Critique in art and design school is a vital part of students' education. With changing class formats and busy schedules how can we improve the experience and effectiveness of critique?
User testing, prototyping, visual design
Fall 2018 (Revised 2022)
ID course work at RISD
*This case study was revised as personal work with additional research and development.
In order to identify the issues with critique in school we must first define what good critique is. I asked students at Rhode Island School of Design what good critique meant to them. After hearing about different perspectives I narrowed down what is considered good critique.
Insightful It helps answer questions you have about your work.
Explorative It introduces new ideas that can broaden your views and allow you to reflect on your artistic choices.
Enabling It give you tools to improve your creative process and better your end results.
The first major problem I identified with critique in school was timing. Depending of the project students may or may not receive feedback while during the process of creating their work. Often the bulk of the critique a student receives comes at the end of the project. While the hope is that students will take what they learned and go back to apply it to their projects, the reality is that with busy schedules and new assignments students rarely have the time to return to past works to apply the critique received.
In addition to the issue with timing I wanted to look at how the shift in how students attend classes caused by the global pandemic has influenced the process of critique in schools. To do this I interviewed a student currently studying at Art Center College of Design to get an updated view on the experience she and her classmates have had with critique.
By creating an empathy map I was able to further understand the needs and feelings of the user. With this in mind I was able to pinpoint problems and opportunities for improvement.
Students sometimes feel frustrated and stuck while working on assignments
Students express curiosity about their peers work and what their peers would say about their own work
There is an issue with availability and the speed of feedback
There is an existing need for an easier way to get feedback on projects and a desire to view other projects
Designing a method for students to connect with their peers without long waiting or reliance on physical space could help solve these issues
To make sure my solution was not redundant and gather more inspiration I looked at existing options for online critique and researched what programs student already use for virtual critique in school. I was able to use this information to inform my decisions as I started designing the solution.
Pros
Easy to engage with and mobile friendly
Large pool of people to potentially recieve feedback from
Low commitment when posting and replying
Cons
Feedback is often unsolicited and uniformed
Many users lack an understanding of how critique works
Algorithm driven
Pros
Allows students within a specific class to connect
Teacher can provide critique remotely
Has all the features necessary for good critique
Cons
Close feedback, inaccessible
Requires time commitment, clumsy to use
Too much information and options to comfortably use on mobile devices
My initial ideation was heavily inspired by social media and how I could combine the convenience and familiar structure with the needs of students.
With this initial concept in mind I created wireframes for user testing.
User testing lead me to a large change in how my app is structured. This was primarily manifested in the shift from users asking their own questions about the work to a design that integrates the critique technique "I like, I wish, I wonder."
I like allows users to share what went well or is positive about the idea.
I wish encourages users to share what could be done differently or improved.
I wonder is a place for unanswered questions and new ideas for the future of this project.
Format makes work in progress posts feel out of place
Design feels too similar to existing social media
Engagement threshold is too high
Redesigned to be more informal
Uses a common critique technique that is fast and has a low effort requirement
Existing prompts make the process more approachable
Users added and responded to specific prompts.
Users fill out existing prompts that follow the "I like, I wish, I wonder" structure.
User interviews revealed that due to the way different schools are structured, labels such as 'Major' can be confusing and should be changed to appeal to a broader user base
Through testing I was able to catch missing functionalities and amend the problems
Include an archive view so that users can go back and find old pieces with less effort
Going into the visual design of PocketCrit I made sure to keep in mind the goal of creating a space that felt casual and approachable. I wanted to create a vibrant, graphic, and simple design.
When redesigning the home feed I drew inspiration from stacked photos and stickers to help portray an informal feeling.
Inspired by in-person critiques that were occasionally conducted during projects, I reimagined the critique process with vibrant colors and sticky notes.
I paired bright colors with a clean font to match the casual and playful feeling of the design. Slight variations in the accents improved how colors appear on both light and dark backgrounds.
Users can log in to PocketCrit using school accounts allowing for easy access to their schools community.
While on the homepage users can scroll through posts from classes and classmates that they follow. Images are displayed in a casual fashion to encourage informal progress posts.
If a user is interested in a piece they can open the critique section. It is divided in 4 tabs: I like, I wish, I wonder, and View All.
Users can post their own critique by following the prompts given. They can also like other critique they find insightful or agreeable.
To encourage discussion, users can reply to critique as they come across it. Discussions are stacked together and can be expanded for easy viewing.
From the homepage users can check notifications to view critique they have received. They can view what they have sent as well as replies and likes on their insights. The ability to add posts is also easily accessible from the homepage.
When creating a post users can add images from their camera roll. They are given the option to write a description and add classes or topics relevant to the piece for the search index. Classes also allow posts to show up on class pages along with work from other students in that course.
User and class pages can be accessed in a variety of ways. Users can view their own profile using the lower navigation or search for a class, user, or topic using the search bar.
User pages include a feed of their projects as well as an archive for easy access to older posts. Links are flexible and can include means of contact or places to view more work. Both classes and users can be followed but following is kept private on both ends to prevent gaining a following from becoming a focus.
Refine and Expand How are likes viewed and interacted with? How are users onboarded when they are first introduced to the new critique structure? These are just a few of the many questions I would like to address if this project were to continue.
Class and Faculty Integration One potential addition that would expand the functionality of PocketCrit is the ability to send requests for feedback to faculty and peers. It would also be interesting to integrate a feature for notes and drawings to allow teachers to give feedback directly on the students work.
Familiarity vs. Purpose. My initial draft of this project leaned heavily on existing social media for its design and features. While this did serve to make the app easy to use due to familiarity, I struggled to fully realize the purpose of the app in this format. It's important to balance new features with what users might already be accustomed to.
Lo-Fi Iterations. Because of the large structural and visual change I made quite late in the design process I came to realize that this could have been avoided if I had done more lower fidelity iterations and testing. It's always exciting to move on to a more finished product but it saves time in the long run to do your due diligence.