2024
Boling, Elizabeth; Gray, Colin M
Anthony Cerise Book Section
In: Ertmer, Peggy A; Glazewski, Krista D; Koehler, Adrie A; Stefaniak, Jill E (Ed.): The ID CaseBook: Case Studies in Instructional Design, pp. 127–138, Routledge, New York, 2024, ISBN: 9781003354468.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Instructional Design, Learning Experience (LX) Design, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinary Education
@incollection{Boling2024-co,
title = {Anthony Cerise},
author = {Elizabeth Boling and Colin M Gray},
editor = {Peggy A Ertmer and Krista D Glazewski and Adrie A Koehler and Jill E Stefaniak},
url = {https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781003354468/chapters/10.4324/9781003354468-12},
doi = {10.4324/9781003354468-12},
isbn = {9781003354468},
year = {2024},
date = {2024-04-01},
urldate = {2024-04-01},
booktitle = {The ID CaseBook: Case Studies in Instructional Design},
pages = {127–138},
publisher = {Routledge},
address = {New York},
abstract = {Hustling across campus at Mid-State University, Anthony Cerise,
an associate professor in the College of Education, juggles his
backpack, his morning coffee in a paper cup, and the agenda he
just printed for a meeting to which he hopes he will not be
late. His scarf is flapping across his face thanks to a stiff
fall breeze, blinding him off and on, but in a stroke of luck he
spots the campus bus in time to flag it down, only spilling a
little coffee as he does so. He sprints up the bus steps and
flops down on a worn vinyl seat just behind the driver, who sees
him on this route between the education and engineering
buildings often enough not to require his campus ID when he
boards. Good thing, too; he doesn't have a hand free to fish his
wallet out of his pocket. It was also fortunate that he caught
the bus, he thinks; it's important to arrive on time today
without having to sprint. This meeting is being held to discuss
issues with the IDP (or, as the dean always states in full, the
Integrated Design Program). Showing up disheveled, let alone
late, would not put him on the right foot. Sure, the program is
a big success—that's the problem, in fact; it has grown so
large and so quickly that he and his colleagues desperately need
to confer on where it is coming apart at the seams. But Anthony
is keenly aware of the tensions which have existed in the
program since the beginning, not to mention those between the
program and the administration right now. As the leader of the
faculty team which designs and implements the program, he works
to keep an even keel and to exude confidence on behalf of them
all. He'd like to maintain that presence. More than that, he
doesn't want to give Roger Went, head of the administrative
steering committee, any reason to carry back to the other deans
an impression that their current growing pains are any worse
than they really are. Despite the ballooning enrollments in IDP,
or perhaps because of them, Anthony knows there are those on
campus who wouldn't mind seeing this program shut down. It is
drawing enrollments away from other majors, including those
currently contributing to the multidisciplinary effort as
partners. Others, he suspects, are eyeing the program as a
candidate for moving online with outsourcing for recruitment and
program management, the idea being that if it is growing as a
campus program, it will surely be a moneymaker online. If he and
his fellow colleagues cannot handle their current growing pains,
he worries that the institutional support they need will be
withdrawn or that the program might be effectively taken out of
their hands.},
keywords = {Design Education, Instructional Design, Learning Experience (LX) Design, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinary Education},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {incollection}
}
Hustling across campus at Mid-State University, Anthony Cerise,
an associate professor in the College of Education, juggles his
backpack, his morning coffee in a paper cup, and the agenda he
just printed for a meeting to which he hopes he will not be
late. His scarf is flapping across his face thanks to a stiff
fall breeze, blinding him off and on, but in a stroke of luck he
spots the campus bus in time to flag it down, only spilling a
little coffee as he does so. He sprints up the bus steps and
flops down on a worn vinyl seat just behind the driver, who sees
him on this route between the education and engineering
buildings often enough not to require his campus ID when he
boards. Good thing, too; he doesn't have a hand free to fish his
wallet out of his pocket. It was also fortunate that he caught
the bus, he thinks; it's important to arrive on time today
without having to sprint. This meeting is being held to discuss
issues with the IDP (or, as the dean always states in full, the
Integrated Design Program). Showing up disheveled, let alone
late, would not put him on the right foot. Sure, the program is
a big success—that's the problem, in fact; it has grown so
large and so quickly that he and his colleagues desperately need
to confer on where it is coming apart at the seams. But Anthony
is keenly aware of the tensions which have existed in the
program since the beginning, not to mention those between the
program and the administration right now. As the leader of the
faculty team which designs and implements the program, he works
to keep an even keel and to exude confidence on behalf of them
all. He'd like to maintain that presence. More than that, he
doesn't want to give Roger Went, head of the administrative
steering committee, any reason to carry back to the other deans
an impression that their current growing pains are any worse
than they really are. Despite the ballooning enrollments in IDP,
or perhaps because of them, Anthony knows there are those on
campus who wouldn't mind seeing this program shut down. It is
drawing enrollments away from other majors, including those
currently contributing to the multidisciplinary effort as
partners. Others, he suspects, are eyeing the program as a
candidate for moving online with outsourcing for recruitment and
program management, the idea being that if it is growing as a
campus program, it will surely be a moneymaker online. If he and
his fellow colleagues cannot handle their current growing pains,
he worries that the institutional support they need will be
withdrawn or that the program might be effectively taken out of
their hands.
