record of the conversation and send it to the students after the "live" critique.  This was quite effective, and has real promise for a more seamless studio critique.  It is still, however, a one way conversation.  I can draw on my students work in real time, but they cannot draw back and have a two way conversation through drawings. (Yet)

Here are a few "live" critique images using Notability from today's studio class.

Model Markup Using "Notability" App

Digital Desk Crits Using "Notability" App

Rendering Markup Using "Notability" App

I have also been exploring screen mirroring.  The hope use this to link my ipad screen to the learning management system and draw in real time.  Tonight I got it to work!

Using this method I can share my ipad screen directly into a BlackBoard collaborate session and draw (using the ipad and pencil) in real time for students in a collaborate session.  The connection "hack" is to mirror the ipad through quicktime (google it).  It's kind of clunky, but it works.  If I had a newer MacBook there might be more efficient ways to bridge these two devices.   

Screen Mirroring Ipad into the Learning Management System

This gives me some fun "live critique" tools to experiment with now. 

A warning though.  As effective as this has been in the short term to triage my studio classes, it does not replace the effectiveness of the face to face studio desk crit.  I am NOT advocating for this as a replacement for FTF studios in the future.  But as a tool, to supplement communication within a traditional face to face environment, these tools offer some real potential.  I am glad to have been forced to learn these techniques.

I do believe that I will be a better teacher in the future because of this experience, and I will have a few new tools and techniques to lean on now.

Trading Projects (virtually): encouraging communication while social distancing

Last week was spring break.  After the previous two weeks of this chaotic transition to remote teaching and learning, it was a welcome break for all of us I suspect.

I did give my studio class one small spring break assignment, however, which was to trade projects for a day with a peer, and work on one of their colleague’s design projects.

I have written about trading projects before on this blog.  Typically I would do this as an in-class activity on the first class day after spring break (which would be today).  The learning objectives usually center on the idea of seeing this studio project through someone else’s eyes.  I want the student to see the challenges of their own creative work through a new lens, or frame of reference, by working on a project that is not their own.  This year, the in-class project is obviously not possible.  So I attempted to simulate this virtually over spring break. 

The students had to communicate their peer critique through a series of drawings or a small model, and then call their peer partner to discuss their design critique.

I still want students to see this project through a different lens.  I also want students to begin to identify in their peers work the following questions:

1)    What is working?

2)    What is not working? (or needs to be reconsidered?)

3)    What still needs to be developed?

These questions are, intentionally, the same questions that each student needs to be asking themselves about their own work, as they develop their projects over the next five weeks of the semester.

This year, however, in the midst of this crazy social isolation experiment, I had a much more basic human centered goal for this exercise.  I wanted my students to reach out and talk to each other.  So part of this assignment was to call each other and talk about the projects they traded.  Simply just talk to each other, about design, or anything else.

I tried to encourage the class to have human conversations, and be less socially isolated, because I am worried about my students. I think this move to studio ‘work from home’ has been difficult for them on multiple levels.  (I will write another post about their challenges in the future.)  So I had students work on someone else’s project, and I wanted them to then call each other and discuss their peer critique, and hopefully encourage some real human interactions with their studio peers.  I mean, just a few weeks ago they were all hanging out in studio with each other all the time, and now this support group has been suddenly been disconnected.  (And it happened so fast)

I hope this helped the class begin to adjust to this new normal of ‘remote’ studio. 

Seeing the students interact with each other at least gives me hope.  (Although not everyone participated, which is a concern)

The peer critiques so far look promising.  I always find that our students are better at critiquing each other’s work than they are their own.  It is hard to learn to be self-critical.

Here are some images from this year’s spring break virtual ‘trading projects’ experiment.

Finding Balance: The New Normal

College of DuPage Second Year Design Studio - Early March 2020

Just one month ago, I never really thought that I would be teaching studio for the remainder of the semester from a card table in my house. 

This has all escalated so quickly.

Over the next few weeks I plan to write a series of posts reflecting on this new (not so) normal of teaching design studio classes remotely.  This sudden and turbulent transition to moving all of my community college architecture courses online, and subsequent home isolation, will undoubtedly have lasting impacts. It will change the way we teach, impact our lives in countless ways, and shape the future of architectural education.  I suspect that we will not actually ever really get “back to normal”.  Yet the exact nature of the changes to our future remains unknown. 

Initially, my goal with these posts is to capture the moment.  These essays are journal entries, rough drafts, and works in progress.  They are not polished scholarly work.  I hope the process of recording observations and reflections in the moment will help me to understand all of this, see through the fog of the present, and provide at least a sense of clarity moving forward.

