Jury Duty?
Contributor
“How Was It?”
A “jury” or “review” of ten weeks of work for an audience in ten minutes or less, tired but ready to receive feedback. With members of the jury to instantaneously produce thoughtful, constructive commentary on work they have never seen before, for students whose academic careers they have not necessarily followed. Would a prolonged, more continuous culture enhance learning outcomes?
A review, when seen as an open dialogue, can include voices of other students in the studio, along with participants from other disciplines and the public, helping contribute to the project’s relevance. Is it possible to transform the culture around “Crits” to make them more engaging, inclusive, and participatory in nature?
Being able to see pin-ups around the building for longer than just mid-review would be a great learning experience, as these processes look so different for everyone. Shouldn’t enabling the sharing of processes be a big part of education?
It is surprising that while the world is changing at lightning speed, this method of evaluation in architecture school has remained the same since the 19th century, which is ironic for a profession smitten with critique, yet has not evolved the methods by which it teaches and molds new practitioners.