an associate professor in the College of Education, juggles his
backpack, his morning coffee in a paper cup, and the agenda he
just printed for a meeting to which he hopes he will not be
late. His scarf is flapping across his face thanks to a stiff
fall breeze, blinding him off and on, but in a stroke of luck he
spots the campus bus in time to flag it down, only spilling a
little coffee as he does so. He sprints up the bus steps and
flops down on a worn vinyl seat just behind the driver, who sees
him on this route between the education and engineering
buildings often enough not to require his campus ID when he
boards. Good thing, too; he doesn't have a hand free to fish his
wallet out of his pocket. It was also fortunate that he caught
the bus, he thinks; it's important to arrive on time today
without having to sprint. This meeting is being held to discuss
issues with the IDP (or, as the dean always states in full, the
Integrated Design Program). Showing up disheveled, let alone
late, would not put him on the right foot. Sure, the program is
a big success—that's the problem, in fact; it has grown so
large and so quickly that he and his colleagues desperately need
to confer on where it is coming apart at the seams. But Anthony
is keenly aware of the tensions which have existed in the
program since the beginning, not to mention those between the
program and the administration right now. As the leader of the
faculty team which designs and implements the program, he works
to keep an even keel and to exude confidence on behalf of them
all. He'd like to maintain that presence. More than that, he
doesn't want to give Roger Went, head of the administrative
steering committee, any reason to carry back to the other deans
an impression that their current growing pains are any worse
than they really are. Despite the ballooning enrollments in IDP,
or perhaps because of them, Anthony knows there are those on
campus who wouldn't mind seeing this program shut down. It is
drawing enrollments away from other majors, including those
currently contributing to the multidisciplinary effort as
partners. Others, he suspects, are eyeing the program as a
candidate for moving online with outsourcing for recruitment and
program management, the idea being that if it is growing as a
campus program, it will surely be a moneymaker online. If he and
his fellow colleagues cannot handle their current growing pains,
he worries that the institutional support they need will be
withdrawn or that the program might be effectively taken out of
their hands.
Pivonka, Anne C; Makary, Laura; Gray, Colin M
Organizing metaphors for design methods Journal Article
In: International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 2024, ISSN: 1573-1804.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Design Knowledge, Design Methods, Ethics and Values, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy
@article{Pivonka2024-st,
title = {Organizing metaphors for design methods},
author = {Anne C Pivonka and Laura Makary and Colin M Gray},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-024-09880-y},
doi = {10.1007/s10798-024-09880-y},
issn = {1573-1804},
year = {2024},
date = {2024-02-01},
urldate = {2024-02-01},
journal = {International Journal of Technology and Design Education},
abstract = {Design students must develop competence in a wide range of areas
in order to be successful in their future practice. Increasingly,
knowledge of design methods is used to frame both a designer's
repertoire and their overall facility as a designer. However,
there is little research on how students build cognitive schema
in relation to design methods or how these schema relate to
specific patterns of engagement as developing designers. In this
paper, we report a multiple case study, capturing the experiences
of four advanced undergraduate students enrolled in a User
Experience (UX) design program at a large research-intensive
institution. Through reflexive thematic analysis on our interview
study outcomes, we describe the wide variety of metaphors that
these students used to organize and frame their understanding of
design methods, including both principles they used to consider
methods as knowledge, and the ways in which they felt these
organizing principles impacted their practice of design. We
conclude with recommendations for further research on the uptake
of methods-focused competence in design education and practice.},
keywords = {Design Education, Design Knowledge, Design Methods, Ethics and Values, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Design students must develop competence in a wide range of areas
in order to be successful in their future practice. Increasingly,
knowledge of design methods is used to frame both a designer's
repertoire and their overall facility as a designer. However,
there is little research on how students build cognitive schema
in relation to design methods or how these schema relate to
specific patterns of engagement as developing designers. In this
paper, we report a multiple case study, capturing the experiences
of four advanced undergraduate students enrolled in a User
Experience (UX) design program at a large research-intensive
institution. Through reflexive thematic analysis on our interview
study outcomes, we describe the wide variety of metaphors that
these students used to organize and frame their understanding of
design methods, including both principles they used to consider
methods as knowledge, and the ways in which they felt these
organizing principles impacted their practice of design. We
conclude with recommendations for further research on the uptake
of methods-focused competence in design education and practice.
in order to be successful in their future practice. Increasingly,
knowledge of design methods is used to frame both a designer's
repertoire and their overall facility as a designer. However,
there is little research on how students build cognitive schema
in relation to design methods or how these schema relate to
specific patterns of engagement as developing designers. In this
paper, we report a multiple case study, capturing the experiences
of four advanced undergraduate students enrolled in a User
Experience (UX) design program at a large research-intensive
institution. Through reflexive thematic analysis on our interview
study outcomes, we describe the wide variety of metaphors that
these students used to organize and frame their understanding of
design methods, including both principles they used to consider
methods as knowledge, and the ways in which they felt these
organizing principles impacted their practice of design. We
conclude with recommendations for further research on the uptake
of methods-focused competence in design education and practice.
2023
Parsons, Paul C; Shukla, Prakash; Baigelenov, Ali; Gray, Colin M
Developing Framing Judgment Ability: Student Perceptions from a Graduate UX Design Program Proceedings Article
In: EduCHI 2023: 5th Annual Symposium on HCI Education (EduCHI '23), Hamburg, Germany, 2023.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Design Judgment, Design Theory, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy
@inproceedings{Parsons2023-op,
title = {Developing Framing Judgment Ability: Student Perceptions from a Graduate UX Design Program},
author = {Paul C Parsons and Prakash Shukla and Ali Baigelenov and Colin M Gray},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3587399.3587401
https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023_Parsonsetal_EduCHI_FramingJudgmentAbility.pdf},
doi = {10.1145/3587399.3587401},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-04-28},
urldate = {2023-04-28},
booktitle = {EduCHI 2023: 5th Annual Symposium on HCI Education (EduCHI
'23)},
address = {Hamburg, Germany},
abstract = {Making framing judgments is at the heart of design. When faced
with complex, open-ended situations, designers need to exercise
good judgment to identify the core of the problem at hand and
set the boundaries of the conceptual space through which the
design process will unfold. While framing ability is broadly
recognized as important, the factors that contribute to its
development in educational settings are not well understood,
particularly in the context of HCI education. In this study, we
collected data from master's students in a UX design program at
several points in time across their program journey. We
interviewed 11 of these students in their final semester, having
them reflect on how their ability to make framing judgments has
evolved over time. We highlight pedagogical factors relevant for
the development of their framing ability as indicated by the
students. Our findings also highlight the impact of framing
ability on other design activities and personal design
philosophy.},
keywords = {Design Education, Design Judgment, Design Theory, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Making framing judgments is at the heart of design. When faced
with complex, open-ended situations, designers need to exercise
good judgment to identify the core of the problem at hand and
set the boundaries of the conceptual space through which the
design process will unfold. While framing ability is broadly
recognized as important, the factors that contribute to its
development in educational settings are not well understood,
particularly in the context of HCI education. In this study, we
collected data from master's students in a UX design program at
several points in time across their program journey. We
interviewed 11 of these students in their final semester, having
them reflect on how their ability to make framing judgments has
evolved over time. We highlight pedagogical factors relevant for
the development of their framing ability as indicated by the
students. Our findings also highlight the impact of framing
ability on other design activities and personal design
philosophy.
