Recently, on the 26th February 2021, as part of the Creative Studio module, we undertook a formative assessment critique session of work, chosen by ourselves as always. In the session I participated in, Anneke Pettican was the host. After engaging with the critique sessions throughout the module, I feel I am becoming familiar with the format and what is expected, not only from us ourselves but also our peers. In the session, I showcased two images, the maximum that was available to share, that showcased both a process and the use of that process in potential outcomes for the final major project.
The first slide showcased the process that was formed and practiced the week prior, where a collection of images was generated using a mini studio set-up and a grid layout being formed to collate the imagery. I wrote an earlier blog post on this process here. This process was then built on further using Adobe Illustrator and the pen tool, drawing lines to visually see how the strange dried leaf forms were made up. These lines generated unusual grid systems that I then used to create two wireframe layouts for an iOS mobile device application screen.
This time, during the critique session, we were expected to speak for five minutes about the work showcased and answer three questions that were shared with us before the session.
What do you think was successful in the work?
What isn’t going well that you’re going to work on?
What aspect of the work could you develop further?
Throughout this course, we have presented work multiple times and thanks to these experiences the thought of having to share the concepts and thoughts about my work does not phase me. I believe that these sessions have helped to build soft skills in communicating concepts, ideas, areas for development and areas of pride in the work created with the soft skill of receiving feedback being built alongside this process. One area for development I learned through this specific critique session Is being explicit in the communication of themes and concepts to those who are not already familiar with the work. This arose from the first slide, which featured the drawn over gird layout of the dried leaves. Although this image showcased further development of the outcomes of the workshop and their implementation into the creative work being undertaken, Anneke was not entirely aware of the aims and outcomes of the workshop. This lead to more time being used to explain the main process of taking the photos and this being understood before the concept of the grid layouts could be communicated and explored. This could have been rectified if the original layout of the dried leaves was placed to the left of the drawn over layout, allowing Anneke to see the original and the developed version side by side, therefore generating natural links to the works.
Overall, I believe that the critique sessions are beneficial for building key soft skills in communication and as we develop further into not only this MA program but also our professional careers as designers, as we will need these skills daily. I have also become comfortable giving feedback to my peers that are not simply praising, but feedback that poses questions, food for thought and sharing thoughts on what the work has provoked, for example, students work and their relationship to material that Anneke was exploring made me think of the notions of hylomorphism and morphogenesis that was explored in a key concepts lecture earlier in the module by Rowan Bailey, which I then shared. It is interesting to see how the critiques allow for links to be made between ideas and concepts from previous lectures, seminars and modules.
Comments