Towards a Pedagogical Model Applying Commedia dell’Arte and Art Workshops in Higher Education Design Studies

2.1 Progressive Inquiry with Artifacts and Knowledge Work

Design inquiry is often considered to be experiential and iterative in nature and benefits from relative creative freedom. Nevertheless, design inquiry needs to be constrained and predisposed with the selected genre, form, purpose, modality, and material dictated by the end product (Ledin & Machin, 2020). In this study, we focus on a digital multiplayer game in a 3D space. Progressive inquiry is a pedagogical model for structuring and supporting a group of learners in a deepening question-explanation process. Progressive inquiry consists of several parallel and simultaneous inquiry processes within which consecutive iteration cycles and collaborative knowledge construction take place (Hakkarainen, 2000).

In this study, we conceptualize and differentiate two inquiry vessels, knowledge objects and design artifacts (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 2003; Hakkarainen, Palonen, Paavola, & Lehtinen, 2004; Hakkarainen, 2009; Merrill, 2000; Niedderer, 2013) created by the students during their study project. Knowledge objects include a variety of digital contents and abstractions: the game design document, the design drivers, concept maps, character personality trait lists, early prototypes, student reports, visual learning diaries, and sketches done individually and produced as a group assignment. Design artifacts in this study refer to both digital and tangible masks and costumes with integrated Commedia elements. We acknowledge the role of creative exploration and workshop-based creative practice, which combines both theory and practice in the inquiry cycles for acquiring new interpretations and significance of the Commedia elements. Progressive inquiry on characterization centered around both tangible artifacts and intangible, abstract knowledge objects that were created in design workshops that studied the elements of Commedia dell’Arte, the thematic denominator.

Knowledge work can be conceptualized as work that focuses on advancing and articulating knowledge objects by the learning community’s collective efforts and resources (Bereiter, 2002; Bereiter & Scardamalia, 2003; Hakkarainen et al., 2004; Schatzki, Knorr-Cetina, & Von Savigny, 2001). In this study, multiple UAS study lines, university students, stakeholders, end-users, and theater professionals partook in knowledge construction and cognitive processes. Objects of knowledge are, according to Knorr-Cetina, “characteristically open, question generating and complex” (Cetina, 2016; Knorr-Cetina, 2001, p. 181).

Knowledge objects are abstractions that take shape when investigating the phenomena or task at hand in collaborative, iterative inquiry processes. Knowledge objects enable the process, as they evolve over time, are in progress, incomplete and in their nature open-ended (Cetina, 2016; Knorr-Cetina, 2001). Since knowledge objects are always in the process of being materially defined, they “continually acquire new properties and change the ones they have” (Knorr-Cetina, 2001, p. 181). Even though they are never fully and unambiguously complete, they can be used at any stage to analyze the current stage of the progress of an inquiry (Merrill, 2000). Similarly, from a narrative point of view in negotiating shared meaning and value within co-design process, an epistemic object “embeds a story that enlists the support of others within the same inquiry, engages them in building upon the narrative or disputing it, and results in some form of collaborative understanding” (Khazraee & Gasson, 2015, p. 140).

To facilitate transfer of learning, it is essential to engage students in collaboratively solving complex and interlinked challenges. A thematic denominator in higher education design curriculum enables several parallel design inquiries to co-occur and benefit each other as the same interdisciplinary students are invited to participate in experimenting new modalities within the co-existing collaborative inquiry rounds. Parallel to the digital characterization process, the co-design process for the multiplayer digital game wall interface, the co-design for the game itself with integrated minigames and Commedia elements, as well as the design process of the tangible concrete wall took place. In these parallel co-design processes, students created, compared, and assessed various optional solutions to multifaceted challenges and became equipped to solve unanticipated, interdisciplinary problems both now and in the future (Marton & Trigwell, 2000; Tyler, 2021).

2.2 Computers as Theater – The Multiplayer Game Wall as an Example of an Interactive Interface

Brenda Laurel draws conceptual connections between theater, digital games, and digital interfaces in Computers as Theater (1993). In her seminal work, Laurel advocates an analogy between computers and theater with many shared concepts for comparison. She refers to Aristotelian (384–322 BC) principles when analyzing the similarities in computer interfaces, games on computers, and theatrical performances. Especially important is the emotional pleasure attached to well-designed affordances and the concept of agency in new media art with gamified content.

