Emergent Critique in Informal Design Talk

Reflections of Surface, Pedagogical, and Epistemological Features in an HCI Studio

Colin M. Gray November 28, 2013

Understanding communication between students in non-classroom spaces Using this understanding of the studio through enactment of critique to conceptualize the hidden curriculum

background

research questions

What informal interactions are taking place between students in the design studio?

How are these interactions instigating critique?

review of literature

review of literature

Existing research on conceptualizing critique activity

Process model (Oh, et al., 2012)

Development of understanding (Exter, et al., 2009)

Genres (Dannels & Martin, 2008)

Types of knowledge (Uluoglu, 2000)

CLASSROOM CRITIQUE

review of literature

Oh, et al. (2012) process model of critiquing

review of literature

Shaffer’s Theoretical Model of the Studio (Shaffer, 2003)

Surface Features

Pedagogical Structures

Epistemology

context

contextHuman-Computer Interaction design (HCI/d) program in a School of Informatics

Non-classroom studio with no dedicated space

dataCritical Ethnography (Spring 2013)

Participant Observation (150 hours)

- thick field notes - audio recordings (45 hours/150 segments) - photographs (n=745)

Critical Interview (n=14)

Artifact Analysis

analysis

analysisCoding of emergent themes across audio segments

Situating these codes in the context of the studio based on Shaffer’s theoretical model

findings

Instigating Interaction # Example Interactions

overheard/seen 16 Design talk or work is overseen or overheard while working separately

smalltalk/social talk 39 Casual greetings; “what are you up to?”; “how was your weekend?”; friendly talk

showing off 12 Displaying finished or in-progress work to others without provocation

planned/scheduled 53 Request to discuss at some point in the future; planned meeting

request for advice 30 Explicit request for guidance, opinion, or interpretation

OVERHEARD/OVERSEEN

SMALLTALK/SOCIAL TALK

SHOWING OFF

PLANNED/SCHEDULED

REQUEST FOR ADVICE

Shaffer’s Theoretical Model of the Studio (Shaffer, 2003)

Surface Features

Pedagogical Structures

Epistemology

discussion

discussion

Physicality of space indicates what kinds of interactions can be supported

The space was designed for certain types of collaboration

Divide between physical and digital spaces

Surface Features

discussion

Group projects support collaboration and sharing

Shared pedagogical experience

Representations follow pedagogical structures

Pedagogical Structures

discussion

Surface and pedagogical elements of the studio indicate underlying beliefs

Projection of identity as professional designers

A studio bridge (Brandt, et al., 2011) is co-constructed between students and the formal pedagogy

Epistemology

next steps

next stepsBroader analysis of data across two semesters of data collection

Focus on instigating interactions, and how and when these interactions emerge in the studio space

Analysis of how interactions span virtual and physical spaces

questions?