Abstract
Progress and change are important to improving old processes and educational methods are not an exception to these facts of life. Numerous studies have been conducted on different learning styles and methods individuals use to transfer what they learn to new situations. However, most of these studies do not reflect on what this research means for designers, specifically graphic designers.
Graphic designers play many roles as problem solvers, critical thinkers, and creative strategists. Generally speaking, success in graphic design is measured by the strength of a solution’s creativity. When a solution is creative it tends to address the need in a new way. A designer works through a process to find a solution that best meets the criteria of the problem or issue—research, ideation, final design development, and communication. Graphic design has been taught at universities for a long period of time, but there have not been many research studies that look specifically at how the processes of design problem-solving are taught to students at the university level. It is important that examines these processes to determine if there is a need for improvement in design education. It has often been said that there is no one perfect way to teach subject matter, but this does not imply stagnation. In this study, two group of students were recruited to examine select teaching methods. Then the two groups were compared based on different methods of instruction. The data were then examined to determine whether the students’ abilities to think critically and creatively are based on the design process and a limited interruption. This research is important because it offers a new method to understand how instructors teach graphic design to enable students to understand the processes they are being taught and transfer that knowledge to new situations.
Progress and change are important to improving old processes and educational methods are not an exception to these facts of life. Numerous studies have been conducted on different learning styles and methods individuals use to transfer what they learn to new situations. However, most of these studies do not reflect on what this research means for designers, specifically graphic designers.
Graphic designers play many roles as problem solvers, critical thinkers, and creative strategists. Generally speaking, success in graphic design is measured by the strength of a solution’s creativity. When a solution is creative it tends to address the need in a new way. A designer works through a process to find a solution that best meets the criteria of the problem or issue—research, ideation, final design development, and communication. Graphic design has been taught at universities for a long period of time, but there have not been many research studies that look specifically at how the processes of design problem-solving are taught to students at the university level. It is important that examines these processes to determine if there is a need for improvement in design education. It has often been said that there is no one perfect way to teach subject matter, but this does not imply stagnation. In this study, two group of students were recruited to examine select teaching methods. Then the two groups were compared based on different methods of instruction. The data were then examined to determine whether the students’ abilities to think critically and creatively are based on the design process and a limited interruption. This research is important because it offers a new method to understand how instructors teach graphic design to enable students to understand the processes they are being taught and transfer that knowledge to new situations.
Summary
Education is an important fundamental aspect to becoming a designer, and it is an instructor’s role to make students think differently. How and when and instructor intervenes can have a large impact on the outcome of students projects. How an instructor and student interact in the classroom setting can impact the level of critical and creative thinking skills students acquire while at college or university. One of the first questions this study looked at was, “What is PS and CCS that impact visual communication and the graphic design student?” Surveys were handed to participants at the beginning of the study to help answer this question. The questions asked participants to indicate how they respond to the needs of a design project, whether they think both critically and creatively as well as how much help they require to problem solve. The data revealed that only a few participants perceived they were at a higher level of thinking while a majority of the participants tended to answer in the mid range or lower range of critical thinking. It was also noted that, with the intervention, students were actually able to show they had skills beyond their answers to the survey. Overall, one might conclude that students are able to exceed their abilities with the help and guidance of an instructor. The second question this study looked at was, “What is an instructor impact on a student’s ability to problem solve (PS), think critically and creatively (CCS)?” During the workshop we were able to look at this question by separating participants into either group A or group B. The workshop was conducted differently depending whether the participant was in group A or group B. Group A progressed through the workshop without interventions 87 from the investigator, while group B participants were given an intervention during the research phase. Use of the term intervene does not mean that the participants were disrupted in a negative way. The intervention in the study occurred at a point in time when the investigator spoke aloud to the participants with a question to see if the interaction would positively or negatively affect the participant's ability to think more critically and creatively. The study revealed that intervention during the research phase may have assisted the participants to think more critically or creatively. The last question of this study was limited due to only being able to test the intervention during the research phase. This study was not able to be fully implemented with the final question. The question, “How can an instructor embed PS and CCS in the graphic design projects to help students build on these skills?” revealed that the interaction between the instructor and the student has a strong impact on how the students are able to perform and their level of PS and CCS. Study 1 revealed that that students who had an intervention from the primary investigator showed a higher level of PS and CCS in the number of sketches, level of research, documentation, and development of their designs. Participants in study 2 who did not have an intervention tended to perform approximately the same throughout the workshop. The purpose of this study was to propose a new model of design process to enhance critical thinking and creative thinking. Understanding and applying critical thinking skills is important in developing successful designers. Using a critical thinking self-assessment survey at the beginning of the semester is recommended because it enables students to chart their progress. Intervention is recommended in each design process that focuses on individual skills practiced of critical and creative thinking. Although a short intervention was provided 88 in the research phase of this study, an intervention could potentially be implemented at each stage of design process.
