2022
Parsons, Paul C; Gray, Colin M
Separating Grading and Feedback in UX Design Studios Proceedings Article
In: EduCHI'22: 4th Annual Symposium on HCI Education, 2022.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Design Theory, HCI Education, Instructional Design, Reflection, Studio Pedagogy, UX Knowledge
@inproceedings{Parsons2022-ow,
title = {Separating Grading and Feedback in UX Design Studios},
author = {Paul C Parsons and Colin M Gray},
url = {https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2022_ParsonsGray_EduCHI_SeparatingGradingandFeedback.pdf},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-04-01},
urldate = {2022-04-01},
booktitle = {EduCHI'22: 4th Annual Symposium on HCI Education},
abstract = {Assessment and feedback are central tasks in most instructional
settings, and the reception of feedback by students is generally
regarded as an essential part of the learning process [18, 22].
Despite the centrality and importance of feedback, there is
increasing evidence that traditional feedback practices are not
effective [6, 37]. Among several known challenges to
implementing effective feedback is the entanglement of feedback
with assessment (i.e., grading), which has become so strong in
many instances that they are effectively conjoined [37]. This
integration is routine and often assumed uncritically, and it
can lead to several problems for the student experience. While
both assessment and feedback have important functions, they are
distinct, and their conflation can obscure the important role
that each has for the teacher and student. In this `teachable
moment' paper, we describe some known problems with assessment
and feedback, the value of disentangling them, and several
strategies we have taken to improve the feedback process across
a series of UX design courses at a large research university."},
keywords = {Design Education, Design Theory, HCI Education, Instructional Design, Reflection, Studio Pedagogy, UX Knowledge},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Assessment and feedback are central tasks in most instructional
settings, and the reception of feedback by students is generally
regarded as an essential part of the learning process [18, 22].
Despite the centrality and importance of feedback, there is
increasing evidence that traditional feedback practices are not
effective [6, 37]. Among several known challenges to
implementing effective feedback is the entanglement of feedback
with assessment (i.e., grading), which has become so strong in
many instances that they are effectively conjoined [37]. This
integration is routine and often assumed uncritically, and it
can lead to several problems for the student experience. While
both assessment and feedback have important functions, they are
distinct, and their conflation can obscure the important role
that each has for the teacher and student. In this `teachable
moment' paper, we describe some known problems with assessment
and feedback, the value of disentangling them, and several
strategies we have taken to improve the feedback process across
a series of UX design courses at a large research university."
settings, and the reception of feedback by students is generally
regarded as an essential part of the learning process [18, 22].
Despite the centrality and importance of feedback, there is
increasing evidence that traditional feedback practices are not
effective [6, 37]. Among several known challenges to
implementing effective feedback is the entanglement of feedback
with assessment (i.e., grading), which has become so strong in
many instances that they are effectively conjoined [37]. This
integration is routine and often assumed uncritically, and it
can lead to several problems for the student experience. While
both assessment and feedback have important functions, they are
distinct, and their conflation can obscure the important role
that each has for the teacher and student. In this `teachable
moment' paper, we describe some known problems with assessment
and feedback, the value of disentangling them, and several
strategies we have taken to improve the feedback process across
a series of UX design courses at a large research university."
2018
Gray, Colin M
Narrative Qualities of Design Argumentation Book Section
In: Hokanson, Brad; Clinton, Gregory; Kaminski, Karen (Ed.): Educational Technology and Narrative: Story and Instructional Design, pp. 51–64, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018, ISBN: 9783319699141.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Critique, Design Education, HCI Education, Reflection
@incollection{Gray2018-pg,
title = {Narrative Qualities of Design Argumentation},
author = {Colin M Gray},
editor = {Brad Hokanson and Gregory Clinton and Karen Kaminski},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69914-1_5},
doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-69914-1_5},
isbn = {9783319699141},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-01-01},
urldate = {2018-01-01},
booktitle = {Educational Technology and Narrative: Story and Instructional
Design},
pages = {51--64},
publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
address = {Cham},
abstract = {The narrative qualities of a design presentation and subsequent
critique comprise a design argument, distilling designers'
rationale for their design, rooted in their process. In this
paper, I analyze two consecutive design presentations from an
introductory undergraduate human-centered design studio,
documenting the argumentation structures students rely upon when
``selling'' their design. Dominant argumentation structures of
these presentation events are described and related to narrative
in a human-centered design context.},
keywords = {Critique, Design Education, HCI Education, Reflection},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {incollection}
}
The narrative qualities of a design presentation and subsequent
critique comprise a design argument, distilling designers'
rationale for their design, rooted in their process. In this
paper, I analyze two consecutive design presentations from an
introductory undergraduate human-centered design studio,
documenting the argumentation structures students rely upon when
``selling'' their design. Dominant argumentation structures of
these presentation events are described and related to narrative
in a human-centered design context.
critique comprise a design argument, distilling designers'
rationale for their design, rooted in their process. In this
paper, I analyze two consecutive design presentations from an
introductory undergraduate human-centered design studio,
documenting the argumentation structures students rely upon when
``selling'' their design. Dominant argumentation structures of
these presentation events are described and related to narrative
in a human-centered design context.
2014
Gray, Colin M; Siegel, Martin A
Sketching Design Thinking: Representations of Design in Education and Practice Journal Article
In: International Journal of Technology and Design Education, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 48–61, 2014.
Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, HCI Education, Reflection, UX Knowledge
@article{Gray_undated-ih,
title = {Sketching Design Thinking: Representations of Design in Education and Practice},
author = {Colin M Gray and Martin A Siegel},
url = {https://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/DATE/article/view/1925},
year = {2014},
date = {2014-01-01},
urldate = {2014-01-01},
journal = {International Journal of Technology and Design Education},
volume = {19},
number = {1},
pages = {48--61},
keywords = {Design Education, HCI Education, Reflection, UX Knowledge},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}