Critique Notes: Learning Tool for Higher Education Design Curriculum

Industry

Education

Design Category

Learning Experience Design / UX Research

Timeline

Nov 2024 - Ongoing

Team

4 Designers

Background

In design education, final critique often marks the conclusion of the design process and the beginning of deeper reflection and learning through feedback. However, traditional critique methods, rooted in apprenticeships and ateliers, have remained largely unchanged, resulting in an unengaging and often ineffective experience for students. Despite critique's long-standing role in design, the one-way exchange and lack of meaningful discussion limit opportunities for deeper understanding and growth. We discovered that final critiques were students' least favorite format, often characterized by a lack of constructive feedback and limited engagement. To address these challenges, our goal is to create a feedback system that inspires and guides student critics, fostering more constructive, genuine, and actionable feedback for student presenters.

In design education, final critique often marks the conclusion of the design process and the beginning of deeper reflection and learning through feedback. However, traditional critique methods, rooted in apprenticeships and ateliers, have remained largely unchanged, resulting in an unengaging and often ineffective experience for students. Despite critique's long-standing role in design, the one-way exchange and lack of meaningful discussion limit opportunities for deeper understanding and growth. We discovered that final critiques were students' least favorite format, often characterized by a lack of constructive feedback and limited engagement. To address these challenges, our goal is to create a feedback system that inspires and guides student critics, fostering more constructive, genuine, and actionable feedback for student presenters.

Large Project Gallery Image #1
Large Project Gallery Image #1
Large Project Gallery Image #1

What does final critique typically look like?

What does final critique typically look like?

Problem

How can the format of final critiques in design education be improved to foster more genuine and constructive feedback for students?

We need to design a system that priotizes balancing structured reflection with open dialogue, supporting both student critics and student presenters.

Solution

A 3-step pedagogical system that guides students through productive and articulated exchanges in final critique, aimed at fostering collaborative learning and growth.

01\

Card prompt exercise for optimized brainstorming

Before the presentation, each student critic receives two card prompts--one card from the "Big Picture" deck, and another from the"Deep Dive" deck. This exercise encourages critics to focus and gather productive thoughts prior to diving into the presentation. The "Big Picture" deck asks critics to consider conceptual aspects of the project, while the "Deep Dive" deck focuses on technical considerations.

General / Warm-up Prompts

Specific / Technical Prompts

02\

Guided note-taking for thoughtful articulation

The pamphlet helps critics provide structured feedback by guiding them to note initial thoughts during the presentation, complete a radar chart evaluating key design concepts, and offer written feedback on areas of success, questions, and constructive criticism. This approach promotes a democratic feedback process, ensuring all voices are heard, preventing dominant opinions from overshadowing others, and encouraging clear, actionable insights that support the presenter’s growth.

03\

Self reflection and synthesized learning

After presenting their project, the presenter collects all critique notes from the class. Once they've reviewed the feedback, they reflect on their project, identifying areas for improvement and considering how they can apply the feedback to future projects. This process encourages self-awareness and growth, helping the presenter to refine their approach and develop stronger design practices moving forward.

Research

We conducted interviews and gathered polling data from 60+ students majoring in design in the following institutions and ended up with some key findings.

We conducted interviews and gathered polling data from 60+ students majoring in design in the following institutions and ended up with some key findings.

User Journey Mapping

We analyzed and synthesized the quantitative and qualitative data from the surveys and interviews conducted during each phase of the final critique on a journey map and discovered that the pain points of presenters and critics actually mirrored each other: while critics struggled to articulate their points clearly, presenters found it difficult to gather actionable feedback.

Key Insights

Competitive Tools

Hence, we began with a competitive analysis to not only gather inspiration but also identify common strategies that enhance the critique process, such as structured prompts to guide feedback, visual frameworks for clarity, and integrated reflection tools to help users synthesize insights effectively.

Design

Core Design Tenants

From our extensive secondary and primary research, we have identified common themes and pinpointed the following design tenants that will guide our processes.

Sketches and Idea Development

Emerging Themes:

Preparation - Emphasis on readiness for critique sessions, including having clear objectives and materials prepared.

Guest Critic Involvement - External perspectives will provide fresh, professional insights.

Cards and Prompts (Guidelines) - Structured prompts or cards to guide discussions and maintain focus during critique sessions.

