Studio life: The construction of digital design competence

Critical Analysis

In this article, the authors leverage observational research to explore the difference between studio in a traditional context, and studio coordinated via a variety of digital whiteboards and tools. The interactive and digitally-intensive space forced students into a mode of display, rather than on the fluid shifting between individual and cooperative work that emerges from a more traditional studio.

The authors begin by arguing the benefits of learning to design as it relates to career placement, claiming that interaction design rests on theoretical computer science topics, and “only those students who are able to transform these abstract notions into persuasive communicative practices will be successful in a professional context.” This transformation is presented in a series of educational outcome statements, including developing original ideas, managing tools, and using design methods.

Studio learning is based on old traditions that involve “open-ended projects similar to actual practice, a number of structured conversations (critique sessions or ‘crits’), and some kind of public presentation.” A focus is on drawing as a form of decision making, and continually trying design moves through sketches and observing the consequences. Sketching is fundamental, as is “fortifying the sketch by verbal articulation” which is a way to “demystify design practice and in a sense it is the essence of learning to design.”

Citing Shaffer, the authors describe several qualities of studios, including:

In the studio, students had their own workspaces;

In the studio, students met for large blocks of time, and since they had their own workspaces, they could also work in the studio outside scheduled times;

In the studio, feedback was generative.

A physical studio affords collaboration and conversation. In the studio, “students could see and hear each other.” Seeing each other’s work provided an “opportunity to critically reflect on their own projects.” They gain awareness of what other students are doing, which means that “a student could provide serendipitous input to someone else’s work if he or she walked by another student’s desk.” The authors indicate that fostering these type of unplanned interactions are “critical when designing spaces for fruitful interaction.”

Research Value

The value of this work in informing my own research is that it:

• Offers evidence of the nature of students collaborating through impromptu interactions, which requires being physically present outside of class
• Reinforces the claim (and benefit) of long hours and working outside of class time
• Argues that sketching and speaking are the core of design pedagogy, and that only those who can make forms will be professionally successful