Theory and Thoughts

This week students came to class with their final public service advertisements mounted. Once again, students went up in front of the group one by one and presented their pieces. They discussed what they had changed after the previous weeks discussion and defended their design decisions. The class seems to be falling into a comfortable rhythm. Some students who have full confidence in what they’ve created are eager to show their work off while others appear to dread the experience entirely and resolve to go last—if the must. Still as students, many of them (not all) lack the presentation skills necessary to sell their their ideas in front of a large group. They start off by apologizing for “this” and making up excuses for “that.” Reflecting on the situation I can’t help but wonder if this is the sort of thing that will come with experience or if this is a teachable skill. It sends me back to my freshman year in college when my most dreaded class was speech class. A good presentation requires preparation—a component design students have much room to improve.

For the most part the students work improved by refining what they already already had. The hours in photoshop paid off as this was the area that their original comps had needed the most work. Two students took their work to the next level—greatly improving on what they originally had created—surprising the entire class with the finish and execution. One was the student who had previously misinterpreted the classes feedback and temporarily veered off track. He brought his poster back to his original concept and created compelling illustration. The other student listened closely to the feedback and executed the illustration and final concept close to perfectly. From time to time Prof. B would interject reminders of what students should be thinking as they considered each “finished” piece. In addition he reminded them that the projects were completed as far as his grading was concerned but the real grade was their final portfolio at graduation. He asked the class numerous times, “Are we done here [with this piece]?” and “Is the message clear?” He challenged the students when they were silent about a piece as it wasn’t always easy to get feedback—positive or negative. To open up the discussion a little he would make a couple of his own design observations. His comments reflected the feedback that a creative director might provide.

In one instance I made the comment that I would recommend giving the poster a little more breathing room on the border edge (referencing the BP “we come in peace” poster). In my opinion the way it was mounted on the presentation board made it look cramped and like a mistake. I felt that giving it a thicker, more defined, intentional-appearing border would eliminate the tension. This brought up a good point by the professor that at some point it was beyond design rules and into the realm of subjective opinions where he respectfully disagreed with my comment. I was a little surprised by his comments but could see his position as well to a degree. In a compromise—which can be dangerous to do too often in one design piece—we agreed that perhaps a thicker border of a neutral color would satisfy both schools of thought.

After all 14 students presented Prof. B gave his summarizing thoughts. He was pleased with most students efforts and encouraged those who had put forth the effort. In contrast there were several students who had less than inspiring final posters. Inline with the emphasis of the program he reminded them to treat class like a real job. Two students came to class with final posters of undiscussed concepts. The posters where ineffective and in sharp contrast to the specific instructions they had received in their critique the week before. Prof. B reminded the students that had the equivalent happened in the industry they wouldn’t get off so easy. At an agency they would most likely be fired for deliberately not creating what the client or art director had requested; in a freelance position they would probably not be asked to complete the work or at least never be approached for work again. The whole point of the class critiques is to give students the opportunity to be guided and to guide each other towards the most effective design solution. If they disregard the process their work suffers in addition to their grades. A couple of the students left the group wondering what happened between the initial review and final submission.

The final submission included the final mounted piece, layered and unlayered digital files (submitted before the beginning of class) and a envelope with their process notes within (brainstorm/sketches). While the envelope was not discussed in great detail in class it appears to be a standard procedure at VCC as each student was prepared to submit their work appropriately.

Before the end of class the next project was discussed. The assignment is to create either a three poster or three magazine ad series for a beauty and hygiene product of their choice. Other than that there were no guidelines. Students are expected to take over the design process from here, outlining their design problem and their market, differentiating their target audience details and concepting a minimum of 15 campaigns for the next class. In addition they were asked to keep their sketches to one concept per page with the full campaign showing. The question came up about what magazine dimensions would be appropriate which the prof responded by saying it depended on their audience and where it made the most sense. In addition the students were allowed to choose up to two different products within the 15 campaigns if they so chose to do so.

After class Prof. B asked me to lead out the upcoming class discussion. Although I had expected to take the lead at some point during the semester I wasn’t sure I was quite ready. Sensing my apprehension he reassured me that my input thus far in the class had given him the confidence to hand the reins over and that everything would be fine. I agreed and have been decidedly rereading certain portions of “Tools for Teaching” by Barbara Gross Davis. The chapters in Part III: Discussion Strategies have been an excellent source in preparation.

This week all thirteen students were present to share their progress and submit their digital drafts for the public service announcement poster. In class students tacked their 11×17 color printouts on the wall one at a time. The group gathered around and provided feedback. At the start Prof. B started off each students critique by giving his initial impressions of the execution. However, as the class progressed he put less of his own critique and challenged the students to engage in the conversation more.

It was exciting to see the concepts from the previous week come to life. It would have been impossible not to have high expectations after being part of the initial review. Some students stayed true to their sketches. Several others improved on them and sadly some under performed even more dreadfully than their initial concepts had.