Choices of Critique Formats - Offering various critique styles, such as group discussions or individual feedback sessions to cater to diverse needs and preferences.

Phase I Development

Initially, we envisioned gamifying critique with a deck of cards featuring thought-provoking questions, aiming to foster genuine feedback by reimagining the critique process as a "discussion-first, sharing-second" structure. However, we soon discovered that this approach was too intrusive and attempted to alter the traditional critique process too drastically, leading to confusion among students and professors. It simply did not feel natural.

Pivot

Phase II Development

Phase 2 focused on consolidating a feedback system that addresses the pain points of both critics and presenters during each phase of the final critique. The system includes a brainstorm aid, guided note-taking, and self-reflection components, ensuring critics provide productive feedback while giving presenters clear insights from diverse perspectives. This approach maximizes the value of feedback within the same timeframe, improving the efficiency of the critique process compared to traditional verbal methods.

User Testing

Stickynotes vs Critique Notes

A/B Testing

We conducted A/B testing to compare traditional sticky notes with our critique notes system in a simulated final critique session. Involving 5 student critics and 1 presenter, we gathered feedback through follow-up interviews to understand the user experience and identify areas for improvement.

Observations and Feedback

Final Design

User Journey Mapping

Our System

Look & Feel

The ‘C’ in the ‘Critique’ tool kit was derived from a magnifying glass that symbolizes the act of examining work at a deeper level.

Warm earthy and neutral colors were chosen to foster comfort, encouragement, and easy personalization upon use.

Project Gallery Image for 50% width of the screen #1
Project Gallery Image for 50% width of the screen #1
Project Gallery Image for 50% width of the screen #1
Project Gallery Image for 50% width of the screen #2
Project Gallery Image for 50% width of the screen #2
Project Gallery Image for 50% width of the screen #2
Large Project Gallery Image #2
Large Project Gallery Image #2
Large Project Gallery Image #2
Large Project Gallery Image #3
Large Project Gallery Image #3
Large Project Gallery Image #3

Impact

Classroom Integration

After reaching out to Professor Amy Leidtke, Critique Notes were introduced in a real classroom setting in higher design education. During the final critique process in Professor Leidtke’s Design Principles I course at RISD, sophomore industrial design students used Critique Notes to provide feedback on each other’s final projects before carrying out their usual verbal critique.

Typed vs Written

Given the increasing significance of digital tools in modern design education, I wanted to explore whether the digital version of Critique Notes would lead to more structured and effective feedback compared to the traditional handwritten approach. To evaluate the effectiveness between the two media, I conducted A/B usability testing to compare the typed and handwritten methods of using critique notes. The goal was to measure the impact of each format on the quality and clarity of feedback provided.

Digital Format

The digital format made the feedback easier to read and more organized, but it lost some of the personal touch and engagement that came with handwriting. While it helped with clarity, the process of organizing, saving, and sending the files added a layer of complexity that wasn’t as intuitive as simply writing feedback by hand and passing it to a peer. The digital approach felt less spontaneous and more like a task, whereas handwriting allowed for more organic, immersive and personal exchanges.

Physical Format

The handwritten feedback approach offered a more personal and informal space for students to articulate their opinions, which helped foster a stronger sense of engagement and connection with the critique process. While some students found it challenging to organize their thoughts within the limited space of the paper, many still preferred the handwritten format for the intimacy it provided. Several reflected that the time and care it took to write their feedback made them more willing to participate thoughtfully in verbal critiques and engage more deeply with their peers’ projects.

Publication

Click to redirect

On February 2, 2025, Critique Notes was published as part of "Evolving Design Critique for a Changing Industry" on the RISD College Commons, contributing to research on enhancing critique structures in design education. This work was developed through the ReAssembling ID course at the Rhode Island School of Design, focusing on fostering more structured, inclusive, and engaging feedback practices.

Retrospect

Key Learnings

A few things to takeaway from this very special and extensive project driven by research, real-world insights, and supportive people...

Special thanks to...

Sejin Hwang — our professor and advisor on this project, for guiding us through challenges and supporting our learning journey.

Kathryn, Nicole, and Stephen — my dedicated teammates, whose commitment to the iterative research and prototyping process was invaluable amidst their other responsibilities.

Amy Leidtke and her Design Principles I class — for providing us the opportunity to test our system in a real classroom setting.

All the fellow design students who responded to our surveys, participated in our interviews, and gave feedback to our project!