with complex, open-ended situations, designers need to exercise
good judgment to identify the core of the problem at hand and
set the boundaries of the conceptual space through which the
design process will unfold. While framing ability is broadly
recognized as important, the factors that contribute to its
development in educational settings are not well understood,
particularly in the context of HCI education. In this study, we
collected data from master's students in a UX design program at
several points in time across their program journey. We
interviewed 11 of these students in their final semester, having
them reflect on how their ability to make framing judgments has
evolved over time. We highlight pedagogical factors relevant for
the development of their framing ability as indicated by the
students. Our findings also highlight the impact of framing
ability on other design activities and personal design
philosophy.
Gray, Colin M; Parsons, Paul C
Building Student Capacity to Engage with Design Methods Proceedings Article
In: EduCHI 2023: 5th Annual Symposium on HCI Education (EduCHI '23), Hamburg, Germany, 2023.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Design Knowledge, Design Methods, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy
@inproceedings{Gray_undated-nk,
title = {Building Student Capacity to Engage with Design Methods},
author = {Colin M Gray and Paul C Parsons},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/3587399.3587415
https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023_GrayParsons_EduCHI_MasterclassDesignMethods.pdf},
doi = {10.1145/3587399.3587415},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-04-28},
urldate = {2023-04-28},
booktitle = {EduCHI 2023: 5th Annual Symposium on HCI Education
(EduCHI '23)},
address = {Hamburg, Germany},
abstract = {Knowledge of design methods is critical for careers in
User Experience (UX) design and other fields commonly
served by HCI programs. In this masterclass, we will seek
to bring together the knowledge contained in key texts
commonly used in HCI education and the evident pedagogical
challenges that underlie codified methods knowledge. Such
fundamental questions at this intersection include: What
kind of knowledge do methods contain? How do students
learn about methods? and How do we know when students have
sufficient knowledge of methods to continue engaging in
adaptation, use, and creation in the future? We will
collaboratively address these questions, laying the
groundwork for participants to consider the following
issues in their own curriculum.},
keywords = {Design Education, Design Knowledge, Design Methods, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Knowledge of design methods is critical for careers in
User Experience (UX) design and other fields commonly
served by HCI programs. In this masterclass, we will seek
to bring together the knowledge contained in key texts
commonly used in HCI education and the evident pedagogical
challenges that underlie codified methods knowledge. Such
fundamental questions at this intersection include: What
kind of knowledge do methods contain? How do students
learn about methods? and How do we know when students have
sufficient knowledge of methods to continue engaging in
adaptation, use, and creation in the future? We will
collaboratively address these questions, laying the
groundwork for participants to consider the following
issues in their own curriculum.
User Experience (UX) design and other fields commonly
served by HCI programs. In this masterclass, we will seek
to bring together the knowledge contained in key texts
commonly used in HCI education and the evident pedagogical
challenges that underlie codified methods knowledge. Such
fundamental questions at this intersection include: What
kind of knowledge do methods contain? How do students
learn about methods? and How do we know when students have
sufficient knowledge of methods to continue engaging in
adaptation, use, and creation in the future? We will
collaboratively address these questions, laying the
groundwork for participants to consider the following
issues in their own curriculum.
Gray, Colin M; Williams, Rua M; Parsons, Paul C; Toombs, Austin L; Westbrook, Abbee
Trajectories of Student Engagement with Social Justice-Informed Design Work Book Section
In: Hokanson, Brad; Exter, Marisa; Schmidt, Matthew M; Tawfik, Andrew A (Ed.): Toward Inclusive Learning Design: Social Justice, Equity, and Community, pp. 289–301, Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, 2023, ISSN: 2625-0012.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Critical Theory, Design Education, Digital Civics, Ethics and Values, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy, UX Practice
@incollection{Gray2023-sf,
title = {Trajectories of Student Engagement with Social Justice-Informed Design Work},
author = {Colin M Gray and Rua M Williams and Paul C Parsons and Austin L Toombs and Abbee Westbrook},
editor = {Brad Hokanson and Marisa Exter and Matthew M Schmidt and Andrew A Tawfik},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37697-9_22},
doi = {10.1007/978-3-031-37697-9_22},
issn = {2625-0012},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-01-01},
urldate = {2023-01-01},
booktitle = {Toward Inclusive Learning Design: Social Justice, Equity, and
Community},
pages = {289–301},
publisher = {Springer Nature Switzerland},
address = {Cham},
abstract = {Designers are increasingly interested in using methodologies
that foreground the politics of design, moving beyond
product-centered notions of work that are common even within
human-centered design traditions. In this paper, we document the
experiences of undergraduate UX design students as they used a
digital civics approach to support local community needs. We
highlight how students sought to frame their design work and
outcomes, describing successful and unsuccessful trajectories of
engagement with social justice principles.},
keywords = {Critical Theory, Design Education, Digital Civics, Ethics and Values, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy, UX Practice},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {incollection}
}
Designers are increasingly interested in using methodologies
that foreground the politics of design, moving beyond
product-centered notions of work that are common even within
human-centered design traditions. In this paper, we document the
experiences of undergraduate UX design students as they used a
digital civics approach to support local community needs. We
highlight how students sought to frame their design work and
outcomes, describing successful and unsuccessful trajectories of
engagement with social justice principles.
that foreground the politics of design, moving beyond
product-centered notions of work that are common even within
human-centered design traditions. In this paper, we document the
experiences of undergraduate UX design students as they used a
digital civics approach to support local community needs. We
highlight how students sought to frame their design work and
outcomes, describing successful and unsuccessful trajectories of
engagement with social justice principles.