As an observer I found myself able to critique the students as they critiqued each others pieces as well as how they reacted to their own work under fire. It became clear to me that as you receive feedback it is important to listen to what the person is saying. If your responses are defensive or full of excuses then it’s clear you aren’t really listening. We all know that hearing and listening are different things. I think many students forget to listen when people talk about their work. They want positive reactions and become personally attached to their creations. Emotions aside and ears wide open is the best approach in the discussion. Listening is active and involves hearing, paying attention and understanding. To establish that you were attentive and that you’ve processed what has been said repeat it back in your own words what you heard. By saying, “I want to be sure I heard you correctly on this” followed by your take, you will have clarity moving forward.

The above notes on listening pertains specifically to several students who didn’t hear what the class was saying during the first critique. Perhaps they did listen but chose to ignore the wise council of their peers and professor. Next week will be the true test when they come with their final posters. During this weeks critique, specific directions and council was given to each student. Prof. B marked directly on their drafts areas to improve. While several of the students tried illustration styles, only a couple of them really worked. The challenge with illustration as they found out was that it has to have a unified look which can be very difficult to pull off without adequate training or experience.

It was interesting to see how Prof. B challenged each student a little differently. For the students who could handle more, he gave them advanced techniques to attempt. Throughout the class he would remind students what he had been told as a student, “no sleep”—meaning plenty of work for everyone still to do. Once everyone had presented Prof. B debriefed the class on where he thought everyone was. He commented by reminding everyone that great design has two components that must both be present for a successful piece. You have to start with a solid concept and just as importantly you have to finish with flawless execution. He shared that at this point in their program “software” excuses didn’t cut it anymore. If they didn’t know a specific technique there are places to learn online. He reminded the students that he was available by email if they had any questions and dismissed class. After the previous weeks failure to clarify specifications he reviewed the details of the final piece which is to be printed in color 11×17 mounted black on black. In addition the students are required to submit two digital files, one layered and one flat.

In reflection during and after class I had some thoughts on how to improve the quality as well as the quantity of students participation during critiques. Perhaps I’ve been spoiled  by the online learning experience as it relates to critique but I feel that their are aspects of it that could benefit the in-classroom setting as well. Having a clearly defined criteria by which to assess the design is key to encouraging discussion. Being able to visualize and reference the criteria for critique should not only be made available but integrated into the conversation. If it was posted or projected on the board or even provided as a handout, it could referenced and eventually ingrained into the students minds. It’s easy to forget about each component that goes into to successful design piece when all you can think about is an ugly color or misplaced drop shadow. By having a detailed list of the fundamentals and perhaps project specific considerations students can stay on task and provide quality assessments.

This week each student was expected to have their 20 sketches completed for the public service announcement of their choice. Unlike the previous weeks session that consisted mostly of lecture with little discussion—this week was quite the opposite. All 16 students gathered around a set of large work desks. One-by-one students presented their topics and spoke to each sketch as they shared their work. Prof. B does an excellent job of challenging students to provide critiques for each other. At the same time his ideas are thoughtful, calculated and strategic. This first critique focused on analyzing for sound concept not so much the quality of the sketch. As to be expected, the students work varied in cleverness and execution. Several students presented multiple stand out concepts. These students clearly understood the assignment and engaged in it as intended: not to take their first favorite idea, but to explore the content and subject from different angles. There were several students however who arrived with the allotted quantity of sketches—but lacked any conceptual direction. Rather than taking up too much valuable time talking about how they missed the mark completely Prof. B challenged that student along with the rest of the class to take one of the ill-fitting sketches and treat like an agency brainstorm. He asked questions like how could we… and what would you do to make this more clear? Who’s your intended audience…? As an instructor Prof. B shared with me that tearing students work down in class is not his style. He feels the grade book will get his message across just as clearly. So rather than focusing on the negative aspects of the less than acceptable projects students focused on what could be done to communicate more clearly. Along these same lines, critique is not meant to express personal opinions as much as it is share design observations. One can disagree with the content of the design but still give an insightful review of the work. All but one topic was an easy sell. By this I mean everyone can agree that literacy is good, you should quit smoking, the oil spill was harmful, suicidal vets should receive help, trees are huggable and recycling helps the planet. It’s more challenging to convince an audience that BDSM should be a more widely accepted practice and that the stereotypes are false. This critique appeared particularly challenging for many students as well as the professor as no one wants to be insulting or ignorant about the subject matter. Prof. B did an exceptional job playing both sides of the argument that by the end of class I really couldn’t tell what his personal perspectives were regarding the topic itself.

Reflecting on the class there were a couple questions that I had regarding discussions and direct student tasking. As a professor how when do you stop and just let the class critique itself? Can teacher’s give too much of their own creative input into the students work? How do you challenge students who are ahead of the rest of the class without leaving behind the struggling students?

As a professor there are many things to cover with each assignment. It’s easy to get off topic when students ask questions—regardless how appropriate they might be. When the first project was announced, specific directions were not given regarding the size or layout expectations for sketches. Because of this, students work was all over the place. It made it challenging for each student to communicate their ideas when they were small 4″ line drawings, or every idea was on one sheet of paper. For the following project the this specification will be clarified. It was a good example of how without direct guidance you get a full spectrum of executions. This can be a good or bad thing depending on the situation—but for this it made it difficult during critique. Next week: digital comps!