Limitations
There were a several limitations that affected the outcomes of this study. First the number of participants varied between the workshop groups. This was due to the timing of the workshops and participant availability. Other impacts on group size included participants not appearing at the workshop after signing up. A few participants had to leave midworkshop due to work conflicts. Other impacts that limited the study involved participants not participating in all workshop material or not sending mood-boards and communication until it was too late. These participants’ materials were discarded due to the unknown impact of missing data or altered data. Issues with IRB approval caused the workshops to be held late in the Spring semester which made it difficult to assemble enough participants as most were preparing for final exams. The IRB was originally approved but it was not sent back to the investigator at the correct email address. The prolonged changes made to the IRB pushed back testing. his in limited the study because of time to gather participants and have workshop testing. The final limitation was not being able to test an intervention during all stages of the design process. The study enabled the researcher and participants to experience the effect of the intervention that was applies only during the research phase. It is believed that, had there been opportunities for more participants to engage in the study as well as more time, this study could have explored the impact of interventions at different stages of the study. Nevertheless, the findings generated from this study provide important implications for 89 practice and meaningful future research. This study supports the need to teach and measure student progress regarding the value of student/participant critical and creative thinking skills in the field of graphic design. Future studies may provide additional information regarding the process of critical and creative thinking regarding timely instruction and intervention to gain knowledge through action.
Future Study
The results of the workshop has generated ideas for several directions for future research. It appears that the instructor’s role in initiating good practice skills in critical and creative thinking is crucial to the design process students work through during a design project and on the outcome of their assignment. Future research interrupting different phases of the workshop with interventions would provide more valuable information in how students work through the design process and which parts of the phases are most important for the student to interact with the instructor for transferring information to other phases. In addition, looking at different levels of college students, such as juniors and seniors, could generate more knowledge regarding the skills of design students throughout education and their ability to work through the design process. Another aspect this research provided direction to determine how students perform on an assignment with a project sheet as well as study the effect of self-initiated tasks. Another question to ask is: Are students as successful without the guidance of a project sheet or task assignment? This workshop only gave student’s direction through word of mouth and they were not given a project statement to follow. Looking into design student’s interaction with project sheets and the outcome of assignments would be an interesting and informative study in the field of design education. 90 Finally, this research opens an opportunity to test the amount of time spent that is allotted for specific tasks. Would outcomes be different if the workshop lasted longer than a hour and a half? Would having the workshops last over a few days or weeks change the productivity and outcomes of the assignment? These questions and many others could be answered with further research. Through additional research, one can gain a better understanding at how design students work through the design process, the instructor’s impact on student work and transferability of information to future projects outside the educational setting. By researching these areas more we may be able to improve the process in which design students are taught to practice their critical and creative thinking skills to better serve them outside university classroom settings.
