Yesterday I submitted my final paper. About five minutes later I came up with a better title, but oh well. I thought it would be great to share and see other student’s work, so I’m going first.

New title: Designing for Quality Critical Discourse

Abstract: Critique is important in many fields, including art and interaction design. In this paper I will look at two sources that allow for photography critique; Deviant Art and Flickr. I argue that specifics of Deviant Art allow for and foster quality critical discourse. I argue that certain formal characteristics along with use qualities create a particular style. This style is then affected and made sense of through social structures such as photography culture. This style fosters better quality critiques, even though it has weaknesses. I end by presenting six principles for designing for quality critique.

Full Paper: Hill, John Wayne. 2010. Designing for Quality Critical Discourse.

Overall, I’m very happy with my paper. While I don’t generally enjoy writing, I did enjoy the emergent thought and sheer usefulness of the pre-writing activities that Jeff taught us. I think I most enjoyed laying out an argument and using theories that I had never before touched. This allowed me to be confident in what I was thinking and arguing. What scared me the most was the while writing I ended up defining Interaction Style, and was not confident at all in doing so. However, after talking with Jeff I tackled the issue head on and devoted 4 paragraphs to the definition. I’m sure it’s not great, but I feel much better about it. In brief, I defined interaction style as “the consistent treatment of formal qualities and use qualities made sense of through social structures”. I’m not sure this is anywhere close to good, but it’s something. Overall, this paper has greatly affected how I view critique interfaces, and has had a huge impact on my capstone. I hope others will share their papers as well!