While industry is looking to graphic design education for the next top designers who have the knowledge and skills to be successful in their field (Bridges, King, Brown, & Luedeman, 2013), graphic design instructors often have a limited time to teach students the knowledge and skills they need to become successful designers (Landa, 2010; Kennedy et al., 2012; Liu, & Tourtellott, 2011). Most university-level graphic design courses, the traditional preparation pathway for future designers, focus on improving student’s design ability through hands-on projects that teach students how to use graphic design technology (Motley, 2017). In addition to hands-on graphic design experiences, many classrooms also use peer critique to allow students to critique and give feedback to peers while identifying the positive aspects of a design and suggesting improvements to be made (Motley, 2017). Students tend to improve their design when a classroom implements critique, including self and peer assessment, into the curriculum (Wanner, & Palmer, 2018). However, little is known about the relationship, if any exists, between a student’s ability to design and a student’s ability to critique. Therefore, this study will investigate the correlation between student critique and student design abilities with the intent of improving graphic design educational practices. Understanding this correlation may assist those involved with graphic design education to better prepare students for future employment by assisting instructors in using their limited teaching time most effectively. Specifically, a relationship between graphic design critique and graphic design skill may suggest that the limited time available for teaching should emphasize improving critique skills with the goal of also improving graphic design abilities. If no relationship between critique and design abilities exists, this may suggest that limited time should be spent engaging students in critique and other forms of teaching should be emphasized.

京都大学 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(人間・環境学) / 甲第24114号 / 人博第1051号 / 新制||人||246(附属図書館) / 2022||人博||1051(吉田南総合図書館) / 京都大学大学院人間・環境学研究科共生文明学専攻 / (主査)准教授 齋藤 嘉臣, 教授 森口 由香, 准教授 徳永 悠, 准教授 楠 綾子 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Human and Environmental Studies / Kyoto University / DGAM

Africa has always aspired for the economic integration of its markets. This endeavour is evident right from the 1960s clamour for independence and shortly thereafter, as newly independent states. During this period African countries under the umbrella of the OAU underscored economic cooperation as the basis for intra-African relations. However, it was not until the year 1991, with the conclusion of the AEC Treaty, that the continent formally adopted a framework and roadmap towards continental economic integration. The 40-year roadmap towards a continental economic community was premised upon the two principles of harmonisation and devolution. Moreover, the six-stage integration process set out in Article 6 of the AEC Treaty identifies the eight RECs in Africa as the building blocks for the continent’s proposed single market and economic union. It also underpinned the economic integration of the continent on the harmonious co-existence of the RECs. A step-wise ambitious integration model was adopted under Article 6 of the AEC Treaty. The model envisaged the creation of a Free Trade Area (FTA), followed by a Customs Union, a Common Market and ultimately a fully-fledged Economic Union. As a first step towards the continental integration, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) was unveiled in 2018. Cross border, intra-African trade, is bound to lead to a rise in investment and commercial transactions on the continent. This, in turn, will inevitably lead to disputes which require resolution. The economic integration of the continent is fast evolving under the aegis of the AU; whose dispute settlement system is currently also under review. Significantly, the AU has consolidated its dispute settlement mechanism, following the merger in 2008 of the ACJ and ACH&PR, into a single AU court, known as the African Court of Justice and Human Rights (ACJ&HR). It is within the context of the merged AU single court that this thesis grounds itself. It seeks to interrogate the adequacy of the continental trade and investment dispute settlement system and examines its viability within the consolidated AU dispute settlement system. While the AU led continental economic integration gains pace, the dispute settlement system, critical for the integration, is either lagging behind or is not receiving adequate attention. As a result, the dispute settlement systems created under the AEC and AfCFTA are incongruent with the principles of harmonisation and devolution, which underpin the continent’s economic integration goals. The recommendations proffered, align with the philosophy of harmonising and devolving the continental trade and investment dispute settlement system. The research proposes to locate the continental trade and investment dispute settlement within the AU single court system. The principal recommendation is not only to expand the Court’s jurisdiction in order to accommodate the trade and investment mandate, but also to use sub-regional REC judicial organs as courts of first instance for the ACJ&HR. A hierarchical order of the continental court system, with the single AU Court at the apex, is also proposed in this study as the supreme overarching supranational judicial organ. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LL.D.