Jury Criticism and Design Ability: Factors in Evaluative Judgments of Design

Abstract

Critical comment (the “crit”) is used to teach judgment and design to architects. It is assumed by experts that the best designers are likely to be the best judges. In this study architecture students (ns = 16, 22, 20, 17) judged their own and their peers' work before or during a peer jury; 3 instructors' evaluations were criteria. When students judged their own work, good designers were more accurate then poor ones and hearing the jury assisted both good designers and poor designers. When students judged one another's work, their own ability in design made no difference. Again, the jury assisted both groups. It appears that all students tend to overrate poor designs by others. The implications in relation to peer norms and teaching are discussed.