How will all of this impact they way I teach?  

(I think in the long term I will be a better educator for having lived through this)

What lasting impacts will this have on architectural education? 

Why is teaching through web conferencing so exhausting?

And a more pressing question;

How do I really teach a studio course (the ultimate hands-on experiential learning activity) remotely?

College of DuPage Second Year Design Studio - Late March 2020

Ethereal Daylight

Chapel of St. Ignatious, Seattle University, 1997

My students are working on a design project exploring natural daylight.  So naturally I am reading Steven Holl to get in the mood.  I am going to save some quotes here to be used later.

“Transmitting the force and spiritual power of daylight has been a core aim of our architecture for forty years.  The perceptual spirit and metaphysical strength of architecture are driven by the quality of light and shadow shaped by solids and voids, by opacities and transparencies and translucencies.  What the eyes see and the senses feel in relation to architecture is formed according to conditions of light and shadow.  Natural light, with its ethereal variety of changes, fundamentally orchestrates the intensities of architecture and cities.”

Steven Holl, Compression

“Light is the main thing.  Light is a natural phenomenon the complexity of which reveals the structure of human consciousness.  Objects, including buildings, in their absorption and reflection of light, simulate a human brain’s neural networks, in effect activating the brain.  The more complex and nuanced the stimulation, the more fully the brain comes to life”

Lebbeus Woods (from Steven Holl’s book Compression)

Inside the Second Year Studio

I have been working on a "pecha kucha" presentation for our annual Coalition of Community College Architecture Programs conference. 

Here is "Inside the Second Year Studio" - a short presentation about preparing our community college architecture students to transfer.

Trading Projects (Again)

 

 

It’s the first class after spring break.  I kind of expect sluggish students.  So naturally, we had an in class charrette.  Build a model in two hours.

But wait, there is a catch.  (There always is right!)

Today I asked my students to trade projects with another colleague.  They were instructed to work on a project that was not their own, and in a two-hour charrette create a study model for their peer’s project.

 

I had several goals for this exercise.

1)      I wanted students to see their own work through a new lens.  Working on the same problem that they have been struggling with, but through someone else’s interpretation and concept, will hopefully open up new ways of seeing their own work.

2)      I wanted to remind students of the value of two hours.  They created a new study in two short hours, for a project that was not their own.  Hopefully this reminds the class to not be afraid to explore alternatives and test tangents.  If you can create something new in a few hours – why not?

3)      Lastly, maybe they get some feedback on their own work.  Perhaps their classmates will see something in their work that was not readily evident to the primary author, and will in turn spark a path forward to develop their work with depth and sophistication as we move toward the final review in a few short weeks.

Critique?

Every year I begin the first studio critique of the year with a discussion about why we do this in a design studio, and what the value of a critique is.  This year I decided to share my notes on the topic.


Why we critique?

1. Critiques are about the work, not the person presenting it.  Critiques serve the work, with a goal of improvement.
2. Critiques are an opportunity to step away from your work, and see it anew.  The challenge is to look at your own work from a different perspective, with a slightly detached critical view.
3. Critiques are also about identifying strengths in the work, and discussing how to amplify these strong points, not just about identifying errors and how to eliminate them.
4. Critiques are both about the work now (improving the work), and for future work.  The goal is to develop your ability as a designer to look at your own work with a critical eye in the future, especially for those moments when you are not able to get the feedback you need.
5. Ask why is the professor is giving this feedback?  Critiques are not always intended for the same purpose. Sometimes they are about immediate feedback on the work as presented.  Sometimes critiques are intended as a broader conversation exploring concepts beyond the immediate work itself.  Understanding why the feedback is being offered is key to knowing how to respond to the critique.
6. There is a collaborative learning aspect to this as well.  We want you to learn from each other.  If you can at least identify why something your peers presented is good, even if it is beyond your skill level at the moment, gives you a goal for the future.
7. Listen and accept the feedback without taking it personally.
8. Ask questions.
9. Take Notes.
10. Challenge the critique when necessary.
11. The studio is a relatively safe environment to get feedback on your work.   It is better to hear it now, in the context of a studio, as opposed to from a future employer in an interview of from a potential transfer school denying you entry due to a poor portfolio. 

DESIGN THINKING

I have long been a fan of the design firm IDEO, and their thoughts and approach to the creative process. 