Education is an important fundamental aspect to becoming a designer, and it is an instructor’s role to make students think differently. How and when and instructor intervenes can have a large impact on the outcome of students projects. How an instructor and student interact in the classroom setting can impact the level of critical and creative thinking skills students acquire while at college or university. One of the first questions this study looked at was, “What is PS and CCS that impact visual communication and the graphic design student?” Surveys were handed to participants at the beginning of the study to help answer this question. The questions asked participants to indicate how they respond to the needs of a design project, whether they think both critically and creatively as well as how much help they require to problem solve. The data revealed that only a few participants perceived they were at a higher level of thinking while a majority of the participants tended to answer in the mid range or lower range of critical thinking. It was also noted that, with the intervention, students were actually able to show they had skills beyond their answers to the survey. Overall, one might conclude that students are able to exceed their abilities with the help and guidance of an instructor. The second question this study looked at was, “What is an instructor impact on a student’s ability to problem solve (PS), think critically and creatively (CCS)?” During the workshop we were able to look at this question by separating participants into either group A or group B. The workshop was conducted differently depending whether the participant was in group A or group B. Group A progressed through the workshop without interventions 87 from the investigator, while group B participants were given an intervention during the research phase. Use of the term intervene does not mean that the participants were disrupted in a negative way. The intervention in the study occurred at a point in time when the investigator spoke aloud to the participants with a question to see if the interaction would positively or negatively affect the participant's ability to think more critically and creatively. The study revealed that intervention during the research phase may have assisted the participants to think more critically or creatively. The last question of this study was limited due to only being able to test the intervention during the research phase. This study was not able to be fully implemented with the final question. The question, “How can an instructor embed PS and CCS in the graphic design projects to help students build on these skills?” revealed that the interaction between the instructor and the student has a strong impact on how the students are able to perform and their level of PS and CCS. Study 1 revealed that that students who had an intervention from the primary investigator showed a higher level of PS and CCS in the number of sketches, level of research, documentation, and development of their designs. Participants in study 2 who did not have an intervention tended to perform approximately the same throughout the workshop. The purpose of this study was to propose a new model of design process to enhance critical thinking and creative thinking. Understanding and applying critical thinking skills is important in developing successful designers. Using a critical thinking self-assessment survey at the beginning of the semester is recommended because it enables students to chart their progress. Intervention is recommended in each design process that focuses on individual skills practiced of critical and creative thinking. Although a short intervention was provided 88 in the research phase of this study, an intervention could potentially be implemented at each stage of design process.
Limitations
There were a several limitations that affected the outcomes of this study. First the number of participants varied between the workshop groups. This was due to the timing of the workshops and participant availability. Other impacts on group size included participants not appearing at the workshop after signing up. A few participants had to leave midworkshop due to work conflicts. Other impacts that limited the study involved participants not participating in all workshop material or not sending mood-boards and communication until it was too late. These participants’ materials were discarded due to the unknown impact of missing data or altered data. Issues with IRB approval caused the workshops to be held late in the Spring semester which made it difficult to assemble enough participants as most were preparing for final exams. The IRB was originally approved but it was not sent back to the investigator at the correct email address. The prolonged changes made to the IRB pushed back testing. his in limited the study because of time to gather participants and have workshop testing. The final limitation was not being able to test an intervention during all stages of the design process. The study enabled the researcher and participants to experience the effect of the intervention that was applies only during the research phase. It is believed that, had there been opportunities for more participants to engage in the study as well as more time, this study could have explored the impact of interventions at different stages of the study. Nevertheless, the findings generated from this study provide important implications for 89 practice and meaningful future research. This study supports the need to teach and measure student progress regarding the value of student/participant critical and creative thinking skills in the field of graphic design. Future studies may provide additional information regarding the process of critical and creative thinking regarding timely instruction and intervention to gain knowledge through action.
Future Study
The results of the workshop has generated ideas for several directions for future research. It appears that the instructor’s role in initiating good practice skills in critical and creative thinking is crucial to the design process students work through during a design project and on the outcome of their assignment. Future research interrupting different phases of the workshop with interventions would provide more valuable information in how students work through the design process and which parts of the phases are most important for the student to interact with the instructor for transferring information to other phases. In addition, looking at different levels of college students, such as juniors and seniors, could generate more knowledge regarding the skills of design students throughout education and their ability to work through the design process. Another aspect this research provided direction to determine how students perform on an assignment with a project sheet as well as study the effect of self-initiated tasks. Another question to ask is: Are students as successful without the guidance of a project sheet or task assignment? This workshop only gave student’s direction through word of mouth and they were not given a project statement to follow. Looking into design student’s interaction with project sheets and the outcome of assignments would be an interesting and informative study in the field of design education. 90 Finally, this research opens an opportunity to test the amount of time spent that is allotted for specific tasks. Would outcomes be different if the workshop lasted longer than a hour and a half? Would having the workshops last over a few days or weeks change the productivity and outcomes of the assignment? These questions and many others could be answered with further research. Through additional research, one can gain a better understanding at how design students work through the design process, the instructor’s impact on student work and transferability of information to future projects outside the educational setting. By researching these areas more we may be able to improve the process in which design students are taught to practice their critical and creative thinking skills to better serve them outside university classroom settings.