2022
Pivonka, Anne; Makary, Laura; Gray, Colin M
Organizing Metaphors for Design Methods in Intermediate HCI Education Proceedings Article
In: EduCHI'22: 4th Annual Symposium on HCI Education, 2022.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Design Knowledge, Design Methods, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy, UX Knowledge
@inproceedings{Pivonka2022-nm,
title = {Organizing Metaphors for Design Methods in Intermediate HCI Education},
author = {Anne Pivonka and Laura Makary and Colin M Gray},
url = {https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2022_PivonkaMakaryGray_EduCHI_OrganizingMetaphorsDesignMethods.pdf},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-04-01},
urldate = {2022-04-01},
booktitle = {EduCHI'22: 4th Annual Symposium on HCI Education},
abstract = {Design students must develop competence in a wide range of areas
in order to be successful in their future practice.
Increasingly, knowledge of design methods is used to frame both
a designer's repertoire and their overall facility as a
designer. However, there is little research on how students
build cognitive schema in relation to design methods or how
these schema relate to specific epistemological patterns of
engagement. In this research paper, we report a multiple case
study, capturing the experiences of four advanced undergraduate
UX design students at a large research-intensive institution.
Through an interview study and subsequent analysis, we describe
the wide variety of organizing metaphors that these students
used to frame their understanding and performance of design
methods, including both principles they used to consider methods
as knowledge, and the ways in which these organizing principles
impacted their practice of design. We conclude with
recommendations for further research on the uptake of
methods-focused competence in HCI education and practice.},
keywords = {Design Education, Design Knowledge, Design Methods, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy, UX Knowledge},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Design students must develop competence in a wide range of areas
in order to be successful in their future practice.
Increasingly, knowledge of design methods is used to frame both
a designer's repertoire and their overall facility as a
designer. However, there is little research on how students
build cognitive schema in relation to design methods or how
these schema relate to specific epistemological patterns of
engagement. In this research paper, we report a multiple case
study, capturing the experiences of four advanced undergraduate
UX design students at a large research-intensive institution.
Through an interview study and subsequent analysis, we describe
the wide variety of organizing metaphors that these students
used to frame their understanding and performance of design
methods, including both principles they used to consider methods
as knowledge, and the ways in which these organizing principles
impacted their practice of design. We conclude with
recommendations for further research on the uptake of
methods-focused competence in HCI education and practice.
in order to be successful in their future practice.
Increasingly, knowledge of design methods is used to frame both
a designer's repertoire and their overall facility as a
designer. However, there is little research on how students
build cognitive schema in relation to design methods or how
these schema relate to specific epistemological patterns of
engagement. In this research paper, we report a multiple case
study, capturing the experiences of four advanced undergraduate
UX design students at a large research-intensive institution.
Through an interview study and subsequent analysis, we describe
the wide variety of organizing metaphors that these students
used to frame their understanding and performance of design
methods, including both principles they used to consider methods
as knowledge, and the ways in which these organizing principles
impacted their practice of design. We conclude with
recommendations for further research on the uptake of
methods-focused competence in HCI education and practice.
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."
2021
Di, Zhu; Gray, Colin M; Toombs, Austin L; Liu, Wei
Building a Cross-Cultural UX Design Dual Degree Proceedings Article
In: IASDR 2021: The Ninth Congress of the International Association of Societies of Design Research, 2021.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Cross-Cultural Education, Design Education, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy, UX Knowledge
@inproceedings{Di2021-wv,
title = {Building a Cross-Cultural UX Design Dual Degree},
author = {Zhu Di and Colin M Gray and Austin L Toombs and Wei Liu},
url = {https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/2021_Dietal_IASDR_CrossCulturalUXDesignDualDegree.pdf},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-12-01},
urldate = {2021-12-01},
booktitle = {IASDR 2021: The Ninth Congress of the International
Association of Societies of Design Research},
abstract = {User Experience (UX) design has expanded rapidly across a range of industry and educational contexts in the last decade. While the core knowledge and “center” of UX is still emergent and contested, new educational programs to train the next generation of UX designers have begun to outline pedagogical practices and concepts that have relevance to the present and future of UX as a discipline. In this paper, we take a broad view of UX preparation, building on a case study of a global dual degree partnership between programs in the United States and China. We recount our individual experiences of building new programs in UX at the undergraduate and graduate levels, and the process of mapping our curricula to offer a bidirectional dual degree program that launched in 2019.},
keywords = {Cross-Cultural Education, Design Education, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy, UX Knowledge},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
User Experience (UX) design has expanded rapidly across a range of industry and educational contexts in the last decade. While the core knowledge and “center” of UX is still emergent and contested, new educational programs to train the next generation of UX designers have begun to outline pedagogical practices and concepts that have relevance to the present and future of UX as a discipline. In this paper, we take a broad view of UX preparation, building on a case study of a global dual degree partnership between programs in the United States and China. We recount our individual experiences of building new programs in UX at the undergraduate and graduate levels, and the process of mapping our curricula to offer a bidirectional dual degree program that launched in 2019.
