PROCESS PORTFOLIO

The PROCESS PORTFOLIO is your documentation of ART MAKING

The focus of your PP is to highlight YOUR process of brainstorming, development, art process, and reflective practice.  The PP is worth 40% of your mark and is externally assessed.

The PP submission is meant to be a curated selection of evidence from the course, while it may be assembled at the end of the course, the visual evidence should be authentically produced throughout the two years. This is key to creating a visually engaging and coherent presentation of artmaking.

This works hand in hand with your Visual Arts Journal. With our emerging technologies, this can get really cool. If you are using the Hybrid Visual Arts Journal I suggest (like my students) then you will have some work in a manual (traditional) sketchbook and some work digitally; in files or in your Procreate Gallery.

Students are to submit carefully selected materials which evidence their EXPERIMENTATION, EXPLORATION, MANIPULATION, AND REFINEMENT of a VARIETY OF VISUAL ART ACTIVITIES during the two year course.

The Process Portfolio (PP) is up to you to organize as you see fit to show your art process.  Essentially, you need to show evidence of A LOT of QUALITY THOUGHT AND WORK.

Successful portfolios include a great deal of imagery of all parts of the process – from initial ideas/brainstorms, to process shots to final shots. It’s important to include failed ideas and attempts and to articulate reasons why certain media/techniques and ideas were followed or rejected.

It is also important to include more than one image/text per page – this is evidence of 2 years of work so it should be detailed. Handwritten work that is hard to read (due to poor-quality photos or poor-quality handwriting) is problematic for examiners – if they can’t read it, they can’t assess it.  Also, avoid pages of lots of text with no imagery (either candidate work or research of other artists) – this is first and foremost a VISUAL submission of your VISUAL work.

Grouping work of work of the same project together in consecutive slides is a good idea to avoid confusion. It’s helpful if pages and sections are titled and sub-titled, using the criterion words that you are highlighting. Strong candidates analyze and discuss their art and their research with clear reference to art terms and art-specific vocabulary.  

IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE ALL TRADITIONAL SKETCHBOOK OR ALL DIGITAL:  There are some stylistic choices you can make.  If most of your work is done in your Visual Arts Journal, you can take a photo of your whole page and type your written words (specifically parts that are hard to read) beside – or use a side column to add more detailed information.  Or you can take photos of specific sketches and insert them into a more digital format. My students are getting the hand of the Hybrid Visual Art Journal and they like to include PP pages that they start with traditional sketches, then load into keynote to add some text and then use either Procreate or their digital pens to add further notes, sketches and ‘sketchbook’ aesthetic vibes.

Successful portfolios include a great deal of imagery of ALL STAGES of the ARTMAKING PROCESS

Use the DESIGN PROCESS to help you organize

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Let’s help each other. If you have a question, email Miss A. Maybe others are curious about it too.

FAQ: SHOULD I INCLUDE FINISHED (RESOLVED) IMAGES? You do not have to include images of your finished(resolved) works. In fact, if you do as you feel that it helps explain your process, include just a small image. It won’t elevate your mark (and is mostly irrelevant). Save your stellar photos of your finished (resolved) artworks for your Exhibition submission

FAQ: DO I HAVE TO INCLUDE ALL FORMS OF ARTMAKING OR CAN I FOCUS ON ONE MEDIUM? For your exhibition, yes. But for your PP, you must include evidence of working through 2D, 3D, and 4D mediums. 2D is traditional (manual) work on a flat plane: think drawing, painting, etc. 3D is traditional (manual) work on a multi-dimensional (not flat) place: think sculpture, installations, etc. 4D is lens-based media using a digital/lens-based plane: think photography, digital, etc.

FAQ: HOW DO I SCORE 7 in PROCESS PORTFOLIO? First of all, plan well and go over high-scoring exemplars so you know what to expect, can visualize how to organize yours. IB says that the strongest portfolios exhibit an engaging representation of the artistic journey, showcasing a diverse range of visual evidence. High-scoring portfolios effectively showcase initial ideations, experimentation, and thoughtful revisions and reflections that were analytical and insightful. High-quality portfolios often adopted a more experimental and holistic approach, focusing on the entire inquiry process rather than providing evidence for each criterion individually. They were rich in visual evidence and demonstrated a meaningful exploration of materials, techniques, and concepts, leading to the development of clear intentions and personally relevant projects.