The techniques for orchestrating human response in theater and immersive digital interfaces are strikingly similar. First, there is a fundamental concordance in representing action with multiple agents, as both domains are action and character based. Second, theater provides a model of human–computer activity that according to Laurel is “familiar, comprehensible, and evocative” for wider public (Laurel, 1993, p. 30).

In this study, we recognize and use theoretical conceptualization for characterization from Aristotle’s Poetics, which is the philosophical basis of analyzing performing arts. Poiesis refers to becoming of life, to start existing, the very essence of birth or becoming in an ongoing process – not the praxis or theory of it (Aristotle, 2006; Taminiaux, 1987). The computer, especially its latest development and usage in an immersive 3D space with an interface, allows gamers to participate in the becoming. The very essence of poiesis is an ongoing action of representation, which is established and strengthened by “the sensory immersion and the tight coupling of kinesthetic input and visual response,” very similar to audience engagement at the theatrical performance (Laurel, 1993, p. 21). Both domains, theater and computers, orchestrate and amplify experience. In this study, the end product for which students generated characters and game concepts was a digital interactive immersive multiplayer game wall, which has touch sensitive sensors.

A wooden multiplayer touch sensitive game wall was co-designed with the South-Eastern Finland UAS, Xamk multiple designing, engineering, and programming study lines together with stakeholder OiOi, a company specializing in experiment architecture. The game wall is located at the Xamk Kouvola campus in a 3D space Future Experiment Lab FUEL and has two additional side screens and a surround sound system to create an immersive environment. The game wall experience is unique due to its multiplayer aspect. It is operated as a huge touch screen with physical presence required.

The multiplayer game “The Great Escape” referred to in this article derives inspiration from a play called The Comedy About a Bank Robbery, a farce comedy which as a genre originates from Italian street theatre Commedia dell’Arte which relies heavily on set scenarios and stock characters with masks as further elaborated in this article. Besides Xamk and a Russian university of technology and design, collaborators of the multiplayer game included Kouvola City Theatre, OiOi, Art Testers, Taike Regional Game Artist Jaakko Kemppainen, Kouvola youthwork and urban art sectors, as well as end-user representatives from Kouvola Eskonlanmäki comprehensive school students specializing in technology and drama.

In the pedagogical model, we have taken into consideration that the interface design, technical capacity, and performance of the multiplayer game wall were designed during the same set time frame of the project as the game itself. Both were part of the parallel co-design inquiries, set contents to the learning objectives, and finally contributed to the research setup, data collection and research results in the form of the pedagogical model.

In digital games, experience is machinated and validated via affordances, such as character-based affordances. If the game has characters, as this study has, the protagonists and antagonists with their characteristic traits are designed according to the peculiar genre they represent, for instance, action, comedy, tragedy, or melodrama. In multiplayer games and digital experience environments, the action is based on a vast amount of shared information or common ground. In multiplayer games and digital experience environments, the action is based on a vast amount of shared information or common ground. Collective actions build on that accumulation, the perceptual common ground, which directs, and orchestrates interaction through the appearance and behavior of objects on the screen (Laurel, 1993). The dramatic interactions – collaboration, constraints, and engagement – all become shared information, the common ground. The multiplayer wall provides the shared context for action in which the players are agents, and the digital characters with their specific traits contribute to affordances.

2.3 Commedia dell’Arte, Aristotle, Carnival of Comedy, and the Paradox of a Wise Fool

Commedia dell’Arte, a popular street theater from the sixteenth–eighteenth centuries, designates how the audience engages with the characters and the fast-paced action specific to the genre. Commedia dell’Arte can be described as an unscripted improvised comedy with stock characters and set scenarios (Chaffee & Crick, 2015). The three words of the genre name translate to “comedy of the artists” distinguishing its performers as artists not as amateurs. Arte can be translated into English not only as artists and art but also as craft and know-how (Rudlin, 1994, p. 14). It is a genuine actor’s art, and therefore, we decided to integrate actors’ movement as workshop content for inquiry purposes.

