12/IB Self Portrait Rubric

Click on the image below to make it larger/easier to read :)

 

 

Collaborative project 2k15

Here we go again! In the ongoing series of really successful collaborations, this year's group has chosen the most dynamic image yet. This is going to be fantastic. The printed image given them was 15x24 cm broken into 18 4x5 cm rectangles - they are each taking responsibility to blow one of those up to an 8x10 inch canvas I have provided them. The overall structural integrity and alignment of the image must be maintained, but the surface treatments, colours etc. are completely up to the individual student!  Cant wait to see this come together.

Students - check the collaboration tag to see your rubric.

IB Internal Asessment - Exhibition

Internal assessment details HL - The Exhibition
Part 3: Exhibition  Weighting: 40%  
EXAMPLES FROM IB 1, 2

Students at SL and HL submit for assessment a selection of resolved artworks for their exhibition. The selected pieces should show evidence of their technical accomplishment during the visual arts course and an understanding of the use of materials, ideas and practices to realize their intentions. Students also evidence the decision-making process which underpins the selection of this connected and cohesive body of work for an audience in the form of a curatorial rationale.

During the course students will have learned the skills and techniques necessary to produce their own independent artwork in a variety of media. In order to prepare for assessment in this component, students will select the required number of pieces to best match the task requirements and demonstrate their highest achievement. Students at SL select 4–7 artworks for submission while students at HL select 8–11 artworks for submission.

The final presentation of the work is assessed in the context of the presentation as a whole (including the accompanying text) by the teacher against the task assessment criteria.

Task details
 

For the exhibition task students at HL should select and present their own original resolved artworks which best evidences:

1. technical competence
2. appropriate use of materials, techniques, processes
3. resolution, communicating the stated intentions of the pieces
4. cohesiveness
5. breadth and depth
6. consideration for the overall experience of the viewer (through exhibition, display or presentation).

Students will be assessed on their technical accomplishment, the conceptual strength of their work and the resolution of their stated intentions. To support their selected resolved artworks, students at SL and HL should also submit:

1. exhibition text which states the title, medium, size and a brief outline of the original intentions of each selected artwork
2. two photographs of their overall exhibition. While the photographs will not be used to assess individual artworks, they may give the moderator insight into how a student has considered the overall experience of the viewer in their exhibition. Only the selected artworks submitted for assessment should appear in the exhibition photographs.

Students at HL should also develop a curatorial rationale which accompanies their original artworks (700 words maximum). This rationale explains the intentions of the student and how they have considered the presentation of work using curatorial methodologies, as well as considering the potential relationship between the artworks and the viewer.  


Structuring the exhibition

It is expected that work developed for the exhibition will overlap or have grown from initial or in-depth investigations within part 1: comparative study and part 2: process portfolio.

Work developed for the exhibition will have been carefully supported and facilitated by both teacher-directed learning activities and independent studies by the student. In preparing for this task students will need to have engaged with a variety of skills, techniques and processes that will have enabled them to manipulate materials, media, techniques and processes in order to discover strengths and work towards technical excellence.

Art-making forms

Having worked within a range of art-making forms for part 2: process portfolio, students at both SL and HL may submit work created in any art-making form for part 3: exhibition. The submitted pieces should be selected by the student from their total body of resolved works and should represent their most successful achievements against the assessment criteria. They should be presented in a manner suitable for an audience.

Exhibition text (500 characters maximum per artwork)

Each submitted artwork should be supported by exhibition text which outlines the title, medium and size of the artwork. The exhibition text should also include a brief outline of the original intentions of the work (500 characters maximum per artwork). The exhibition text should contain reference to any sources which have influenced the individual piece. Students should indicate if objects are self-made, found or purchased within the "medium" section of the exhibition text, where applicable. Where students are deliberately appropriating another artist’s image as a valid part of their art-making intentions, the exhibition text must acknowledge the source of the original image.

Collective pieces
Students are required to submit individual artworks for assessment. Where students wish to submit portions of work in the form of one collective piece (such as diptych, triptych, polyptych or series), this must be clearly stated as part of the title of the submitted piece in the exhibition text, presented in parentheses. For example: Title of the piece (diptych). The requirements for capturing and submitting collective pieces is the same as with other standard submissions, however students deciding to submit collective pieces need to be aware that there is a compromise in the size an image can be viewed when submitted as part of a collective piece which may prevent examiners from taking details that cannot be seen into account. Collective piecesthat are presented without the appropriate exhibition text will be considered as distinct artworks and could lead to a student exceeding the maximum number of pieces.

