From Studio Practice to Online Design Education: Can We Teach Design Online? | De l’enseignement pratique en studio à l’enseignement en ligne : peut-on enseigner le design en ligne ?
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt27849Mots-clés :
design education, design studio, online design education, online design studio, technology-enhanced learningRésumé
Digital technology is reshaping the way higher education subjects are taught, including design. Various design disciplines use studio teaching as a pedagogy to educate students for professions in art and design. Studio teaching bases a high premium on face-to-face interactions which guide learning through dialogue and feedback on individual work. Many design educators believe it is difficult or even impossible to teach design online because of studio-based interactions. Is design one of those disciplines that cannot be taught online because of the studio culture? This study explores that question by investigating the effectiveness of teaching design subjects that employ a virtual classroom to manage peer-to-peer critiques, instructor feedback, and assignments. Twenty-eight first-year students participated in two online design subjects that required them to interact with fellow students and the design instructor via a Learning Management System. The experienced benefits and challenges of students and instructors are presented, and future research is highlighted.
La technologie numérique transforme la façon dont sont enseignées les disciplines de l’éducation postsecondaire, y compris le design. Différentes branches du design se servent de l’enseignement en studio comme pédagogie permettant de former les étudiants pour les métiers des arts et du design. L’enseignement en studio accorde une importance considérable aux interactions en personne qui orientent l’apprentissage par l’entremise du dialogue et de la rétroaction offerte sur le travail individuel. De nombreux enseignants de design croient qu’il est difficile, voire impossible, d’enseigner le design en ligne à cause des interactions en studio. Le design est-il l’une de ces disciplines que l’on ne peut pas enseigner en ligne à cause de la culture des studios? Cette étude explore la question en investiguant l’efficacité de sujets qui étudient le design à l’aide d’une salle de classe virtuelle, qui sert à gérer les critiques entre les pairs, les rétroactions de l’instructeur, ainsi que les travaux à effectuer. Vingt-huit étudiants de première année ont pris part à deux cours de design en ligne qui exigeaient d’eux qu’ils interagissent avec leurs camarades et avec l’instructeur par l’entremise d’un système de gestion de l'apprentissage. Les avantages et les défis dont les étudiants et les instructeurs ont fait l’expérience sont présentés, et des pistes sont proposées pour des études futures.
Références
Afacan, Y. (2016). Exploring the effectiveness of blended learning in interior design education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(5), 508-518. doi:10.1080/14703297.2015.1015595
Barber, T. C. (2011). The online crit: The community of inquiry meets design education. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 25(1). Retrieved from http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/723/1188
Bazeley, P. (2004). Issues in mixing qualitative and quantitative approaches to research. In R. Buber, J. Gadner, & L. Richards (Eds.), Applying qualitative methods to marketing management research (pp. 141-156). UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from http://www.researchsupport.com.au/MMIssues.pdf
Bender, D. M. (2005). Developing a collaborative multidisciplinary online design course. The Journal of Educators Online, 2(2), 1-12. doi:10.9743/jeo.2005.2.5
Bender, D. M., & Vredevoogd, J. D. (2006). Using online education technologies to support studio instruction. Educational Technology & Society, 9(4), 114-122. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b445/3102c2525b43c83bfd2dec28b64f56cf707e.pdf
Blair, B. (2006). ‘At the end of a huge crit in the summer, it was “crap” – I’d worked really hard but all she said was “fine” and I was gutted.’. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 5(2), 83-95. doi:10.1386/adch.5.2.83_1
Blythman, M., Orr, S., & Blair, B. (2007). Critiquing the crit: University of the Arts London. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/586074/Critiquing_the_Crit.
Brame, C. J. (2016). Effective educational videos: Principles and guidelines for maximizing student learning from video content. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(6), 1-6. doi:10.1187/cbe.16-03-0125
Blackboard. (2019). Blackboard Collaborate. Retrieved from https://www.blackboard.com/online-collaborative-learning/blackboard-collaborate.html
Cheng, N. Y.-W. (2000). Web-based teamwork in design education. Paper presented at the SiGraDi 2000: 4th Ibero-American Congress of Digital Graphics, 25-28 September 2000, Rio de Janiero, Brazil.
Coyne, R. D., Lee, J., & Petrova, D. (2017). Re-visiting the flipped classroom in a design context. Journal of Learning Design, 10(2), 1-13. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1134650.pdf
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Crowther, P. (2013). Understanding the signature pedagogy of the design studio and the opportunities for its technological enhancement. Journal of Learning Design, 6(3), 18-28. doi:10.5204/jld.v6i3.155
Day, P. (2012). The art group crit. How do you make a firing squad less scary? Networks. Retrieved from http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/projects/networks/issue-18-july-2012/the-art-group-crit.-how-do-you-make-a-firing-squad-less-scary
Ellmers, G. (2006). Reflection and graphic design pedagogy: Developing a reflective Framework to enhance learning in a graphic design tertiary environment. Paper presented at the ACUADS 2006 conference, Monash University, School of Art, Victorian College of the Arts, Melbourne. Retrieved from https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=creartspapers
Fleischmann, K. (2015). Democratisation of design and design learning - how do we educate the next-generation designer. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 8(6), 101–108. Retrieved from http://www.universitypublications.net/ijas/0806/pdf/B5R188.pdf
Fleischmann, K. (2016). Peer assessment: A learning opportunity for students in the creative arts. In C. Nygaard, J. Branch, & P. Bartholomew (Eds.), Assessing Learning in Higher Education (pp. 45-58). Oxford: Libri Publishing.