Gray, Colin M
"Scaling Up" and Adapting to Crisis: Shifting a Residential UX Studio Program Online Journal Article
In: Design and Technology Education, 2021.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy
@article{Gray2021-oq,
title = {"Scaling Up" and Adapting to Crisis: Shifting a Residential UX Studio Program Online},
author = {Colin M Gray},
url = {https://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/DATE/article/view/2969},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-11-01},
urldate = {2021-11-01},
journal = {Design and Technology Education},
abstract = {Our undergraduate UX program at Purdue University launched in 2016 as one of the first UX-focused undergraduate degree programs in the United States, intentionally designed to support the unique characteristics of a residential, research-intensive, land-grant institution. We designed multiple overlapping studio experiences that formed multiple connections among cohorts, supporting mentorship, cognitive apprenticeship, the construction of social bonds, and reflection on one’s own development as a designer. Our program was experiencing quick growth, with our cohort size growing from 20 students in 2016 to 50 students in 2021. With the onset of pandemic restrictions, the challenges of “scaling up” and the challenges of building a virtual studio pedagogy thus met. Our “hidden curriculum” of peer feedback and tacit learning, critique as a means of socialization and feedback, emancipation of the self, and allowance for identity formation pointed towards studio properties that were central to our pedagogy and needed to be reformulated or rethought. I describe the resulting “dimensions of crisis” that impacted our pedagogy and practice, the new supports for studio learning practices that we designed, and how these changes may lead to lasting changes to our residential program once the restrictions of the pandemic subside.},
keywords = {Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Our undergraduate UX program at Purdue University launched in 2016 as one of the first UX-focused undergraduate degree programs in the United States, intentionally designed to support the unique characteristics of a residential, research-intensive, land-grant institution. We designed multiple overlapping studio experiences that formed multiple connections among cohorts, supporting mentorship, cognitive apprenticeship, the construction of social bonds, and reflection on one’s own development as a designer. Our program was experiencing quick growth, with our cohort size growing from 20 students in 2016 to 50 students in 2021. With the onset of pandemic restrictions, the challenges of “scaling up” and the challenges of building a virtual studio pedagogy thus met. Our “hidden curriculum” of peer feedback and tacit learning, critique as a means of socialization and feedback, emancipation of the self, and allowance for identity formation pointed towards studio properties that were central to our pedagogy and needed to be reformulated or rethought. I describe the resulting “dimensions of crisis” that impacted our pedagogy and practice, the new supports for studio learning practices that we designed, and how these changes may lead to lasting changes to our residential program once the restrictions of the pandemic subside.
2020
Gray, Colin M; Parsons, Paul; Toombs, Austin L
Building a Holistic Design Identity Through Integrated Studio Education Book Chapter
In: Hokanson, Brad; Clinton, Gregory; Tawfik, Andrew; Grincewicz, Amy; Schmidt, Matthew (Ed.): Educational Technology Beyond Content - A New Focus for Learning, pp. 43-55, Springer, 2020.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, HCI Education, Instructional Design, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinary Education
@inbook{Gray2020e,
title = {Building a Holistic Design Identity Through Integrated Studio Education},
author = {Colin M Gray and Paul Parsons and Austin L Toombs},
editor = {Brad Hokanson and Gregory Clinton and Andrew Tawfik and Amy Grincewicz and Matthew Schmidt},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37254-5_4},
doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-37254-5_4},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-04-01},
urldate = {2020-04-01},
booktitle = {Educational Technology Beyond Content - A New Focus for Learning},
pages = {43-55},
publisher = {Springer},
abstract = {Design education has quickly evolved from product- to interaction-focused outcomes. As the technical skills needed for success become increasingly unstable, a holistic means of instruction is needed to prepare students for the realities of practice. In this chapter, we describe the creation of a novel undergraduate user experience (UX) design program that focuses on learning strands that weave throughout a studio-based program. Instead of relying upon content-delineated coursework, where strands of competence necessary for practice are often siloed, the integrated studio encourages students to build a flexible design identity, relating multiple strands of content to one another in a systematic way throughout their program.},
keywords = {Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, HCI Education, Instructional Design, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinary Education},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inbook}
}
Design education has quickly evolved from product- to interaction-focused outcomes. As the technical skills needed for success become increasingly unstable, a holistic means of instruction is needed to prepare students for the realities of practice. In this chapter, we describe the creation of a novel undergraduate user experience (UX) design program that focuses on learning strands that weave throughout a studio-based program. Instead of relying upon content-delineated coursework, where strands of competence necessary for practice are often siloed, the integrated studio encourages students to build a flexible design identity, relating multiple strands of content to one another in a systematic way throughout their program.
Gray, Colin M; Parsons, Paul; Toombs, Austin L; Rasche, Nancy; Vorvoreanu, Mihaela
Designing an Aesthetic Learner Experience: UX, Instructional Design, and Design Pedagogy Journal Article
In: International Journal of Designs for Learning, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 41-58, 2020.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Case, Design Education, HCI Education, Instructional Design, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinary Education
@article{Gray2020-sk,
title = {Designing an Aesthetic Learner Experience: UX, Instructional Design, and Design Pedagogy},
author = {Colin M Gray and Paul Parsons and Austin L Toombs and Nancy Rasche and Mihaela Vorvoreanu},
doi = {10.14434/ijdl.v11i1.26065},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-01},
urldate = {2020-01-01},
journal = {International Journal of Designs for Learning},
volume = {11},
number = {1},
pages = {41-58},
abstract = {In this design case, we describe a multi-year process during which a team of faculty designed a four-year undergraduate major in user experience (UX) design at a large research-intensive institution. We document the program- and course-level design experiences of five faculty members. This multi-year process has culminated in a dual-strand, integrated studio learning environment. Two types of studios—“learning” and “experience” studios—form the core of the program, with learning studios allowing cohort-specific skills development and practice, and experience studios providing cross-cohort opportunities to work on industry projects. We detail our process of developing this course sequence and the program-level connecting points among the courses, identifying institutional supports and barriers, the unique and varied skillsets of the involved faculty, and the growing agency and competence of our students in the program.
