From Confusion to Consensus

ARCH 7133 Studio 3: Synthesis/Engagement

After a stressful spring semester with barely a break in between, we started our final summer semester. This summer, One of our courses was crafting a convivial game—a relational practice around collectively stewarding a present and future world.

Dan wrote to us saying this course would be one of the strangest and most meaningful we’d ever take. We would learn web development techniques while experimenting with collaborative decision-making to shape the course’s conditions. With curiosity and confusion, we kickstarted our course on June 4th.

On the first day, we entered the classroom and instinctively began arranging chairs around the table. Joshua assisted Dan in connecting his laptop to the screen. Dan greeted us and shared a few words before asking us to step out and reenact the first five minutes of the class. We complied, leaving and then re-entering, passing chairs to each other and arranging them around the table, with Joshua once again helping Dan connect the laptop. Dan then revealed how we had collectively set up the class subconsciously. This was no ordinary class. There were no clear student and teacher roles; we were equals, and anyone could lead a discussion. Initially, I was lost, hoping for Dan to lead. I wondered if he had even prepared for the course or if this was too experimental.

The seven of us were hesitant to participate actively. In a regular setting, the class is led by a teacher, and we contribute in our own ways—some like to talk, others prefer to work quietly. In the following weeks, Dan introduced icebreaker games before each class, like imagining a room made of any material or food that you could eat your way out of. Answers ranged from dosa to cheese to boba! These games broke the ice, and we grew more comfortable voicing our opinions. It began to feel like a group discussion among eight people aiming for a common goal. We proposed daily agendas, agreeing or disagreeing, and showed consensus by knocking our knuckles on the table.

It became so natural that I started looking forward to Tuesdays and Thursdays. We played games like Pandemic and Co-opoly to understand game mechanisms.

One day, nearing the semester’s second half, we found ourselves in an intense conversation about designing a game collectively. Eight people with eight ideas, and we were stressed about how to work together. Then the weirdest thing happened. Vicky suggested we each write 250 words about what we wanted the game to be. We ended up giving ourselves homework! Dan’s smirk revealed his plan had worked. At that moment, I finally understood the process and the idea behind this course. From that point on, everything changed. We got better at making decisions and collaborating. Every class we moved forward with our ideas, seamlessly blending our varied perspectives. We acknowledged each other’s strengths, and identified a shared purpose. Our efforts resulted in the creation of Crisis Rises!

This journey, marked by confusion, growth, and collaboration, will be one to remember. It taught me the profound impact of working together, the beauty of different minds converging toward a common goal, and the strength found in mutual respect and understanding. As I move forward in my career, I hope this experience remains with me.

>