Structuring the curatorial rationale

The curatorial rationale requires SL and HL students to explain why specific artworks have been chosen and presented in a particular format. It provides students with an opportunity to explain any challenges, triumphs, innovations or issues that have impacted upon the selection and presentation of the artworks. Students should use the curatorial rationale to explain the context in which particular artworks were made and presented in order to connect the work with the viewer. In addition to this, students at HL should also explain how the arrangement and presentation of artworks contributes to the audience’s ability to interpret and understand the intentions and meanings within the artworks exhibited.

HL students may find the following questions helpful when approaching this task. This structure is for guidance only and is neither prescriptive nor restrictive.

1. What is the vision for presenting this body of work?
2. How have particular issues, motifs or ideas been explored, or particular materials or techniques used?
3. What themes can be identified in the work, or what experiences have influenced it?
4. How does the way you have exhibited your artwork contribute to the meanings you are trying to convey to an audience?
5. What strategies did you use to develop a relationship between the artwork and the viewer, for example, visual impact?
6. How does the way you have arranged and presented your artworks support the relationship and connection between the artworks presented?
7. What do you intend your audience to feel, think, experience, understand, see, learn, consider from the work you have selected for exhibition?

Formal requirements of the task—HL
 

1. HL students submit a curatorial rationale that does not exceed 700 words.
2. HL students submit 8–11 artworks.
3. HL students submit exhibition text (stating the title, medium and size) for each selected artwork.
HL students may submit two photographs of their overall exhibition. They will not be assessed or used to assess the individual artworks.

 Submitting assessment work

Students may choose to capture and submit individual artworks for assessment in a variety of ways, depending on the nature of the artwork and the resources available. The work should ideally be captured in whatever electronic means is most appropriate for the selected art-making form. A two-dimensional artwork, for example, might be best captured through a still photograph, while a three-dimensional artwork might be best captured through a short video recording. Lens-based, electronic or screen-based artwork such as animation, however, might call for more unusual file types. Please note that time-based submissions such as these are limited to a maximum duration of five minutes.  

Unless it is impossible, schools are advised to submit two photographs of each student’s overall exhibition. These exhibition photographs provide an understanding of the context of the exhibition and the size and scope of the works. While the photographs will not be used to assess individual artworks, they may give the moderator insight into how a student has considered the overall experience of the viewer in their exhibition. Only the selected artworks submitted for assessment should appear in the exhibition photographs.

The procedure for submitting work for assessment can be found in the Handbook of procedures for the Diploma Programme. Students are required to indicate the number of artworks submitted. Where submitted materials exceed the prescribed limits examiners are instructed to base their assessment solely on the materials that appear within the limits.

 

 

 

IB External Assessment 2 - Process Portfolio - the evolution of the RWB!

External assessment task #2 - Process Portfolio
Part 2: Process portfolio 40%
EXAMPLES FROM IB: 1, 2, 3
 
"All students should use their visual arts journal to carry out their explorations with techniques, technologies, effects and processes and to record their discoveries. They should chart and reflect on their experiments with media, their decision-making and formation of artistic intentions. Students will select, adapt and present what they have recorded in their journal as the basis for material submitted for the process portfolio task." Weighting: 40%
  

Students at SL and HL submit carefully selected materials which demonstrate their experimentation, exploration, manipulation and refinement of a variety of visual arts activities during the two-year course. The work, which may be extracted from their visual arts journal and other sketch books, notebooks, folios and so on, should have led to the creation of both resolved and unresolved works. The selected process portfolio work should show evidence of their technical accomplishment during the visual arts course and an understanding of the use of materials, ideas and practices appropriate to visual communication. They should be carefully selected to match the requirements of the assessment criteria at the highest possible level.

The work selected for submission should show how students have explored and worked with a variety of techniques, effects and processes in order to extend their art-making skills base. This will include focused, experimental, developmental, observational, skill-based, reflective, imaginative and creative experiments which may have led to refined outcomes.