},
keywords = {Design Case, Design Education, HCI Education, Instructional Design, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinary Education},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
In this design case, we describe a multi-year process during which a team of faculty designed a four-year undergraduate major in user experience (UX) design at a large research-intensive institution. We document the program- and course-level design experiences of five faculty members. This multi-year process has culminated in a dual-strand, integrated studio learning environment. Two types of studios—“learning” and “experience” studios—form the core of the program, with learning studios allowing cohort-specific skills development and practice, and experience studios providing cross-cohort opportunities to work on industry projects. We detail our process of developing this course sequence and the program-level connecting points among the courses, identifying institutional supports and barriers, the unique and varied skillsets of the involved faculty, and the growing agency and competence of our students in the program.
Boling, Elizabeth; Gray, Colin M; Smith, Kennon M
Educating for design character in higher education: Challenges in studio pedagogy Proceedings Article
In: Proceedings of the Design Research Society, Design Research Society, Brisbane, Australia, 2020.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, Identity, Studio Pedagogy
@inproceedings{Boling2020-ci,
title = {Educating for design character in higher education: Challenges in studio pedagogy},
author = {Elizabeth Boling and Colin M Gray and Kennon M Smith},
url = {https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/2020_BolingGraySmith_DRS_DesignCharacter.pdf
http://dx.doi.org/10.21606/drs.2020.120},
doi = {10.21606/drs.2020.120},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-01},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the Design Research Society},
publisher = {Design Research Society},
address = {Brisbane, Australia},
abstract = {Some particular challenges in studio pedagogy arise from
teaching for design character versus focusing solely on skills,
knowledge or the cognitive processes of our students. In this
paper, three authors with extensive combined experience in
studio learning, teaching, and scholarship address these
challenges via reflection on our own experiences of research and
teaching and in-depth discussion with each other. We adopt a
co/autoethnographic approach (Coia & Taylor, 2009), identifying
a range of challenges we have faced ourselves across three
established and emergent design disciplines. These challenges
are grouped in relationship to students, to curriculum, to our
colleagues, and to ourselves. In our experience these challenges
affect instructors differently than---and in addition to---those
presented by traditional studio, and we present opportunities to
build on these articulated challenges to further studio
pedagogy.},
keywords = {Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, Identity, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Some particular challenges in studio pedagogy arise from
teaching for design character versus focusing solely on skills,
knowledge or the cognitive processes of our students. In this
paper, three authors with extensive combined experience in
studio learning, teaching, and scholarship address these
challenges via reflection on our own experiences of research and
teaching and in-depth discussion with each other. We adopt a
co/autoethnographic approach (Coia & Taylor, 2009), identifying
a range of challenges we have faced ourselves across three
established and emergent design disciplines. These challenges
are grouped in relationship to students, to curriculum, to our
colleagues, and to ourselves. In our experience these challenges
affect instructors differently than---and in addition to---those
presented by traditional studio, and we present opportunities to
build on these articulated challenges to further studio
pedagogy.
teaching for design character versus focusing solely on skills,
knowledge or the cognitive processes of our students. In this
paper, three authors with extensive combined experience in
studio learning, teaching, and scholarship address these
challenges via reflection on our own experiences of research and
teaching and in-depth discussion with each other. We adopt a
co/autoethnographic approach (Coia & Taylor, 2009), identifying
a range of challenges we have faced ourselves across three
established and emergent design disciplines. These challenges
are grouped in relationship to students, to curriculum, to our
colleagues, and to ourselves. In our experience these challenges
affect instructors differently than---and in addition to---those
presented by traditional studio, and we present opportunities to
build on these articulated challenges to further studio
pedagogy.
Varner, Deena; Gray, Colin M; Exter, Marisa E
A Content-Agnostic Praxis for Transdisciplinary Education Book Chapter
In: Hokanson, Brad; Clinton, Gregory; Tawfik, Andrew A; Grincewicz, Amy; Schmidt, Matthew (Ed.): Educational Technology Beyond Content: A New Focus for Learning, pp. 141-151, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2020, ISBN: 9783030372545.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Instructional Design, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinarity, Transdisciplinary Education
@inbook{Varner2020b,
title = {A Content-Agnostic Praxis for Transdisciplinary Education},
author = {Deena Varner and Colin M Gray and Marisa E Exter},
editor = {Brad Hokanson and Gregory Clinton and Andrew A Tawfik and Amy Grincewicz and Matthew Schmidt},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37254-5_12},
doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-37254-5_12},
isbn = {9783030372545},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-01},
booktitle = {Educational Technology Beyond Content: A New Focus for Learning},
pages = {141-151},
publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
address = {Cham},
abstract = {In this chapter, we describe a novel transdisciplinary undergraduate program that is focused on developing students’ praxis to address problems across disciplinary boundaries and provide a means to interrogate discipline-specific content, epistemologies, and research methodologies they might encounter across those spaces. We argue that undergraduate educators have the potential to inculcate students’ praxis to effect social innovation across disciplinary boundaries by facilitating engagement with three interrelated processes: habits of mind, ways of knowing, and the adoption of a transdisciplinary, content-agnostic skillset. We describe each set of processes, along with core transdisciplinary skills and ways of knowing, building towards a content-agnostic instructional design approach.},
keywords = {Design Education, Instructional Design, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinarity, Transdisciplinary Education},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inbook}
}
In this chapter, we describe a novel transdisciplinary undergraduate program that is focused on developing students’ praxis to address problems across disciplinary boundaries and provide a means to interrogate discipline-specific content, epistemologies, and research methodologies they might encounter across those spaces. We argue that undergraduate educators have the potential to inculcate students’ praxis to effect social innovation across disciplinary boundaries by facilitating engagement with three interrelated processes: habits of mind, ways of knowing, and the adoption of a transdisciplinary, content-agnostic skillset. We describe each set of processes, along with core transdisciplinary skills and ways of knowing, building towards a content-agnostic instructional design approach.
