Week 2 – From Intention to Method
A week focused on closing the gap between idea and action, and learning that clarity comes from showing how a design operates, not just what it proposes.
Hearing the difference between describing a project and explaining its mechanics.
I shared my research drawing with Alexis and received clear and constructive feedback. While the work was received positively, the main critique was that it focused too heavily on describing what the project is, rather than explaining how it works. This distinction felt important. It highlighted that intention alone is not enough, and that design thinking must be accompanied by evidence of process, operation and consequence. The feedback prompted me to reconsider how clearly my work communicates its underlying logic.
Moving from ecological ambition to ecological specificity.
Following this, I began thinking more carefully about how I describe ecological improvement within the project. Rather than stating that the design increases ecology, I was encouraged to show how this happens and what kind of ecology is being supported. This meant identifying specific habitats, conditions and processes, and understanding how precedent projects achieve similar outcomes through planting strategies, water management and spatial organisation. I also revisited my list of seven key words and reduced them to five by merging interaction and reflection into movement, helping to clarify the project’s conceptual framework and avoid unnecessary overlap.
Learning to use feedback as a live design tool.
During the session, we presented our work on Miro and responded directly to feedback in real time. Despite making changes, the core message remained consistent: I need to demonstrate more of the how. This included further development of the ecology of the site and a deeper unpacking of the technical and operational aspects of my precedent studies, particularly within the Muse page. The repetition of this feedback reinforced its importance, making it clear that method, detail and mechanism must be foregrounded if the project is to be convincing.
Reflection
This week reframed how I understand resolution within design. It is not about adding more content, but about making the existing ideas legible through process, ecology and technique. The feedback helped me recognise that narrative and ecology only become persuasive when they are grounded in clear explanation of how a landscape performs, adapts and evolves over time.