This study explores the types of feedback and implicated relational systems in an online design critique using an inductive analysis of an online critique about a project focused on designing a new food pyramid. The results reveal eight types of feedback and three implied relational systems, all of which suggest relational archetypes that are disconnected from typical preprofessional activity systems. These results illustrate the potential for the online medium to be a space in which participants pursue idealized relational identities and interactions that are not necessarily authentic approximations of actual relational systems. Using these results as a foundation, the author discusses the potential relevance of the online medium to this setting and the implications of relational authenticity and genre knowledge on oral genre teaching and learning.
Althaus, S. ( 1997). Computer-mediated communication in the university classroom: An experiment with on-line discussion. Communication Education , 46, 158-174.
2.
Anandarajan, M., Igbaria, M., & Anakwe, U. ( 2000). Technology acceptance in the banking industry: A perspective from a less developed country. Information Technology and People, 13, 298-312.
3.
Anson, C., & Forsberg, L. ( 1990). Moving beyond the academic community: Transitional stages in professional writing. Written Communication, 7, 200-231.
4.
Anthony, K.H. ( 1991). Design juries on trial: The renaissance of the design studio. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
5.
Artemeva, N. ( 2008). Toward a unified social theory of genre learning. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22, 160-185.
6.
Artemeva, N., & Freedman, A. ( 2001). ‘‘Just the boys playing on computers’’: An activity theory analysis of differences in the cultures of two engineering firms. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 15, 164-194.
7.
Banerjee, M., Capozzoli, M., McSweeney, L., & Sinha, D. ( 1999). Beyond kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures . Canadian Journal of Statistics, 27, 3-23.
8.
Barzelay, M. ( 1993). The single case study as intellectually ambitious inquiry . Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3, 305-318.
9.
Bawarshi, A. ( 2000). The genre function. College English, 62, 335-360.
10.
Berkenkotter, C., Huckin, T.N., & Ackerman, J. ( 1988). Conventions, conversations, and the writer: Case study of a student in a rhetoric Ph.D. program. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 9-44.
11.
Blatner, A. ( 2003). The art of case presentation. Arts in Psychotherapy, 30, 131-135.
12.
Boyer, E., & Mitgang, L. ( 1996). Building community: A new future for architectural education and practice. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
13.
Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. ( 1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.
14.
Creswell, J.W. ( 2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
15.
Dannels, D.P. ( 2000). Learning to be professional: Technical classroom discourse, practice, and professional identity construction. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 14, 5-37.
16.
Dannels, D.P. ( 2001). Time to speak up: A theoretical framework of situated pedagogy and practice for communication across the curriculum. Communication Education, 50, 144-158.
17.
Dannels, D.P. ( 2002). Communication across the curriculum and in the disciplines: Speaking in engineering. Communication Education, 51, 254-268.
18.
Dannels, D.P. ( 2005). Performing tribal rituals: A genre analysis of ‘‘crits’’ in design studios. Communication Education, 54, 136-160.
19.
Dannels, D.P. ( 2009). Features of success in engineering design presentations: A call for relational genre knowledge. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 23, 399-427.
20.
Dannels, D.P., Housley Gaffney, A.L., & Norris Martin, K. (2008). Beyond content, deeper than delivery: What critique feedback reflects about communication expectations in design education. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2. Retrieved July 30, 2008, from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v2n2.html
21.
Dannels, D.P., Housley Gaffney, A., & Norris Martin, K. (IN PRESS). Students’ talk about the communication climate of the design critique. Communication Education.
22.
Dannels, D.P., & Norris Martin, K. (2008). Critiquing critiques: A genre analysis of feedback across novice to expert design studios. Journal of Business & Technical Communication, 22, 135-159.
23.
Darling, A.L. ( 2005). Public presentations in mechanical engineering and the discourse of technology. Communication Education, 54, 20-33.
24.
Devitt, A.J. ( 2000). Integrating rhetorical and literary theories of genre . College English, 62, 696-717.
25.
Dias, P., Freedman, A., Medway, P., & & Paré, A. (1999). Worlds apart: Acting and writing in academic and workplace contexts. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26.
Flyvbjerg, B. ( 2004). Five misunderstandings of case study research. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds), Qualitative research practice . London, England: SAGE.
27.
Frederickson, M. ( 1990). Design juries: A study in lines of communication. Journal of Architectural Education, 43, 22-27.
28.
Freedman, A., Adam, C., & Smart, G. ( 1994). Wearing suits to class: Simulating genres and simulations as genre. Written Communication, 11, 193-226.