As such, this article really resonated with me.  I think my students are also struggling with the synthesis part of the design process as well at the moment, as we are well past the "fun" part of brainstorming ideas, and are now fully immersed in design resolution (or making it work) part of the semester. 

I am posting this here to save for later, perhaps for a student discussion on the topic.

https://qz.com/1118085/the-uncomfortable-secret-to-creative-success-is-disequilibrium/

TRADING PROJECTS

Models from our in class charrette this week

This week I revisited a favorite studio class experiment, having student’s trade projects for a day.  Over the past few years, I have experimented with variations on this exercise, where students complete a studio class charrette working on a project that is not their own.  The students don’t always love this activity, as they would probably prefer to work on their own design issues, but his exercise has several goals and positive outcomes

1. First, I find this is a good exercise for the first class back after spring break.  Students often return from the break with a kind of post break sluggishness, and this time intensive class charrette gets them back into a productive studio class, encouraging the creative energy to flow again.  If nothing else, this activity is worth doing for this one aspect alone.
2. In a professional environment, it is not that uncommon to find projects passed around within design firms.  You might inherit a project started by a colleague, and be responsible for shepherding the design through the next phase of the process.  So this is a valuable future professional skill to have.  
3. More importantly, this is an excellent exercise to shake things up in the studio.  I want the students to see this design project from an entirely different perspective.  By forcing students to work on the project through the lens of another students’ work, I hope to help them challenge their own inherent biases that they have accumulated by this point in the semester.  It is my hope that now, when they return to their own work, they will have a new sense of openness to new possibilities, and will see new potentials in their own work, having spent a class living in someone else’s project.
4. Completing this exercise as a charrette, with limited studio time to work, also has its advantages.  One positive is that the tight deadline keeps students from over thinking the exercise.  It is not that I am advocating for a thoughtless design process, but sometimes students have a tendency to get stuck over analyzing the problem, and the intensive nature of this exercise promotes a more intuitive approach to decision-making.
5. This exercise is also an opportunity to work on students critique skills.  By having the class trade design projects, I am asking them to critique a peer’s work through the design changes that they propose.  It is important, and I stress this, that they not design this new project the way they would do it – rather, I ask them to help their colleague by developing the work based on their peers design intents.  This means identifying what is working well about the project, and trying to amplify these successes.  It means identifying areas that are not working well, and trying to edit these deficiencies.  It also means suggesting variations and alternatives, in an attempt to clarify and strengthen the work that has already been started.  It does not mean simply saying ‘now how would I do this?’.  By trading projects, the intent is to have students assume the role of the critic or instructor, and help each other to develop and strengthen the work by backing away from their own authorship of the project. 

In this exercise, students had 90 minutes to create a study model.  This model was to develop, critique, and suggest design alternatives, with the goal of helping each other to develop the work. 

Some years this activity works better than others, as the class dynamic plays a part in the successfulness of the activity.  Students need to buy into the exercise to make it most meaningful.

This year, the post charrettte conversations amongst the students, where they debriefed their partner on the design proposals, seemed to be a rich a fruitful conversation.  I am encouraged that the class this year may have received meaningful suggestions about their work through this studio experiment.  

If nothing else, this got the studio moving again, and forced students to consider the project through a new lens.

Design Concepts

 

Dear students, I have been thinking about your design concepts.

I hope you have been as well.

I have questions.  I hope these help you formulate and clarify your ideas, concept statements, and diagrams.

First of all, you have been assigned to design a lakefront ecology center, on a unique and dramatic lakefront site.  Given the site and the program.

·         How does your project REVEAL the nature of its place?

·         How does the design AMPLIFY ones understating of water ecology?  And address sustainable issues?

·         How does your design connect you to the lake?  PHSICALLY? EMOTIONALLY? POETICALLY?

·         How does your design make you more aware of the natural world, and ecological concerns?

·         How does the design address the specificities of its site?  The city? The view?  The natural world?  The transition, edge, or threshold?  How does it improve on the existing conditions?

I also have questions about the more practical design decisions that you have made.

·         How is your design organized? And Why?

·         How do you move to it?  Through it?

·         What are you trying to accomplish formally and aesthetically? What does it look like?  Why? And how does this relate to the site, the city, and issues of ecology?

Finally, you should be trying to design unique, authentic, and memorable spaces and places.

·         Does your project create a place for people?  Establish a sense of community?  Create a poetic connection to the natural world?   Allow for various types of uses (beyond the program)?  Function within the context of civic parkland?

·         Is it memorable?  How?

·         If Architecture is about experiencing space…..  How have you choreographed an experience through your project?