> The critique, as practiced in design schools, is applicable to > projects at a professional level too.
Jack, I guess that was the thought of the original poster. However, one of the first replies provided a guideline in the general direction of "never ask questions of the presenter, only state grounded assessments." When I read that, I realized that the contexts must be quite different. One of my essential techniques for *teaching* during a critique session is to combine questions with my own assessments. The ideal is to create a pedagogical situation where the presenting student and I together construct a rationale (or a line of reasoning) on the fly which 1. supports some of the design decisions, 2. questions other design decisions, 3. hints at promising alternatives, and 4. directs the attention of the presenting student (and the class) to other noteworthy work in the domain. When it works, it is great. When it doesn't work, it is awkward and sometimes even embarassing. But I tend to stick to it, as I think the pedagogical benefits outweigh the inconveniences. However, I am certainly not claiming that it is a good technique if the aim is strictly to improve the product. Hence my attempt to distinguish "pedagogical critique sessions" from "constructive critique sessions". Regards, Jonas Löwgren ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