Commedia dell’Arte stock characters’ nature and temperament were exaggerated, and they reflected the different classes of society. Within set scenarios, the characters’ entrances and exits were fixed, yet the content of acting was unscripted improvisation, a carnival of comedy with the lazzo – special witty or foolish jokes. The stock characters and fixed social types included such as foolish old men, devious servants, and military officers full of false bravery (Rudlin, 1994, pp. 62–63).

In Poetics, Aristotle provides a dramatic theory with elements of qualitative structure that are beneficial in building and analyzing digital computer-based fictional worlds of today that are built on representations (Laurel, 1993, p. 36). Even though Aristotle’s dramatic theories stem from the Classical period in Ancient Greece, they are valuable in identifying and elucidating formal and structural characteristics of both narratives and actions of contemporary digital games. Aristotle analyzed how the Greeks employed drama and theater as tools for thought, in much the same way as we do today or in the way that we envision employing them in the not-too-distant future in digital fictive worlds, digital games, and immersive environments (Laurel, 1993, p. 40).

Aristotle differentiates between Greek tragedy and comedy throughout Poetics by distinguishing between the nature of the human characters. While comedy focuses on depicting less virtuous people with their weaknesses and foibles, tragedy deals with serious, important, and virtuous people (Aristotle, 2006). By focusing on comedy – particularly in Commedia dell’Arte and farce comedy – we need to ask what does foolery and what do fools teach ordinary people and why should everyone embrace their inner fool. Foolishness entails many subcategories with aspects of trickery, entertainment, wittiness, verbal and physical acrobatics, folly, stupidity, idiocy, anarchy, sarcasm, and cynicism, to name some aspects. There is a social demand for accepted forms of foolery and thus a need for these exaggerated qualities in art and fiction. The fictive foolish characters are usually treated by the audiences with mockery, ridicule, and derision – but also saluted and welcomed with liberating laughter (Telfer, 1995).

Pearson (1991) divides the journey of the Fool archetype into four stages of which we learn different perspectives such as playfulness, naivety, comedy, and comical elements. The first and most elementary phase of a fool’s life cycle is similar to an innocent child for whom life resembles an enjoyable game to be played for the fun of it with not much responsibility or need to contribute to the society. In the next phases, Jester and Trickster live life fully in the moment. They teach the audiences to celebrate life and its offerings with a “carpe diem” mentality. The Trickster is able to use the acquired cleverness “to trick others, to get out of trouble, to find ways around obstacles and last but not least to tell the truth without impunity” (Pearson, 1991, p. 60). Therefore, according to Pearson, there is a deep philosophical meaning in the Trickster, who can help us see “unconventional approaches to problems or entertain an entirely different world view” (ibid.). Thinking outside the box metaphor is very similar to designers’ and artists’ position, role, and significance in society. The Trickster's capabilities and qualities can become a genuine transformative power “in times of massive societal change, when the capacity to change course in midstream is vital and immensely socially useful” (Pearson, 1991, pp. 62–63).

Jester and Trickster characters have been granted the privilege and freedom to say aloud, often abruptly, things that are unconventional and yet might have a serious message about the current state of affairs. This type of inadvertent verbal acrobatics containing puns full of meaning is common to characters in Commedia dell’Arte art form as well. In archetypes described by Pearson, both the Fool and the Sage search for balance and are complementary to each other at the end of their life cycle, when the transformation through four Fool stages is successful and a refined Wise Fool appears.

2.4 Drama as a Collaborative Inquiry

Drama with its emphasis on action provides strong social contexts for learning and supporting a motivated students’ desire to communicate (Dunn, 2016; Jackson, 1993; O’Neill, 1995; O’Toole, 1992; Winston & Stinson, 2016). The method has a special feature of simultaneous observation and action, research, and exploration of the fictive world to create understanding, negotiate meaning, as well as experience empathy toward the fictive characters (Jackson, 1993; O’Toole, 1992; Owens & Barber, 2001). In this study, drama pedagogical methods were used in characterization and creating the digital game storyline with aspects of community, empathy, and identity (Hand & Moore, 2006; Tanenbaum & Tanenbaum, 2015).

Transition from expression to experience through drama was used to evoke collective creativity in the Commedia dell’Arte related contents’ creation. The students’ teams were guided by applying process drama methods to enhance critical thinking and reflection for action, in action and of action (Bowell & Heap, 2013; Schneider et al., 2006; Schön, 2017). The link between intellectual understanding and the body, embodied learning in communicating with and through the body was employed in art workshops and process drama workshops, and was crucial for three causes such as the characterization, the Commedia mask element, and the multiplayer game wall end product (Brauer & Bräuer, 2002; Dunn, 2016; Khaner & Linds, 2015; Richards & Rodgers, 2001; Vettraino & Linds, 2015).