Structuring the process portfolio

Students will have pursued their own interests, ideas and strengths, and their submitted work should highlight the key milestones in this journey. The submission may come from scanned pages, photographs or digital files. The process portfolio screens may take a variety of forms, such as sketches, images, digital drawings, photographs or text. While there is no limit to the number of items students may wish to include on each screen, students should be reminded that overcrowded or illegible materials may result in examiners being unable to interpret and understand their intentions.

The selected screens should evidence a sustained inquiry into the techniques the student has used for making art, the way in which they have experimented, explored, manipulated and refined materials, technologies and techniques and how these have been applied to developing work. Students should show where they have made independent decisions about the choices of media, form and purpose that are appropriate to their intentions. The portfolio should communicate their investigation, development of ideas and artworks and evidence a synthesis of ideas and media. This process will have inevitably resulted in both resolved and unresolved artworks and candidates should consider their successes and failures as equally valuable learning experiences.

Examiners are looking to reward evidence of the following:

1. sustained experimentation and manipulation of a variety of media and techniques and an ability to select art-making materials and media appropriate to stated intentions
2. sustained working that has been informed by critical investigation of artists, artworks and artistic genres and evidence of how these have influenced and impacted own practice
3. how initial ideas and intentions have been formed and how connections have been made between skills, chosen media and ideas
4. how ideas, skills, processes and techniques are reviewed and refined along with reflection on the acquisition of skills and analysis of development as a visual artist
5. how the submitted screens are clearly and coherently presented with competent and consistent use of appropriate subject-specific language.

Students must ensure that their work makes effective use of appropriate subject-specific language.
Art-making forms
 For SL students the submitted work must be in at least two art-making forms, each from separate columns of the table below. For HL students the submitted work must have been created in at least three art-making forms, selected from a minimum of two columns of the art-making forms table below. The examples given are for guidance only and are not intended to represent a definitive list.

 

Submitted work might well include experiments undertaken during (and reflections upon) taster sessions in particular media, demonstrations of techniques, workshops, master classes, guided experimentation and studio practice experienced as part of the core syllabus activities outlined above.

Formal requirements of the task—HL  
 HL students submit 13–25 screens which evidence their sustained experimentation, exploration, manipulation and refinement of a variety of art-making activities. For HL students the submitted work must have been created in at least three art-making forms, selected from a minimum of two columns of the art-making forms table.


Submitting assessment work

The submitted screens must not include any resolved works submitted for part 3: exhibition assessment task.


The size and format of screens submitted for assessment is not prescribed. Submitted materials are assessed on screen and students must ensure that their work is clear and legible when presented in a digital, on-screen format. Students should not scan multiple pages of work from their journals and submit them as a single screen, for example, as overcrowded or illegible materials may result in examiners being unable to interpret and understand the intentions of the work. The procedure for submitting work for assessment can be found in the Handbook of procedures for the Diploma Programme. Students are required to indicate the number of screens when the materials are submitted. Where submitted materials exceed the prescribed screen limits examiners are instructed to base their assessment solely on the materials that appear within the limits.

 

 

IB - External Assessment 1 - Comparative Study Info

IB External Assessment Task #1
Part 1: Comparative study
Weighting: 20%
EXAMPLES FROM IB: 1, 2, 3

Students are required to analyse and compare artworks, objects or artifacts by different artists. This independent critical and contextual investigation should explore artworks, objects and artifacts from differing cultural contexts.

Throughout the course, students will have investigated a range of artists, styles, images and objects from a range of cultural contexts, through an integrated approach to exploring the three syllabus areas: visual arts in context, visual arts methods and communicating visual arts. Students select artworks, objects and artifacts for comparison from differing cultural contexts that may have been produced across any of the art-making forms, and that hold individual resonance for the student and have relevance to their own art-making practice. This is of particular importance to HL students.

Students at both SL and HL must examine and compare at least three pieces, at least two of which should be by different artists. It is valuable for students to have experienced at least one of the works in real time and space, such as a painting at a gallery, a sculpture in a park or an artifact from the local community that is brought into the school, although this is not essential. Good quality reproductions can be referred to when a student’s location limits their access to such works first hand. The works selected for comparison and analysis should come from contrasting cultural contexts.