2019
Gray, Colin M
Democratizing assessment practices through multimodal critique in the design classroom Journal Article
In: International Journal of Technology and Design Education, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 929-946, 2019, ISSN: 1573-1804.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Critique, Design Education, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy
@article{Gray2018-pv,
title = {Democratizing assessment practices through multimodal critique in the design classroom},
author = {Colin M Gray},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9471-2},
doi = {10.1007/s10798-018-9471-2},
issn = {1573-1804},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-08-01},
urldate = {2019-08-01},
journal = {International Journal of Technology and Design Education},
volume = {29},
number = {4},
pages = {929-946},
abstract = {Critique is a primary method of assessment and feedback used in design education, yet is not well understood apart from traditional instructor-led activities in physical learning spaces. In this study, we analyze a series of group critiques in a human–computer interaction learning experience, focusing on an emergent instructional design for technologically-mediated critique created by experienced students serving as peer mentors. Peer mentors designed complex interactions that supported assessment in the design classroom, including multiple technology-supported modes of critique beyond the traditional oral critique. The modes of critique, and the ways in which they intertwined, included: (1) public oral critique led by the instructor, (2) a critique document authored by experienced students in real-time using Google Docs, and (3) backchannel chat used by experienced students in Google Docs to facilitate and organize their critique. Using this model of distributed assessment, which we refer to as multimodal critique, the amount of feedback and number of interlocutors increased dramatically, facilitating participation by students and peer mentors alike. These interactions indicate instructional affordances for including many simultaneous users within an existing assessment infrastructure using readily accessible technologies, and a means of activating student development at multiple levels of expertise.},
keywords = {Critique, Design Education, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Critique is a primary method of assessment and feedback used in design education, yet is not well understood apart from traditional instructor-led activities in physical learning spaces. In this study, we analyze a series of group critiques in a human–computer interaction learning experience, focusing on an emergent instructional design for technologically-mediated critique created by experienced students serving as peer mentors. Peer mentors designed complex interactions that supported assessment in the design classroom, including multiple technology-supported modes of critique beyond the traditional oral critique. The modes of critique, and the ways in which they intertwined, included: (1) public oral critique led by the instructor, (2) a critique document authored by experienced students in real-time using Google Docs, and (3) backchannel chat used by experienced students in Google Docs to facilitate and organize their critique. Using this model of distributed assessment, which we refer to as multimodal critique, the amount of feedback and number of interlocutors increased dramatically, facilitating participation by students and peer mentors alike. These interactions indicate instructional affordances for including many simultaneous users within an existing assessment infrastructure using readily accessible technologies, and a means of activating student development at multiple levels of expertise.
Gray, Colin M; Chivukula, Shruthi Sai
Engaging Design Students in Value Discovery as "Everyday Ethicists" Proceedings Article
In: Dialogue: Proceedings of the AIGA Design Educators Community Conferences, pp. 187–189, AIGA Design Educators Community, 2019.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Dark Patterns, Design Education, Ethics and Values, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinary Education
@inproceedings{Gray2019-ez,
title = {Engaging Design Students in Value Discovery as "Everyday Ethicists"},
author = {Colin M Gray and Shruthi Sai Chivukula},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/mpub.11688977},
doi = {10.3998/mpub.11688977},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-01-01},
booktitle = {Dialogue: Proceedings of the AIGA Design Educators Community Conferences},
volume = {(Decipher, Vol. 1)},
pages = {187--189},
publisher = {AIGA Design Educators Community},
abstract = {In creating the not-yet-existing, the designer takes on a
substantial weight of responsibility not only for the present
use of a designed artifact or experience but also the
potential futures that these artifacts or experiences may
potentially embody. In this way, design activity can be viewed
as always already being linked to social change, mediated
through the character of the designer. In this conversation,
we seek to explore how design activity—in particular, the
education of designers—might celebrate this ethical
responsibility as a form of activism that inherently
celebrates and embodies a certain set of social values while
simultaneously excluding other possible social values. We
advocate for a repositioning of the role of values and ethics
in relation to design activity, seeing ethical concerns not as
a constraint or barrier to action but rather as a generative
driver of design concepts through the process of value
discovery.},
keywords = {Dark Patterns, Design Education, Ethics and Values, Studio Pedagogy, Transdisciplinary Education},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
In creating the not-yet-existing, the designer takes on a
substantial weight of responsibility not only for the present
use of a designed artifact or experience but also the
potential futures that these artifacts or experiences may
potentially embody. In this way, design activity can be viewed
as always already being linked to social change, mediated
through the character of the designer. In this conversation,
we seek to explore how design activity—in particular, the
education of designers—might celebrate this ethical
responsibility as a form of activism that inherently
celebrates and embodies a certain set of social values while
simultaneously excluding other possible social values. We
advocate for a repositioning of the role of values and ethics
in relation to design activity, seeing ethical concerns not as
a constraint or barrier to action but rather as a generative
driver of design concepts through the process of value
discovery.
substantial weight of responsibility not only for the present
use of a designed artifact or experience but also the
potential futures that these artifacts or experiences may
potentially embody. In this way, design activity can be viewed
as always already being linked to social change, mediated
through the character of the designer. In this conversation,
we seek to explore how design activity—in particular, the
education of designers—might celebrate this ethical
responsibility as a form of activism that inherently
celebrates and embodies a certain set of social values while
simultaneously excluding other possible social values. We
advocate for a repositioning of the role of values and ethics
in relation to design activity, seeing ethical concerns not as
a constraint or barrier to action but rather as a generative
driver of design concepts through the process of value
discovery.
2016
Gray, Colin M; Smith, Kennon M
Critical Views of Studio Book Section
In: Boling, Elizabeth; Schwier, Richard A; Gray, Colin M; Smith, Kennon M; Campbell, Katy (Ed.): Studio Teaching in Higher Education: Selected Design Cases, pp. 260–270, Routledge, New York, NY, 2016.
BibTeX | Tags: Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, Studio Pedagogy
@incollection{Gray2016-kv,
title = {Critical Views of Studio},
author = {Colin M Gray and Kennon M Smith},
editor = {Elizabeth Boling and Richard A Schwier and Colin M Gray and Kennon M Smith and Katy Campbell},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-01},
booktitle = {Studio Teaching in Higher Education: Selected Design Cases},
pages = {260--270},
publisher = {Routledge},
address = {New York, NY},
keywords = {Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {incollection}
}
Gray, Colin M
Emergent Views of Studio Book Section
In: Boling, Elizabeth; Schwier, Richard A; Gray, Colin M; Smith, Kennon M; Campbell, Katy (Ed.): Studio Teaching in Higher Education: Selected Design Cases, pp. 271-281, Routledge, 2016, ISBN: 9781138902411.
BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Studio Pedagogy
@incollection{Gray2016-jg,
title = {Emergent Views of Studio},
author = {Colin M Gray},
editor = {Elizabeth Boling and Richard A Schwier and Colin M Gray and Kennon M Smith and Katy Campbell},
isbn = {9781138902411},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-01},
booktitle = {Studio Teaching in Higher Education: Selected Design Cases},
pages = {271-281},
publisher = {Routledge},
keywords = {Design Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {incollection}
}
Boling, Elizabeth; Schwier, Richard A; Gray, Colin M; Smith, Kennon M; Campbell, Katy (Ed.)
Studio Teaching in Higher Education: Selected Design Cases Book
Routledge, New York, NY, 2016.
Links | BibTeX | Tags: Design Education, Studio Pedagogy
@book{Boling2016-xu,
title = {Studio Teaching in Higher Education: Selected Design Cases},
editor = {Elizabeth Boling and Richard A Schwier and Colin M Gray and Kennon M Smith and Katy Campbell},
url = {https://www.routledge.com/Studio-Teaching-in-Higher-Education-Selected-Design-Cases/Boling-Schwier-Gray-Smith-Campbell/p/book/9781138902435},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-01},
publisher = {Routledge},
address = {New York, NY},
keywords = {Design Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {book}
}
2015
Gray, Colin M
Critiquing the Role of the Learner and Context in Aesthetic Learning Experiences Book Chapter
In: The Design of Learning Experience, pp. 199–213, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2015.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, Instructional Design, Studio Pedagogy
@inbook{Gray2015-hu,
title = {Critiquing the Role of the Learner and Context in Aesthetic Learning Experiences},
author = {Colin M Gray},
url = {https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/2015_Gray_LearningExperiences_CritiquingLearnerandContext.pdf
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-16504-2_14},
doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-16504-2_14},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-01-01},
booktitle = {The Design of Learning Experience},
pages = {199--213},
publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
address = {Cham},
abstract = {I critique the role of learners and context to more fully explore the latent conceptions and performance of aesthetic learning experiences in instructional design and technology. This critique is intended to allow for a fuller interrogation of how individual learners apprehend designed learning experiences, heightening the role of the instructional designer in envisioning such experiences. Using a 1-year ethnography of a graduate human–computer interaction program to document the felt student experience, I highlight the importance of understanding how learners construct their own experiences during the learning process through the roles they take on and the informal pedagogical experiences they create. I identify additional areas of research that are needed to expand our notions of designing for experience, informing both theory construction and practice.},
keywords = {Critical Pedagogy, Design Education, Instructional Design, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inbook}
}
I critique the role of learners and context to more fully explore the latent conceptions and performance of aesthetic learning experiences in instructional design and technology. This critique is intended to allow for a fuller interrogation of how individual learners apprehend designed learning experiences, heightening the role of the instructional designer in envisioning such experiences. Using a 1-year ethnography of a graduate human–computer interaction program to document the felt student experience, I highlight the importance of understanding how learners construct their own experiences during the learning process through the roles they take on and the informal pedagogical experiences they create. I identify additional areas of research that are needed to expand our notions of designing for experience, informing both theory construction and practice.
2013
Gray, Colin M
Informal peer critique and the negotiation of habitus in a design studio Journal Article
In: Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 195–209, 2013, ISSN: 1474-273X.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Critical Pedagogy, Critique, Design Education, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy
@article{Gray2013-aw,
title = {Informal peer critique and the negotiation of habitus in a design studio},
author = {Colin M Gray},
url = {https://colingray.me/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/2013_Gray_ADCHE_InformalPeerCritique.pdf
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/intellect/adche/2013/00000012/00000002/art00005},
doi = {10.1386/adch.12.2.195_1},
issn = {1474-273X},
year = {2013},
date = {2013-12-01},
urldate = {2013-12-01},
journal = {Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education},
volume = {12},
number = {2},
pages = {195--209},
publisher = {Intellect},
abstract = {Critique is a central feature of design education, serving as both a structural mecha- nism to provide regular feedback, and as a high stakes assessment tool. However, this study addresses informal peer critique as an extension of this existing form, engaging students in communication outside of the formal pedagogy. The purpose of this study is to gain a greater understanding of the role of informal critique in exter- nalizing design thinking and judgment, as analysed through Bourdieu’s habitus. Structures surrounding critique, including the role of informal vs formal spaces, objectivity vs subjectivity of critique, and differences between professor and peer feedback are addressed. Beliefs about critique are analysed as critical elements of an evolving habitus, supported by or developed in response to the culture inscribed by the formal pedagogy. Informal critique reveals tacit design thinking and concep- tions of design, and outlines the co-construction of habitus between students and the formal pedagogy.},
keywords = {Critical Pedagogy, Critique, Design Education, HCI Education, Studio Pedagogy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Critique is a central feature of design education, serving as both a structural mecha- nism to provide regular feedback, and as a high stakes assessment tool. However, this study addresses informal peer critique as an extension of this existing form, engaging students in communication outside of the formal pedagogy. The purpose of this study is to gain a greater understanding of the role of informal critique in exter- nalizing design thinking and judgment, as analysed through Bourdieu’s habitus. Structures surrounding critique, including the role of informal vs formal spaces, objectivity vs subjectivity of critique, and differences between professor and peer feedback are addressed. Beliefs about critique are analysed as critical elements of an evolving habitus, supported by or developed in response to the culture inscribed by the formal pedagogy. Informal critique reveals tacit design thinking and concep- tions of design, and outlines the co-construction of habitus between students and the formal pedagogy.