Process drama presupposes a shared fictive world and a mutual agreement between all participants including the facilitator, who also acts from within a role within a given scenario and occasionally invites participants to reflect and analyze the ongoing action by stepping in and out of the fiction (O’Neill, 1995; O’Toole, 1992; Owens & Barber 2001; Schneider et al., 2006). Process drama is an improvisational, unscripted form of drama in which participants are guided to imagine, enact, and reflect upon human experiences. Process drama includes the notion of “performative inquiry” (Fels, 2015) with a critical element of reflection. Reflection in action, reflection for action, and reflection on action all are integral parts of the process (Schön, 2017). The process entails an extensive research and preparation phase prior to the dramatic action phase, which can contain reflection moments and is always followed by facilitated reflection phase that can consist of both written and verbal reflection (O’Neill, 1995; O’Toole, 1992; Owens & Barber, 2001; Taylor & Warner, 2006). The active acting part (the drama) is not intended for audiences but is nonexhibitional. It has many similarities with Commedia dell’Arte, which is also unscripted improvisation within set scenarios with stock characters that have specific predetermined qualities and traits.

Process drama was used in three workshops to map the connections, relationships, and tensions between the chosen game characters. The drama pedagogical learning process brings forth empathy toward the fictive personae, at best enlightenment and revelations about interconnected social relations, questions related to the scenario and issues or phenomena under study. The method is about agreeing to participate in a longitudinal process of thinking, planning, improvising, and engaging oneself in a dialogue according to the given role (O’Neill, 1995; O’Toole, 1992; Taylor & Warner, 2006; Winston & Stinson, 2016).

The values promoted through drama pedagogy include openness, empathy, engagement, and student-centeredness. Competences enhanced were creativity, reflection, metacognitive, analytical, and communication skills as well as team skills. The pedagogical philosophy relies on a constructivist approach and collaborative inquiry. The method requires the active role of a facilitator as a coequal and performing team member, capable of facilitating analyzes of power structures within the created scenarios and between the characters.

3.1 Ethnographic Approach

The present study relies on participatory ethnography with elements from participatory design traditions (Blomberg & Burrel, 2009; Blomberg & Karasti, 2012). In this study, one of the researchers has been involved in the design of the learning environments and activities with an attempt to experiment with new forms of curriculum integration of a student-led design process. Within the experimental design, there has been an attempt to develop a pedagogical model that could be used as a framework to design learning environments and activities.

In line with ethnographic research, one of the researchers has been doing fieldwork with the students and at the same time collecting data including artifacts created by the students. Participatory design is present in several stages of the students’ study project, and the process has been iteratively justified depending on the field observations and discussions with students and teachers involved in the process. Therefore, part of the analysis and the development of the pedagogical model has taken place already during the study project. In this article, however, we focus on the analysis carried out after the study project and rely on the field notes and artifacts created during the study project by the students.

3.2 Data and Analysis

For our data analysis, we gathered multifaceted student-generated forms of data, such as visual mappings for minigames relying on distinct elements of Commedia, mapped interconnectedness of characters, digital and tangible masks, outfit sketches, and hackathon prototypes for the multiplayer digital game. Data were collected at hackathons, study modules, and workshops held at the South-Eastern Finland UAS – Xamk, during years 2019–2021. Data were collected and clustered in folders in online cloud service repositories (Teams) to which students, instructors, and one of the researchers had access. Permission to use the data for research purposes was granted by the Xamk managing authorities, namely, the vice rector (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Knowledge objects including mappings, minigame proposals, and character trait lists; design artifacts including pictures of digital and tangible costumes and masks. Photo credit Heini Haapaniemi.

An ongoing and timely comparison of different student-generated knowledge objects including both preliminary sketches and polished versions of design artifacts was possible through participating and observing study modules. Students stored their output, both individual and co-produced in interdisciplinary teams, into a shared cloud service repository, which was accessible to their peers and researchers. Each phase of the process was also documented with pictures. Large volumes of initial data were compared, and compatible features were organized into content categories.