Students use research and inquiry skills to investigate and interpret the selected pieces, applying aspects of critical theory and methodologies to the works examined and presenting their findings as a personal and critically reflective analysis, using both visual and written forms of notation. Students must support their interpretation with references to sound and reliable sources. A recognized system of academic referencing must be used in line with the school’s academic honesty policy. A candidate’s failure to acknowledge a source will be investigated by the IB as a potential breach of regulations that may result in a penalty imposed by the IB final award committee.

Students then undertake the process outlined below for assessment.

Task details

Students at both SL and HL must select at least three artworks, objects or artifacts, at least two of which should be by different artists. For each of the selected pieces, students should:

1. carry out research from a range of different sources
2. analyse the cultural contexts in which the selected pieces were created
3. identify the formal qualities of the selected pieces
4. interpret the function and purpose of the selected pieces
5. evaluate the material, conceptual and cultural significance of the selected pieces to the cultural contexts within which they were created.

Students at both SL and HL should then:

1. compare the selected pieces, identifying links in cultural context, formal qualities, function, purpose, material, conceptual and cultural significance
2. present a list of sources used during the study.

Students at HL should also reflect on the investigation outcomes and the extent to which their own art-making practices and pieces have subsequently been influenced by artworks, objects or artifacts examined in the comparative study.
The role of the teacher
 

Teachers must ensure that their students are appropriately prepared for the demands of this task through the careful planning and delivery of the core syllabus activities outlined above. This assessment task must not be teacher led and students should be made fully aware of the assessment criteria against which their work will be judged.

The teacher should discuss the choice of selected artworks, objects and artifacts with each student. It is important that the selected pieces are the student’s own choice. Teachers should also ensure that the students are acknowledging all sources used and referencing them appropriately.

Teachers should read and give advice to students on one draft of the comparative study. The teacher should provide oral or written advice on how the comparative study could be improved, but should not edit the draft. The next version handed to the teacher must be the final version for submission.

 Structuring the comparative study
 

Students should articulate their understanding through both visual and written forms, depending on the most appropriate means of presenting and communicating their findings. While the comparative study may include text-based analysis, it may also include diagrammatic and graphic elements such as annotated sketches and diagrams, annotations on copies of artworks as well as other visual organizing techniques (such as flowcharts, relative importance graphs, concept webs and Mind Maps®). An introduction to the study should summarize the scope of the investigation from which the focus artworks, objects and artifacts have been selected. Students should aim for a balance of visual and written content, and use an appropriate means of acknowledging sources. Students must ensure that their work makes effective use of subject-specific language where appropriate.

For each of the selected artworks, objects or artifacts, students at both SL and HL are encouraged to focus their analysis and interpretation of works through consideration of the role of the artist, the artwork, the audience and the cultural context. The scope and scale of the comparative study task will depend largely on the materials selected for investigation. Students may wish, however, to adapt the following structure to suit their needs. This structure is for guidance only and is neither prescriptive nor restrictive.

 Formal requirements of the task—HL
 

1. HL students submit 10–15 screens which examine and compare at least three artworks, objects or artifacts, at least two of which need to be by different artists. The works selected for comparison and analysis should come from differing cultural contexts.
2. HL students submit 3–5 screens which analyse the extent to which their work and practices have been influenced by the art and artists examined.
3. HL students submit a list of sources used.

Submitting assessment work
 

The size and format of screens submitted for assessment is not prescribed. Submitted materials are assessed on screen and students must ensure that their work is clear and legible when presented in a digital, on-screen format. Students should not scan multiple pages of work from their journals and submit them as a single screen, for example, as overcrowded or illegible materials may result in examiners being unable to interpret and understand the intentions of the work.

 The procedure for submitting work for assessment can be found in the Handbook of procedures for the Diploma Programme. Students are required to indicate the number of screens included when the materials are submitted. Where submitted materials exceed the prescribed screen limits examiners are instructed to base their assessment solely on the materials that appear within the limits.

 

 

 

 

All Grades - Silk Screen (Serigraphs) Part 1

Silk Screening

Grade 12 Portfolio - YeNa

This is a selection of works from the portfolio of IB student Ye Na. Her work centered around patterns from her childhood in Korea being reinterprested, deconstructed and reused in contemporary styles. She mostly focused on a mixed media presentations involving acrylic paint and printmaking or acrylic paint with india ink.