learning to give criticism is as hard as learning to take it. truly open and helpful discussion requires skill and patience on both sides. for example, i don't think its fair to smack someone down and then complain that they just don't know how to take criticism.

Frankly a lot of students are nowhere near self-reflective or mature enough to engage in truthful and frank discussions athroughout their school time, let alone in the beginning. Most adults do not even have that capacity, regardless of age. We are biologically / psychologically built to lie, as it in fact can preserve your life / state of mental well-being. I don't necessarily think there is anything wrong with this fact, but it does preclude the type of discussion you are looking for.

There are many interesting psychological studies and articles written on the fact that humans are nearly incapable of being truthful (and why).

I think it's very important for studio instructors to model constructive criticism and actively engage students to critique each other's work - and more importantly, help the students look critically at their own work.

If the studio instructor does not foster this behavior among his or her students, the environment invariably turns hostile or needlessly competitive.

Being able to give and receive constructive criticism is essential in professional practice - especially in terms of managing staff, interacting with coworkers, and working with clients.

Best critic I had was John Patkau, looked at the drawings listened to what was said and critiqued based on that information. Not on how you looked or the sophistication of your scheme so that each student had the same level or opportunity to hear what he said regardless of skill level... very professional and most importantly not personal. But if you bullshitted him you had better be prepared to suffer because he could be ruthless..... that was always fun because if you were honest and had a good intent he made constructive comments but if you tried to pass off chicken scratch as quality work he would go for the throat.

I saw a few suffering fools try several years back and it was always made for an entertaining afternoon.

I agree with what toasteroven said; it's mostly up to the studio instructors to set the pace and the tone. Especially in the beginning, students are still trying on archi-talk and say things to sound smarter or just don't have a grasp of what they are saying/want to say. Takes practice and guidance.

True discussion and argument among classmates will only happen amongst few, open-minded individuals. It's kind of like cultivating a relationship you know? A big group of everyone won't have the same high minded results.

I tend to think though, it's usually some kid bashing someone, then saying "geez... they can't take criticism..."

Like toasteroven said: In our discovery program, Steven and I require the students to critique one another's work. To foster this, we'll say "Julie, you present your work and Nathan, you have to comment on it". By being forced to critique the work in front of their peers, it teaches them how valuable critique can be, and how to be both good presenters and good critics.

...i was told today that my critiques while good, that i should learn to give more "positive" critiques. to which i said; i believe, and have been taught, that the value of constructive criticism is that students are able to deal with issues in a more thoughtful way, that through the kind of dialog, and in my approach, i am trying to get students to be more self critical. to be better prepared in their future education. i think being constructive is being GOOD and being personal is bad, unless of course you do like others have said.

students should have electrodes attached to them so they will be shocked when they utter words such as interesting, cool, rad, bitchin, sexy, etc. oh i just got shocked.

I like liberty's approach. My studio professors did something similar. It helps the students to develop a relationship were they can begin to ask for each others opinions on their own time. It worked well in my class.

#1 - Don't give advice unless someone asks for it
#2 - You have to respect the person's talent you are getting the criticism from. At some point you can decipher useless comments from ones that you favor or think could help, but that's years and years off.

This is different with professors or critics that have tons of experience (Greg Lynn, one of the worst 'talent' designers with fame, imho, is a great critic).
But with students, there are some that just like to talk, but have no real insight and are just annoying, then others that have tons of talent and prefer to keep to themselves in crits. I prefer to listen to the ones that I feel are most talented and actively seek their feedback on projects, outside of class. That was absolutely crucial to my development, not to mention establishing long term friendships.


lbs approach is good, too. I had that in a few classes. It was good to be forced to talk about someone elses project for communication skills, however, it didn't really help the person you are critiquing (you have to be careful what you listen to and what you don't - what you throw out is as important as what you take in).

dude, you're over-complicating things - go to the bar, throw back a few pints, let the "criticism" flow.

Trace makes a lot of good points. It will take some time for students to realize what is useful and what is useless.

Criticis are just one of the many great parts of being an architect. Its all part of the learning process. Encouraging it early on in the studios will help students become better critical thinkers, and it will also enhance the studio culture.