Critiques are the main mode of instruction in studio courses, but the old methods of critique which many instructors experienced as students are, historically, not very equitable practices and can shortchange our students. Engaging new methodologies and critique strategies in studios can profoundly improve learning for all students.

For example, the old style of oral-based and lengthy approaches to critiques in art school can marginalize language learners, those who have auditory processing difficulties, those with attention deficit issues, or students who suffer from social anxiety. The wholesale, single-file three-hour faculty-led soliloquy-style critique of traditional art school styles is exhausting for participants and quite outmoded for today’s learners. Using more effective ways to give targeted feedback can be game changers for the overall student experience and create better engagement.

Check out the contents of this page to learn more about specific critique strategies and techniques:

Quick Tips for Equitable and Effective Critiques

Team-based Critiques

Critique Preparation Strategies

Work in Progress (WIP) Critique Strategies

Jigsaw Collaborations

Using Notetakers

Have TAs, student volunteers, or instructors take notes for each student during critiques. Written notes help students understand and remember feedback. This ensures a balanced view of suggestions, including positive outcomes and constructive criticism. Artists being reviewed shouldn't write their own notes—it's challenging to listen and write simultaneously, especially for ELLs.

Downloadable visual note templates are available here for all students to use:

• The critique worksheet is an emoji style note taking page
  • ❤️ (heart) = what is done well | 🔧 (wrench) = work to be done | 📖 (book) = reference/research suggestions.
• The WIP review template is a brain-map style visual organizer for notes on work in progress discussions.

Team Learning Outcomes Critique

To enhance participation and quality conversations, scaffold the critique by writing assignment learning objectives (LO) on the whiteboard. Assign pairs or small groups specific roles tied to an LO. Teams focus on identifying excellence and areas for improvement related to that LO in the discussed work.

Balanced Feedback Teams

Teams alternate between positive and constructive critiques. One team focuses on positives, another on constructive feedback, and a third analyzes the work's meaning and ideas. Each team explains their observations, referencing specific details in the work. Rotate team roles during the session.

Prepare a Question

Prepare for this critique by crafting a question for the group before the deadline. Refer to the Asking Good Questions guide for assistance in creating questions that stimulate conversation and debate. This approach and resource have proven effective for various student groups, spanning from first-year to graduate levels.

Prepare a Written Statement

While preparing a written statement is familiar, the Critique Starters Warm Up worksheet provides ELL-friendly sentence starters designed for UG students. These sentence starters assist in understanding the critique's structure, vocabulary, and purpose, serving as a helpful tool. ELL students can write about their work in their most fluent language, translate it to English with an app or AI, and refine it further in English with the help of a coach if needed.

Prepare a Comment

Providing extra time for students to prepare comments enhances critique participation. For English Language Learners, it is ok to recommend they organize thoughts in their home language using a phone translator to help them synthesize ideas; they can read from the translation if they are particularly anxious about speaking in English. Explicitly guiding comment structure, such as preparing to explain why they like a piece, or applying field-specific vocabulary to their comments (write some terms on the whiteboard) can support all students in analyzing the work and utilizing professional language.

Skill Level Group WIP Reviews

Divide students into small groups for work-in-progress critiques. Do not identify the markers of the groups, which are organized according to skill level and/or level of completion.

1. Beginners Group. Students struggling with learning objectives should have a separate discussion. Emphasize clear steps and repeat visual demonstrations for better understanding. Focus on clarifications and information repetition.
2. English Language Learners Group. Occasionally, isolating students facing language acquisition challenges can be an effective differentiation strategy. Ask questions about assignment understanding and assist by taking written notes during these conversations. Utilize the paper crits method—place paper on the table and make notes and drawings to aid students in following the conversation.
3. Mid-level Group. Students who are reaching average to higher levels of completion and skill achievement may benefit from discussions about synthesis and refinement.
4. High Achievers Group. Students who are ahead of the curve will benefit from a conversation about refinement and synthesis but also may be ready to engage in deeper conversations about content, continuity, and development of a body of work.

Socially Engineered WIP Conversations

Facilitate better communication. Recognize the challenges language learners face in tracking conversations and maintaining listening stamina. Pair proficient English speakers with those still developing their English skills. Task pairs with collaborating on questions and comments for the group. Reunite the whole group for the critique, allowing pairs to present their questions and comments together.

In this strategy, small groups conduct research on distinct aspects of a problem. Subsequently, students are reshuffled into new groups, each comprising representatives from different original research areas. Consider applying this method, for example, for preliminary research in a design brief. Initially, divide students into small research groups, each focusing on a specific aspect of the brief. Once the research is complete, reform groups to include members from different original research areas. This ensures each new group has an "expert" on a particular target of research. The reconfigured groups then share their findings and brainstorm the next level of the design brief. To explain the shuffle of groups; if there are five groups, each with a different research focus, redistribute them to include one member from each original research group after the initial research phase.