Fleischmann, K. (2018a). Online design education: Searching for a middle ground. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 1-22. doi:10.1177/1474022218758231
Fleischmann, K. (2018b). Hype or help? Technology-enhanced learning in the design classroom: An experiment in online collaboration. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 11(1), 331–342. Retrieved from http://www.universitypublications.net/ijas/0806/pdf/B5R188.pdf
Fielding, N. G. (2012). Triangulation and mixed methods designs: Data integration with new research technologies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 124-136. doi:10.1177/1558689812437101
Güler, K. (2015). Social media-based learning in the design studio: A comparative study. Computers & Education, 87, 192-203. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.06.004
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. doi:10.3102/0013189x033007014
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Kuhn, S. (2001). Learning from the architecture studio: Implications for project-based pedagogy. International Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 17, No. 4 and 5, pp. 349-352. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2018.11.002
Kumar, P., Kumar, A., Palvia, S., & Verma, S. (2019). Online business education research: Systematic analysis and a conceptual model. The International Journal of Management Education, 17, 26-35. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2018.11.002
Kvale, S. (2007). Doing interviews. London: Sage.
Kvan, T. (2001). The pedagogy of virtual design studios. Automation in construction, 10(3), 345-353. doi:10.1016/s0926-5805(00)00051-0
Kwan, K. (2010). A proposal for the web 2.0 revolution in online design education. Paper presented at the Design & Complexity: Design Research Society International Conference, 7-9 July 2010, Montreal, Canada. Retrieved from http://www.drs2010.umontreal.ca/data/PDF/069.pdf
Lapolla, K. (2014). The Pinterest project: Using social media in an undergraduate second year fashion design course at a United States University. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 13(2), 175-187. doi:10.1386/adch.13.2.175_1
Lee, N. (2006). Design as a learning cycle: A conversational experience. Studies in Learning, Evaluation Innovation and Development, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 12-22.
Lotz, N., Jones, D., & Holden, G. (2015). Social engagement in online design pedagogies. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, Aalto University. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/43592/1/SocialEngagementLxD2015Lotz.pdf
Loy, J., & Canning, S. (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for iterative design process learning and teaching. Paper presented at the DRS // CUMULUS 2013- 2nd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, Oslo. Retrieved from https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/117666/1/90380_1.pdf
McIntyre, S. (2007). Evaluating online assessment practice in art and design. UNSW Compendium of Good Practice in Learning and Teaching, 5, 1-32. Retrieved from https://www.unsworks.unsw.edu.au/primo-explore/fulldisplay?vid=UNSWORKS&docid=unsworks_2062&context=L
Park, J. Y. (2011). Design education online: Learning delivery and evaluation. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 30(2), 176-187. doi:10.1111/j.1476-8070.2011.01689.x
McNamara, P. (2015). The influence of MOOCs to enhance graphic design education. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 14(1), 57-69. doi:10.1386/adch.14.1.57_1
Power, J., & Kannara, V. (2016). Best-practice model for technology enhanced learning in the creative arts. Research in Learning Technology, 24, 1-17. doi:10.3402/rlt.v24.30231
Punch, K. (2009). Introduction to research methods in education. London: Sage.
Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Numbers and words: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study. EVALUATION REVIEW, 9(5), 627-643. doi:10.1177/0193841X8500900505
Saghafi, M. R., Franz, J. M., & Crowther, P. (2010). Crossing the cultural divide: a contemporary holistic framework for conceptualising design studio education. Paper presented at the Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Design Education: ConnectED. Retrieved from https://eprints.qut.edu.au/32147/1/c32147a.pdf
Sara, R. (2006). Sharing and developing studio practice: a cross-disciplinary study comparing teaching and learning approaches in the art and design disciplines. Paper presented at the Centre for Learning and Teaching in Art & Design (CLTAD), London.
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shreeve, A. (2011). The way we were? Signature pedagogies under threat. In E. Bohemia, B. Borja de Mozota, & L. Collina (Eds.), Researching Design Education, 1st International Symposium for Design Education Researchers (pp. 112-125). Retrieved from https://www.cumulusassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/CumulusDRS-symposium-Paris-2011.pdf
STP (2009). Curriculum development in studio teaching: Volume one, STP Final Report. Studio Teaching Project. Retrieved from https://ltr.edu.au/resources/STP%20Report%20Vol%201.pdf
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Los Angeles: Sage.
Uluoglu, B. (2000). Design knowledge communicated in studio critiques. Design Studies, 21(1), 33-58. doi:10.1016/s0142-694x(99)00002-2
Wood, A. (2018). You can’t learn design online. TNW - The Conversation. Retrieved from https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2018/03/24/cant-learn-design-online/
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
© Katja Fleischmann 2019
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale 4.0 International.
Droits d’auteur
Les auteurs conservent le droit d'auteur et accordent le droit de la première publication de la revue avec le travail simultanément sous une licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d’Utilisation Commerciale 4.0 International (CC-BY-NC 4.0) qui permet aux autres de partager le travail avec une reconnaissance de la paternité de l'œuvre et la publication initiale dans ce journal.