29.
Frymier, A.B., & Shulman, G. ( 1995). ‘‘What’s in it for me?’’ Increasing content relevance to enhance student motivation. Communication Education, 44, 40-50.
30.
Giltrow, J., & Stein, D. ( 2009). Genres in the Internet: Innovation, evolution, and genre theory. In J. Giltrow & D. Stein (Eds.), Genres in the Internet: Issues for the theory of genre (pp. 1-26). Amsterdam, Australia: Benjamins.
31.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. ( 1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
32.
Goetz, J., & LeCompte, M. ( 1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational. research . Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
33.
Haber, R.J., & Lingard, L. ( 2001). Learning oral presentation skills: A rhetorical analysis with pedagogical and professional implications. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26, 308-314.
34.
Hawisher, G.E., & Selfe, C.L. ( 1991). The rhetoric of technology and the electronic writing class. College Composition and Communication, 42, 55-65.
35.
Jameison, K.M. ( 1975). Antecedent genre as rhetorical constraint. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 61, 406-415.
36.
Koch, A., Schwennsen, K., Dutton, T., & Smith, D. (Eds). (2002). The redesign of a studio culture. Washington, DC: American Institute of Architecture Students, Studio Culture Task Force.
37.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. ( 1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation . Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Lingard, L., & Haber, R.J. ( 1999). Teaching and learning communication in medicine: A rhetorical approach. Academic Medicine, 74, 507-510.
40.
Lingard, L., Garwood, K., Schryer, C.F., & Spafford, M.M. (2003). A certain art of uncertainty: Case presentation and the development of professional identity. Social Science and Medicine, 56, 603-613.
41.
Mazzolini, M., & Maddison, S. ( 2003). SAGE, guide, or ghost? The effect of instructor intervention on student participation in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 40, 237-253.
42.
McComb, M. ( 1994). Benefits of computer-mediated communication in college courses. Communication Education, 43, 159-170.
43.
Miles, M., & Huberman, M. ( 1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
44.
Miller, C.R. ( 1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 151-167.
45.
Morton, J. ( 2006). The integration of images into architecture presentations: A semiotic analysis. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 5, 21-37.
46.
Morton, J., & O’Brien, D. (2005). Selling your design: Oral communication pedagogy in design education. Communication Education, 54, 6-19.
47.
Oak, A. ( 2000). It’s a nice idea, but it’s not actually real: Assessing the objects and activities of design. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 19, 86-95.
48.
Ostermann, A.C. ( 1998, September). Drawing on words and words on drawings: Construction of identity and negotiation of expertise in design juries in the school of architecture. Paper presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics Conference, Seattle, WA, USA.
49.
Pan, C.C., Sivo, S.A., & Brophy, J. ( 2003). Students attitude in a web-enhanced hybrid course: A structural equation modeling inquiry. Journal of Educational Media and Library Sciences, 41, 181-194.
50.
Patton, M.Q. ( 2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
51.
Petraglia, J. ( 1998). Reality by design: The rhetoric and technology of authenticity in education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
52.
Rudin, S. (Producer), & Weir, P. (Director). (1998). The Truman Show [Motion picture]. United States: Paramount Pictures.
53.
Russell, D.R. ( 1997). Rethinking genre in school and society. Written Communication, 14, 504-555.
54.
Schryer, C.F. ( 2000). Walking a fine line: Writing negative letters in an insurance company. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 14, 445-497.
55.
Spilka, R. ( 1993). Influencing workplace practice: A challenge for professional writing specialists in academia. In R. Spilka (Ed.), Writing in the workplace (pp. 207-219). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press .
56.
Spitzberg, B., & Cupach, W. (Eds). (2007). The dark side of interpersonal communication. (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
57.
Swales, J., Barks, D., Ostermann, A., & Simpson, R. ( 2001). Between critique and accommodation: Reflections on an EAP course for Masters of Architecture students. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 439-458.
58.
Warnick, B. ( 2007). Rhetoric online: Persuasion and politics on the World Wide Web. New York, NY: Lang.
59.
Weed, L.L. ( 1969). Medical records, medical education, and patient care: The problem-oriented medical record as a basic tool. Cleveland , OH: Case Western University Press.
60.
Wilson, A.L. ( 1993). The promise of situated cognition. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 57, 71-79.
61.
Wolski, S., & Jackson, S. ( 1999, February). Technological diffusion within educational institutions: Applying the technology acceptance model. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, San Antonio, TX.