The second phase was viewing and categorizing the already sorted data by assigning labels, attributes, and features referring to Commedia elements and possible affections the data might produce in reference to the basic moods and emotions associated with each Commedia dell’Arte stock character. Subsequently, subcategories under previously mentioned content categories were opened as the categorization procedure advanced.

The comparative data analysis continued through workshop and study module entities as the design process proceeded. Concerning tangible masks, the data were gathered while taking part in creative design-action through a three-day workshop event including demonstrations of actors’ art. Besides collecting student-generated data, pictures were taken from hackathons and workshops to ensure the triangulation of data collection methods.

Throughout the study modules, the researchers mapped data connections and feature categories which were used to form initial coding categories. Triangulation of visual and verbal data gathering methods enabled thick description. Combining drama method with design and theater theory and integrating these two into design practice in an iterative multidisciplinary design process can benefit the production of a new pedagogical model and thus advance the entire field of higher education design studies.

4.1 Curriculum Integration

With students from various programs of the university, it was important to consider how the interdisciplinary study project can serve the different learning needs and objectives of each program. Therefore, we relied strongly on relatively open-ended workshops and hackathons where students could freely explore different topics related to the study projects. With guidance from the teachers, students were able to rely on and develop their skills and competencies gained in their earlier studies but were at the same time challenged with very different thinking and practices from other disciplines.

4.1.3 Mask Workshops

In Commedia dell’Arte, masked characters are often referred to as “Masks” (maschere) (Chaffee & Crick, 2015). The “fixed type” and “stock character” are loaded with human reference and cultural meaning in the context of a stage but can never be mixed with a representation of a human being – they are not alive in that sense, but caricature types (Rudlin, 1994, pp. 34–35). Female characters, including servants, were most often not masked. The female character in the masters’ group was called Prima Donna and could be one of the lovers as in our study Isabella, the Bank Director’s daughter. At the time of the flourishing of the genre, the Holy Mother and the Church could not be mocked (Chaffee & Crick, 2015). Therefore, there were no mother figures in Commedia dell’Arte.

We held masks workshops that investigated Commedia dell’Arte as an art form by making plaster masks. Experimental hands-on inquiry was complemented with theoretical knowledge on Commedia characters and actors’ art demonstrations. The plaster molds were made on each participant’s face and thus perfectly fitted the bearer. The most relevant part of the inquiry was to realize how to show emotions on the mask as facial expressions are hidden behind the mask. Costume and accessory designers also understood the focal position of the body and body consciousness with a mask not only to the actors themselves but also to the audience.

Two demonstrations on actors’ art with a mask (Figures 2–4) were given to workshop participants on the first and last day to enable them to learn how to move and act with their own designer artifacts. This pedagogical decision to include an inquiry on actors’ movement was crucial to highlight the body and its movement.

Figure 2

Actors’ art with mask demonstrations. Photo credit Rosamaria Nevalainen.

Figure 3

Actors’ art with mask demonstrations. Photo credit Esko Ahola.

Figure 4

Actors’ art with mask demonstrations. Photo credit Esko Ahola.

Figures 2–12 show the embodied element in learning through material, movement, actor’s art, and imitation of the characters created while molding and designing the mask. The iterative process is a holistic approach integrating embodied learning through actor’s art and material-based hand-on design in making the design artifacts. Learning takes place not only when designing, adjusting, molding, fitting, and readjusting but also when watching, performing, and reflecting. This approach is derived from the inquiry cycle format, which enables distancing oneself from the process for reflection purposes prior to the next design activity. The very first actors’ demonstration revealed to the students that if movement is not accented or there is a lack of bodily engagement, the connection to the observers and audience is impeded – or in the worst case lost. This was clearly indicated in the workshop pictures by both successful and not so successful audience engagement, which was dependent on posture and clarity in movement. Thus, embodied learning was integral to knowledge construction.

Figure 5

Adding texture. Photo credit Heini Haapaniemi.

Figure 6

Trunk-like nose denotes lying and untrustworthiness in Commedia dell’Arte. Photo credit Heini Haapaniemi.

Figure 7

Adjusting the artifact on the face. Photo credit Esko Ahola.

Figure 8

Adjusting the artifact on the face. Photo credit Esko Ahola.

