DRAFT: This module has unpublished changes.
CRITIQUE: PERSONALITY OF LINES:
- Review the guildelines of the assignment
- In pencil, write the characteristics of the four individual designs on the backs of the 2 sheets of Bristol Board
- Write down your four personality characteristics on the back of scrap sheets of paper; pass these along with your designs to the instructor who will write them on the white board.
- Spend a few moments looking carefully at the designs; do not look at the backs
- Evaluate the crafts(wo)manship of each and rate on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being the highest and 5 being the lowest; consider line quality and overall care of presentation
- Are the designs still recognizable as being notebook pages? Please explain.
- Is the work conceptually inventive? Rate on the 1-5 scale and explain; did the student have a solid grasp of the problem (alteration of a notebook page to express personality characteristics) and push the solution beyond the expected?
- Guess which characteristics match the designs; check accuracy on the back
- Do the designs effectively communicate the characteristics? Please explain why or why not. Offer suggestions if you see room for improvement. What would you do differently? Also, discuss what works well or the strengths of the design statement.
- Did this student take risks? Rate on the scale of 1-5 and explain.
- Is the work visually compelling? Is every square inch fully engaged (remember white space can be your friend; engaged doesn't necessarily mean filled up)?
- Carefully hang the notebook assignments on the wall, one sheet on top of the other. Open your sketchbook pages in front of you. Walk around the room to browse through sketchbook pages and look at work.
- Take several minutes for each person to discuss the work of his or her classmate, highlighting strengths and areas for improvement
The instructor will also consider:
- Whether or not class time was used effectively; did you come prepared to learn? Did you generate ideas in your sketchbook? To what extent?
- How substantial were your contributions to team meetings and critiques?