Cited by 71Design Education and PracticeStudent Assessment and FeedbackArt Education and Development

Informal peer critique and the negotiation of habitus in a design studio

Gray, Colin M.·2013·Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education

Abstract

Critique is a central feature of design education, serving as both a structural mechanism 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 externalizing 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 conceptions of design, and outlines the co-construction of habitus between students and the formal pedagogy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1386/adch.12.2.195_1

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prior work has extensively documented what usability issues experts identify, but far less is known about how experts reason through these issues across stages of perception, interpretation, and projection.

    “While prior work has extensively documented what usability issues experts identify [35, 52], far less is known about how experts reason through these issues across stages of perception, interpretation, and projection [43, 76].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gray, C. M.
Affiliations
Indiana University Bloomington (US)
Corresponding author
Gray, Colin M.
Venue
Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education
Publisher
Intellect
Published
2013-12-01
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
195-209
ISSN
  • 1474-273X (ISSN-L)
  • 2040-0896
OpenAlex
W2328229129
Cited by
71
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5
FWCI
4.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Art Design & Communication in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Visual Arts and Performing Arts › Art Education and Development
Keywords
habitus, design education, design studio, design thinking, feedback, peer assessment, tacit knowledge, Pierre Bourdieu

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review