Figure 9

Polishing and giving texture. Photo credit Esko Ahola.

Figure 10

Acting with the masks and embodied learning. Photo credit Esko Ahola.

Figure 11

Acting with the masks and embodied learning. Photo credit Esko Ahola.

Figure 12

A finalized and decorated mask. Photo credit Esko Ahola.

The mask features took shape within a process of molding, designing, polishing, decorating, and coloring (Figures 5 and 6). The students realized that additional material and elements to punctuate the shapes of the mask needed to be as light in weight as possible. Even heavy-looking rough structures such as a long trunk-like nose peculiar to Commedia Zanni character, or materials imitating heavy materials, such as steel, needed to be constructed light and hollow, to be wearable.

Throughout the design process, the masks were tried and fitted on the designers’ own face (Figures 7 and 8). When worn, the mask resembles artificial skin. The mask, whether half mask or covering the whole face, obstructs facial expressions. Within the performative inquiry, students took shifts in observing and acting to experience both sides of the mask – from both the bearers’ and audiences’ point of view (Figures 10 and 11). This phase was followed by further molding the masks and giving them shape, polishing, and texture according to the chosen character traits and lessons learned from movement (Figures 9 and 12). Encouraged by the combination of arts-based and movement-sensitive design inquiry, three fashion design students created versions of the characters as tangible costumes from the past and present with the Commedia aspect as the supporting thematic denominator (Cunningham, 2019).

4.2 Pedagogical Model with Inquiry Cycles: Interdisciplinary Mask Drama and Game Design

The formed pedagogical model “the parallel co-inquiry cycles with performative inquiry for character related design” consisted of several interlinked inquiry processes within which iterations took place. All the inquiry types, the art-based, design-based, drama-based, and technology-augmented inquiry, processes together contributed to the collaborative knowledge construction similar to the definition of progressive inquiry “a pedagogical model for structuring and supporting a group of learners in a deepening question-explanation process” (Hakkarainen, 2000).

Recurring iterations are characteristic of design processes and therefore can be practiced also in design education. Each single co-inquiry cycle (Figure 13, below) has, according to Heron and Reason, a pattern of Observe–Plan–Act–Reflect (Heron & Reason, 2002, p. 167 as cited in Khaner & Linds, 2015, p. 134), which we decided to use as the bases of our model. Without first observing, defining the problem, and studying the context, the shift to planning is not possible. Planning entails thorough research on issues identified in the Observe phase and choosing the best methods to elicit more knowledge on the challenge or task at hand. Establishing criteria and considering constraints are part of the Planning phase which steers the Action phase. The Action phase is based on a selected approach aligned with the methodology, which then leads to reflection on the process and its outcomes. Reflection can contain a comparison of alternative solutions and lead to another loop or stage with more complexity based on the previous findings in the iteration cycles.

Figure 13

The single co-inquiry cycle consists of a recurring pattern of Observe–Plan–Act–Reflect, modified by Haapaniemi and Leinonen from Heron, & Reason (2002), visualization by Saara Kumpulainen and identifies three major components within the single 3E-inquiry cycles, namely Exercise, Experiment and Experience.

The new model identifies three major components within the single 3E-inquiry cycles, namely, Exercise, Experiment, and Experience. The entire process acquires complexity as each single inquiry cycle enters the next loop of Observe–Plan–Act–Reflect (stage 1, 2, 3, and so on), and more time and resources are allocated to the process. For each stage, more time is invested in the knowledge-building activities based on the previous findings, prototypes, or other outcomes. Testing is imbedded in the Action and Reflection phases, whether it is alternative qualities, traits, or behavior (inquiry 1); theoretical abstractions and mappings (inquiry 2); sketches, drafts, layouts, blueprints, patterns, and prototypes (inquiry 3); and interface design, alpha or beta version of the prototype, or test results with the end users (inquiry 4).

Exercise consists of repetition that can at times be tiresome and mundane. Exercise requires determination, concentration, discipline, and a growth-mindset that is not discouraged by difficulty, complexity, setbacks, incompetency, or failures which admittedly always occur at some point in the co-design learning process. Constant repetition builds up confidence in the newly acquired practical skills and gradually enables creative freedom as the method, material, platform, or equipment used becomes familiar to the young designers. This applies to performative inquiry as well. The method enables improvisation within certain limits, yet the courage to improvise is acquired only through small exercises, rehearsals, and repetition. Most important from the facilitator point of view is to establish a learning environment that encourages repeated exercise to refine competencies, which is essential to capacity building.

