Visual arts

curriculum review report

01 May2012
Section 1 - Introductory remarks

Page 2
Visual arts curriculum review milestones
• Pre-Internal Review Committee (October 2010) agreed:
• Guide too open, not enough curriculum content
• Integration between two components (studio work and investigation) too tight

• External Review Committee (ERC) (October 2010) drafted:

• Nature of the subject
• Visual arts aims
• Proposed curriculum model – 3 parts, no HL/SL “differentiator” decided
• Assessment outline (matching curriculum model component by component)

• Internal Review Committee (IRC) (November 2010) five outcomes:

• Strengthen nature of subject, develop concept of creative intelligence
• Curriculum and assessment models to be strengthened and elaborated
• Assessment outline agreed at 25%/25%/50% (50% externally assessed and 50% internally assessed)
• Integration of practice and investigation needed further work and different models of creative process
to be explored
• Curatorship and associated practices recognized and to be further explored .

Page 3
March 2012 curriculum review
meeting
• Recognized:
• The holistic nature of teaching visual arts
• The need to cleanly establish assessment components

• Agreed curriculum should include:

• Skills teaching in 2D, 3D and ‘digital media’ (exact term to be finalized)
• Process of visual enquiry including depth and breadth in exploration and
experimentation
• Observation/visual culture
• Development of ideas
• Reflection and evaluation

Page 4
Section 2 - Teaching and learning

Page 5
Connectivity between course elements

• Interconnections in the teaching of the course are key

• This connectivity can be considered in terms of a cyclic or linear path

approach

• The student’s learning is anchored in a holistic teaching/creative process

Page 6
Teaching connectively
• The model (see next slide) tries to show these key
teaching interconnections

• Please note that for assessment purposes

integration will not be assessed

Page 7
 Interconnective teaching model …
 

Stimulus Starting point / concept / influence / technique (etc.)

Inquiry/ Question / investigate / document / observe /

Investigate search / (etc.)

Ideas (& Select / conceptualize / consider / discuss /

Techniques) imagine / (etc.)

Experiment Explore / practise / refine / risk take / trial and error /

(& Techniques) play / (etc.)

Reflect Self evaluate / embrace mistakes / think critically /

decide / refine / (etc.)

Make Synthesize and produce (etc.)

 

Page 8
… Interconnective teaching model
• Communication and curatorship are also key

Page 9
In making, consideration should be given to the
following media and techniques:

2D 3D Digital media (exact term to be finalized;

see slide 4)
Drawing Sculpture Lens media

Painting Ceramics (Digital)

Printmaking Installation Time-based

Graphic design Graphic design Emerging

Environmental Environmental Environmental

Textiles Textiles

Mixed media Mixed media

Craft Craft

Page 10
Interconnective teaching model: diagram
• Work on representation of teaching interconnections is on-going,
(perhaps in the form of a diagram; not a chart).

• We are trying to express what we would like to see happening in

teaching.

• If you would like to share your ideas on this representation, please see
the final slide for contact details.

Page 11
Further definition and development
• Structure (as shown in model) allows:

• Specific elements of curriculum and assessment to

be further defined

• Approaches to teaching and learning to be

developed

Page 12
Section 3 - Assessment

Page 13
 Defined assessment model

1. Visual inquiry (externally assessed)

• Demonstrate knowledge and understanding

2. Comparative analysis (externally assessed)

• Comparison of art from different times and/or places (presentation, not essay)

3. Studio works (internally assessed)

• Resolved pieces, including at least one each from 2D, 3D and digital media
(exact term to be finalized; see slides 4, 10)

4. HL differentiator (externally assessed)

• Inquiry, process and resolved studio works against prescribed idea

Page 14
Assessment model
SL HL
1 Visual inquiry 25% EA 1 Visual inquiry *to be
decided
EA
2 Comparative analysis 25% EA 2 Comparative *to be EA
decided
3 Studio works 50% IA analysis
3 Studio works *to be
decided
IA

4 Visual arts *to be

decided
EA
project

EA = Externally assessed
IA = Internally assessed and externally moderated

Please note: Part 2 name to be confirmed.

Page 15
Section 4 - Concluding remarks

Page 16
 Progress against five IRC outcomes
…

• Strengthen ‘nature of subject’, develop concept of creative intelligence

• ‘Nature of subject’ section developed (through Basecamp work prior to March meeting)
• Model for teaching that demonstrates concepts of creative intelligence from a visual arts
perspective (developed March 2012)

• Curriculum and assessment models to be strengthened and elaborated

• Holistic curriculum model defined
• Assessment model defined

Page 17
… Progress against five IRC outcomes
…
Assessment outline for:

• SL, agreed: 3 components, 25%/25%/50%

(50% externally assessed, 50% internally assessed and externally
moderated)

• HL, agreed: 4 components (3 in common with SL, plus 1)

• Addition of fourth differentiating component for HL candidates
• Division of hours/marks to be determined

Page 18
… Progress against five IRC outcomes
• Integration of practice and investigation needed further work and different
models of creative process to be explored
• Referred to against bullet points one and two above (see slide 16)

• Curatorship and associated practices recognized and to be further

explored
• Component 2, ‘Comparative analysis’, allows for development of intellectual and
visual routes in the process of selection and presentation of artworks

Page 19
Contact details
• If you wish to comment on any points made in this
report, please contact:

dpdevelopment@ibo.org

Thank you

Page 20