Reflective writing: Moral goods of the studio

My assigned reading in anticipation for the first workshop was The design critique and the moral goods of studio pedagogy by McDonald and Michela.

As a practitioner at UAL who is largely removed from studio culture and as someone who doesn’t have a fine art background, it proved a useful opportunity to understand this aspect of pedagogy which I am not directly exposed to. I certainly had my own preconceptions about studio crits, based on anecdotes of friends who had this as part of their education, and largely viewed them as terrifying and vulnerable exercises.

The essay posits the studio critique as a place of ‘moral goods’ and comes to conclusions based on a literature review in this area and with hermeneutic inquiries and interviews with participants who are studio instructors.

Conceptually, I struggled with the central premise of “moral goods”. The authors identify moral goods as sitting within a moral realist frame, meaning that studio practice is made meaningful as those participating are held to standards within their specific discipline and “have experienced something that they recognize as good, and that allows them to define themselves as good practitioners” (Yanchar & Slife in Michela & McDonald, 2019, p.2).

The conclusive findings of the essay identified the moral goods of studio practice as:

1. Goods of student development
2. Goods of self-cultivation (for the instructor)
3. Goods for stakeholders

I struggled with the application of “moral goods” in this context. I think the phrasing makes these “goods” seem like quite concrete and fixed outcomes, that once they are achieved, that is the end goal. This seems at odd with studio practice which I have previously understood as much more holistic and non-linear.

The elements that I found interesting were:

• Thinking about the balance of the relationships between studio lecturers/instructors and students as instructors are constantly battling between their own personal preferences and subjectivity and adopting a very objective and canonised conception of “good” design or art when critiquing work.
• The participants viewed critique as a central activity of their studio instruction.
• The perspectives of the interviewees were interesting and informative.

This essay allowed me to reflect on the idea of studio critique and practice and how this is more of a symbiotic relationship between instructor and student, whereas I previously only thought about it as a more hierarchical space, rather than a space of self-cultivation for the instructor.

(403 words)

References:

1. McDonald, J. and Michela, E. (2019) ‘The design critique and the moral goods of studio pedagogy.’, Design Studies, 62, pp. 1 – 35.