Experimenting is a mindset that requires courage to explore and navigate between alternative solutions, make propositions, build prototypes, visualize, and test the ideas. It has an inbuilt element of play in it. Creativity and experimenting are integral parts of design processes. An important aspect of creativity is not being afraid to fail. Not all experimenting is successful in terms of usable solutions. The more complex the task, in terms of multidisciplinary challenges and wicket problems, the bolder experimenting within the inquiry loops is required.

Experience in this model refers first to embodied multisensory learning through design artifacts to construct knowledge, and second to multisensory end-user-oriented aspects of the end product, service, or solution. Drama pedagogy as a method is a multisensory experience. The character, the scenario, the relationships, and tensions between the characters are experienced in performative inquiry. Experience benefits the design process with a very special type of knowledge consisting of empathy, situational smartness, overall understanding of the context and the connections of one character with the rest. Besides performative inquiry, experience is provided particularly through the tangible masks: reflections on body consciousness when making and adjusting the masks, embodied learning through the presence and through senses in the actor’s art workshops, keeping in mind the final product (a touch sensitive interactive wall in a 3D space) that aims at providing meaningful, multisensory, shared experiences to the users.

The commensurate parallel co-inquiry cycles in this pedagogical model are called Characters, Knowledge Objects, Artifacts, and Capability & Performance (Figure 14). The names refer to the central content objectives of the inquiry. In this model, the four inquiries have a dynamic influence and impact on each other as they take place in a shared time and space – whether digital or tangible. Most importantly the same students, teachers, and experts form the learning community and can enroll and participate in each inquiry cycle freely if they wish. In other words, within the model, there is no traditional division for higher education study lines but equal access to students of design (such as game design, fashion design, graphic design, service design) and technology (such as programming) (Figure 15).

Figure 14

The Pedagogical model with parallel co-inquiry cycles consists of Characters, Knowledge Objects, Artifacts and Capability & Performance and refer to the central content objectives of each inquiry. Pedagogical model with parallel co-inquiry cycles by Heini Haapaniemi and Teemu Leinonen, visualization by Saara Kumpulainen.

Figure 15

Complementary methods in single co-inquiry cycles by Heini Haapaniemi and Teemu Leinonen.

After each iteration round the Reflection phase enables a thorough analysis of the outcomes of each stage. Well-facilitated reflection entails elements of learning outcomes, learning process, learning tools, and methodology used. This study contained several co-inquiry cycles that were structured through interdisciplinary workshops and study modules listed previously. They formed a pattern of action and reflection in an iterative cycle format. Each cycle of Observe–Plan–Act–Reflect builds on previous inquiry cycles, leading to more complex and nuanced relationships between each phase of the cycle embedding reflection into it (Heron & Reason, 2001, p. 179 as cited in Khaner & Linds, 2015, p. 133). This four-phase inquiry cycle was used as a base of the model with iterative stages and increasing complexity as Heron & Reason’s inquiry cycle flows between action and reflection to “approach the interplay between making sense and action” and building praxis through experiential learning (2002, p. 167 as cited in Khaner & Linds, 2015, p. 134).

Reflection in this pedagogical model has two distinguished purposes: first, to internalize reflective design and to become a reflective practitioner (Schön, 2017) and second, to see the importance of reflection as distancing oneself from the current process, to allow a reflective mind to linger on the process, learn from mistakes, and turn them into assets. Reflection as a metacognitive skill has an all-encompassing purpose in both design and learning processes. In this model, higher education design students’ competence building for reflection in action (when the design activities take place), on action (in hindsight), and for action (prior to the next loop in the iterative cycles) is scaffolded (Schön, 2017). Within each cycle, reflection is used to plan, monitor, and assess one’s own and the teams’ design process and performance as well as lead to the next level in the iteration. Thus, reflection has a fundamental pedagogical purpose, not only in celebrating the successes but learning from the failures. The most beneficial reflection is on aspects that did not work out well. For a reflective designer, failures become victorious through reflection as they provide insight into the process and the design task from multiple perspectives: concept, users, usability, aesthetics, function, and embedded qualities. In successful learning processes, adequate time and facilitation are allocated to learn reflection strategies, which will be beneficial later in the working life context in business-driven assignments with less time for reflection. Through reflection, the design process becomes a source of important information. The candidate – the future designer – can assess his or her own design contributions, even the mistakes made, in a constructive manner.