FAQ: WHY IS MY PROCESS PORTFOLIO NOT SCORING AS HIGH AS I WANT IT TO? Perhaps you haven’t shown as much skilled artwork, idea development, experimentation, and techniques to reach that high assessment. Perhaps you haven’t included examples of all 3 art forms. IB reports that weaker portfolios exhibit several common issues: they have minimal visual evidence and struggle to showcase processes, and they lack experimentation with materials, techniques, and processes. Low-scoring portfolios present projects and tasks that are more TEACHER-driven projects (my teacher told me to do this) without proper unique, independent STUDENT development. This limits the assessment of your individual creative abilities and growth.

Sometimes you might get carried away with the Criterion and focus on showing examples of each without fitting your work into the holistic approach of the course. Low-scoring portfolios show shallow stages of work, lacking in depth and heavily reliant on a limited range of skills. These portfolios seem to try and mask a lack of work and skill with an excessive amount of textual content. Lastly, weaker portfolios demonstrate a limited use of subject-specific language, indicating a weak understanding of artistic concepts.

KEEP THE RUBRIC CLOSE. CONSULT IT OFTEN

As a rule of thumb, when you are creating your PP, keep the PP IB DP VA Achievement chart (rubric) close by, so you can make sure you are including enough work to satisfy each of the Criterion.

CONSIDER KEYWORDS FOR TOP SCORING EXPECTATIONS: Aim for assured and sustained experimentation and manipulation of a range of skills/techniques/processes, in-depth critical investigations, clearly articulated ideas and intentions, and effective and consistent process of review and refinement in a clear, coherent and engaging manner with an excellent range of visual evidence and consistent use of subject-specific language.

MEMBER PRIVILEGES INCLUDE:

• PP STUDENT GUIDE: A detailed step-by-step template to develop, organize, and present your best PP
• PP CHECKLIST: A detailed list to help you organize your PP and to make sure you have included everything you need to score top marks in each Criterion
• PP EXEMPLARS: Examples of high-quality high-scoring RECENT PPs (legitimate examples of 7)

LET’S GET THIS PROCESS PORTFOLIO SORTED

ORGANIZING YOUR PROCESS WORK

You have been working hard, diligently, creatively for the past 2 years. Now, is the time for you to let all your good work shine. To get started, make a list of all the artworks (failed and successful) you have completed over the 2 years – this could include ideas that didn’t go anywhere, experimentation that you didn’t use, artworks that didn’t make it into your exhibition, and of course all that did.

ALSO, go through your Visual Arts Journal and all your photos of you working through your projects (that you have collected and saved in your IB DP VA photo album) and select the ones that show your process the most.  Now, this is where my students get stuck/nervous/hesitant. Because they only want to show the artworks and artmaking process of stuff they ‘like’, stuff that fits their ‘aesthetic’. No joke, I have students who create artworks for months and decide nah, that’s not good enough. YES IT IS! For PP, IB is not looking for things that make you happy or what you think is ‘your best’ they are looking for how much creative work you did (and most of the time, the work is the cringey stuff that you hate and want to throw out – USE THAT!)

It is important that you discuss and articulate your ideas/thoughts/reflections throughout your Process Portfolio.  And ensure that you present strong reasons for your ideas.  The examiner wants to see how you developed your ideas and how you experimented with mediums BEFORE you realized your final (resolved) works; essentially, you want to show how your pieces evolved.   Go through the checklist or consider the suggested screen organization (below). Ensure sure you have enough of the required components. 

You do not have to include all your artworks. I encourage students to use 4 or 5 projects.  You also do not have to include all parts of any project. In your first year, you may notice that your process follows a clear project usually led (and suggested) by your teacher.  By the second year, you will have found your own voice and so will be choosing your own artworks.  These may overlap or use the same artistic inspirations or idea development, so clear projects may not be so evident. It is a good idea to focus on idea development and get as many screens done as possible in your first year. In your second year, you will be more focused on creating artworks – so it’s nice if you can then pick and choose what parts of the process you need to complete or add to your screens to satisfy the requirements.

HELPFUL TIP FROM MISS A: My students create PP screens throughout their first year using a series of evolving templates I created for them to follow. Through our more teacher-led first year, we work through all 3 forms (2D, 3D, and 4D). Students present their ideas and share their working screens at key stages of each process. This helps us get a variety of feedback on our ideas. At first, my students were nervous and hesitant to share but as we continued, they started to look forward to it. My students are really supportive of each other and everyone wants to do their most creative, unique work. So when we present and share our screens, everyone loves to give ideas and suggestions that the student may not have considered. By spending time in your first year to organize and familiarize yourself with the PP screens, you can focus on finishing those exhibition works in your second year and use the time to update and refine your PP screens for submission.

