How do you design workshops that model thinking through making?
The mantra of 'Thinking Through Making' is heard often in design education. It is less descriptive of the education process than of the ultimate goal of that process; the development of tacit knowledge.
The designer’s search for form, creation of spatial relationships, adjustment of colour, or resolution of a visual rhythm - these examples apply tacit knowledge. Such activities depend on the sensibility and sensitivity of the designer.
Sharon Helmer Poggenpohl (2018:183)
Developing sensibility to visual form is generally achieved through experimentation and this often requires us to detach form from meaning; allowing yourself to ‘play.’ Developing sensitivity can be thought of as understanding what is ‘appropriate’ given the context of a communication problem. In my experience the balance of these concerns is often a bottleneck for learners.
What seemed to be a simple task turned out to be quite tricky. I constantly moved back and forth between my demand for aesthetics on one hand and the "message" on the other. I found it difficult to accomplish both at the same time.
Learner self-evaluation, unit 1
Methods are not always explicit in Graphic design research. However it is a widely held notion that the ‘search for form’ requires a mix of both intuition and analysis. It is this combination (in my opinion) that makes this ‘search for form’ such a difficult thing to teach.
The sensitivity/sensibility spectrum
While we are prone to the pitfalls of dichotomy thinking here, the terms sensibility and sensitivity are useful when considering the approaches learners bring to graphic design classrooms. Between the two terms lie an entire spectrum of different approaches and competencies but I believe the following are two archetypes many graphic design educators will recognise:
Learners who are overly focussed on what is appropriate and struggle to generate visual ideas.
At the beginning I found it really challenging to trust in my own ideas. I would often find myself asking "is this right" or "are they going to be good enough?”
Learner self-evaluation, unit 1
Learners who are overly focussed on form who may not struggle to generate ideas but may struggle to make choices between ideas.
The most challenging thing for me is to choose the appropriate work from the experiments to develop; thinking about what is suitable for your design outcome.
Learner self-evaluation, unit 1
Otto Scharmer has described the latter of these as mindless action; the blind implementation of ideas in the absence of earning. The former he brands action-less mind, or “analysis paralysis.” The habit of discussing ‘things to death instead of exploring the future by doing.’
Workshop Design
Considering these archetypes and issues, we developed a series of visual research methods workshops using rules-based exercises. They were designed to introduce students to different methods of image making, experimentation and visual research. Our guiding light for the workshop was Sister Corita Kent, who in her Immaculate Heart Art School Rules said:
“Don’t Make and Analyze at the Same Time, They’re Different Processes.”
For the exercises, we drew inspiration from the apporach at the Basel School of Design where they focus on the analytical and process-oriented aspects of the Swiss design tradition. However, we chose to combine this quite purposefully with the reflective cycle; considering the sequence of the workshop carefully and ensuring that they provided a clear structure for thinking and making.
Impact
On evaluating the impact of the workshops, I was interested to understand
how students perceived the relationship between thinking and making as a result of the workshops
how far the students had perceived the workshop design related to this
Sensibility
The idea of developing a sensibility to visual form came through in two distinct themes in the reflections. Learners talked about ‘instinct’, suggesting that the workshops had helped them to develop a sensibility that was internally guided.
The fast pace of workshop wasn't aimed at creating a refined visual outcome, I believe it was designed to encourage us to think quickly on our feet and to trust our creative instincts.
Students linked the structure of the workshop directly to both an increase in their confidence with experimentation and their ability to ‘relax’ into it…
The experimentation part of each workshop is something I truly enjoy. Experimentation forces me to test what has been learned and absorbed. For me experimenting functions as a way of interiorising knowledge and as a tool for investigating the same knowledge in a creatively. Seeing all possible applications triggers more and more ideas along the way.
I think the most challenging thing is that I try boldly without thinking about anything. Before, I am always confused by whether the visual effect of my work is good or bad. I am troubled by this problem. Now my mentality has changed a bit. I slowly became relaxed. I really enjoy the process of constantly trying.
…and also their perception of the value of it.
We were encouraged to do the visual experiments without thinking too much. It was a challenge for me. But as I got used to it, I found that such a bold attempt was very helpful in creating new visual forms.
Based on the workshop, I now believe in the importance of a lot of experimentation.
The value of generativity was also a common theme in student reflections.
One thing that I think was really important for me to learn was to generate ideas even if you think you are happy with the first outcome. Developments can always be better, and even after making several other designs and preferring the first, I will know that I exhausted the other options and produced the best thing I could.
This was perceived as something that the workshop had facilitated that had broader implications for the design process
In every class, we made many practices before the final result, which reminds me that it is impossible to achieve the ideal design with a single try
Sensitivity
In developing sensitivity to the appropriateness of the work, students placed a lot of emphasis on the value of self-reflection to their overall process:
I think my biggest achievement was to establish a more systematic design method. I do not excessively rely on the tutors feedback anymore, but combine it with the theory of self-reflection.
After each workshop, I will critically reflect on the content of the class and record it. I think this method is very useful. It combines the practical research methods in the workshop and the theoretical knowledge in reading as well as my personal understanding.
If you do not have any reflection, just keep experimenting, it will be difficult to make progress. So I think it's important to record reflection and notes on the process.
Reflection is now an essential thing for me.
There was a general preference for separating the act of creation from the act of analysis.
I have learned that thinking too much can limit the output of broader experimental design exercises.
One student tied this directly back to the idea of ‘thinking through making.’
One main challenge was the process of thinking through making. However, through these workshops, I have begun to see the benefits of experimentation. It had made me realise the many possibilities that open up when you don’t plan everything out from the beginning and just do.
Final thoughts
There were moments in these workshops where students were visibly stressed by the lack of time and there was a part of me that questioned the session design. However as the weeks progressed and students became more accustomed to the demands, they became more proactive and vocal, more sure of their judgements and ideas. As tutors we were gradually able to recede to mere facilitators. I realised we were not just developing methods and process here but a sort of culture — a studio culture. The studio was an exciting place to be in those 10 weeks.
I guess the ultimate judge of the impact of this work will be whether these methods and the ways of working have engendered have a life beyond the end of this unit. Do they hold any water? Will students apply them beyond these contexts or are they just a novel way to get students moving?
This I don’t know. But I’m looking forward to finding out.
References
Vilhauer, M. (2010). Gadamer’s ethics of play. Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books, pp.31-48.
Cross, Nigel. (1982). Designerly Ways of Knowing. Design Studies. 3. 221-227.
Crawford, M. (2015) The World Beyond Your Head: On Becomingan Individual in an Age of Distraction. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Popova, M. (2016) 10 Rules for Students, Teachers, and Life by John Cage and Sister Corita Kent. Available at: URL (Accessed: 19 Feb 2019).