The formed pedagogical model “the parallel co-inquiry cycles with performative inquiry for character-related design” does neither recommend nor limit the number of consecutive loops or stages within the single inquiry cycles. From the learning perspective, the number of loops is determined not only by the task but also by the collective skills and competencies of the participating learners within the interdisciplinary team.

Constructing knowledge together requires transferable skills, which should not be underestimated. Central to success are the teams’ capability to communicate, distribute responsibility, define tasks according to the objectives, share knowledge, and refine ideas into the requested form. The inquiry processes are best enabled and scaffolded by well-selected tools, platforms, and facilitation, which all together form the learning environment.

Societal and communicative aspects of co-design refer to a group of persons engaged in making new meaning together (Kennedy & Kennedy, 2010; Khaner & Linds, 2015). Discussion, asking and answering questions, peer teaching, and critiquing are used to better transfer understanding gained through the learning process to real-world problems (Park, 2007, pp. 192–193, as cited in Khaner & Linds, 2015). This emphasizes the relationally oriented nature of the learning process, requiring the “mutual constitution of participants in a dialogue” to generate conceptual knowledge objects referred to earlier (ibid.). These knowledge objects also build on Weiss’ (1999) statement that “being embodied [is] never a private affair” (Weiss, 1999, p. 5 as cited in Khaner & Linds, 2015, p. 147) as a fundamental component of the intercorporeal nature of inquiry. This formulation of meaning is essential to the process of collaborative inquiry in the context of immersive space-specific digital multiplayer games with emphasis on characters and in reference to theater.

Characterization was central in selecting the inquiry methods keeping in mind the end product, a digital game wall. According to Lynn Fels, “arts-based researcher and drama facilitator, performative inquiry offers students opportunities to voice their presence, to interrogate issues, to work collaboratively across disciplines in a creative environment that welcomes who they are and what they have to offer” (Fels, 2015, p. 151). Performative inquiry has a strong communication and collaborative effect as it is an action site of research in which knowledge construction takes place or “emerges as participants create together” (Fels, 2015, p. 152). Fels emphasizes reflection “as an action site of inquiry, a shared engagement of reciprocal learning” (Fels, 2015, p. 154).

A key to impactful pedagogy and the success of the formed pedagogical model “the parallel co-inquiry cycles with performative inquiry for character related design” is in multisensory, multiplatform, embodied learning that acknowledges learners as active contributors in constructing knowledge together and uses technological platforms to enhance learning practices and iterative processes (Durall Gazulla, Bauters, Hietala, Leinonen, & Kapros, 2020; Friedman, 2003; Muukkonen, Hakkarainen, & Lakkala, 1999). The focus was given to team processes and practices that can be traced in the data as well as students’ reflections regarding learning and collaboration experiences in the UAS study modules and hackathons.

Drama pedagogical methods, performative inquiry, and embodiment as a natural element of constructing knowledge means the students’ mind and bodies react to relational experiences and work as a reference on how they might receive them in the future (Khaner & Linds, 2015, p. 147). These generated learning experiences are of utmost importance in the ability of imagining someone else’s experiences, interpreting their responses, and feeling empathy – which all are at the core of drama pedagogical processes. The process of thinking, acting from within a role and the reflective practice the drama method entails and requires.

This study demonstrates how learning takes place when both the mind (cognition) and the body (senses) are present. In addition, storytelling with embedded imagination plays an important role. Drama methods use active and dramatic approaches to engage students in academic, affective, and aesthetic learning through dialogic meaning-making (Dawson & Lee, 2018). Drama-based pedagogy generates and cultivates many skills. Learning through drama enables cognitive development in the areas of problem-solving, critical thinking skills, decision-making, creativity and imagination, collaboration skills, reflection in action, communication, and analyzing personal contributions in collaboration. Therefore, performative inquiry is beneficial for character-related design throughout the higher education design study curriculum and beyond – applicable and recommendable to processes concerned with deeper end-user understanding.