REMEMBER:

It is important that you discuss and articulate your ideas/thoughts/reflections throughout your Process Portfolio.  Also, ensure that you present strong reasons for your ideas.  The examiner wants to see how your pieces evolved. Strong portfolios show how ideas, materials, and techniques evolved and developed – including failed experiments/ideas rejected and changes in composition. Stronger portfolios show how students continue to explore and experiment all the way through in order to resolve problems.  Weaker portfolios often show work halfway through the project with no explanation about the ideas surrounding the piece. Weaker portfolios also tended to be much more teacher-directed and prescribed “Our teacher told us to do a…….”.  This is incredibly limiting to students and does not allow them to develop their own ideas.

CONSIDER BEING REFLECTIVE AND EVALUATIVE

SUGGESTED SCREEN ORGANIZATION

The following breakdown will give you a good start at organising and choosing what parts of your process to include. These are organized according to the Design Process which aligns well with the PP Criterion.  IB is most emphatic that the PP should be presently holistically and not organized according to criterion, so the work flows authentically. I suggest you organize your projects/screens chronologically with your earliest project (and perhaps some initial brainstorming/initial intention work) and then subsequent developments showing skill and knowledge growth and development as you move through the screens.

IDEAS AND INTENTIONS

It is important to discuss your ideas and your intentions throughout your PP screens. ‘Ideas and Intentions’ are buzz words, stated clearly in the PP rubric, so you know IB examiners want to see some intention setting. I suggest you discuss them at the beginning of each project and also refer to them as you continue through your process. You can add sketches that you had originally done of your first idea as well as photos you took and/or artist works that may have influenced your thoughts.

SOME GENERAL QUESTIONS TO GUIDE YOUR IDEAS AND INTENTIONS:

• What is your general idea?
• Define your idea….. what does this idea mean to you?
• What is the personal relevance?
• What is cultural/historical relevant about your idea? (if there is one)
• Can you link your ideas to other historical artworks/ideas/cultural artifacts/crafts, etc?
• What are some first ideas for art pieces that you have?
• Brainstorm ideas that you can connect with your first idea (mind mapping is helpful with this)
• What initially caught your interest/inspired you?
• Why?  Explain and give some background into your inspirations
• What artist(s) has inspired you? Why? Which artwork specifically?
• Include observational sketches, object sketches, tonal experimentations, contour line sketches
• Include photographs, perhaps a contact sheet of a photographic session you did recently exploring your idea
• Add some developmental sketches of first thoughts for your art project.

This section relates most to Criterion C: Communication of Ideas and Intentions. I don’t encourage you to organize your screens based on the PP Criterion, but it is good to be aware of how the PP expections work with and align with the Design Process so you can choose to share the most relevant parts of your process.

For Criterion C, IB observes that higher-achieving PP submissions recognize the importance of ideation in the art-making practice by focusing on the identification, development, and refinement of relevant ideas. High-scoring PP submissions often present in-depth explorations of contemporary art, and a process of ideation born out of an understanding of the role of local context in the formation of artistic intention. High-scoring PP submissions present an artistic journey and deliberate selections of imagery, forms, media, and techniques to actualize artistic goals. These PP submissions provide detailed explanations of conceptual underpinnings of their work accompanied by diagrams, thumbnail sketches, and annotations, effectively conveying ideas visually. They establish connections between ideas techniques and materials and how they are employed to effectively communicate artistic intentions.

High-scoring PP submissions showcase an advanced level of critical thinking, evident through their thorough visual research. They delve deep into their subjects, exploring various visual sources and references to inform their creative process. This depth of research allowed these PP submissions to develop a strong conceptual foundation for their work, resulting in visually impactful outcomes. They establish connections between ideas techniques and materials and how they are employed to effectively communicate artistic intentions.

While most PP submissions included some form of a mind map in the process portfolio to address this criterion, in weaker-scoring PP submissions the mind map was the only evidence of idea development and the few associations made there did little more than identify areas of interest. These portfolios struggled to achieve higher marks in the criterion because they did not demonstrate how ideas or intentions developed, nor did they communicate how skills, media, and ideas were assimilated. Portfolios that did not include meaningful idea development and were assembled and written at the end of the course often conflated criteria C and D by presenting one long narrative reflective text that listed. intentionality and explored ideas in hindsight. These portfolios lacked meaningful evidence of the developmental stages of forming intentionality. Lower-scoring PP submissions stated their intentions but failed to provide evidence of the stages involved in forming intentions and lack a clear explanation of how skills, media, and ideas were integrated to enhance the work and develop artistic intentions. Some candidates did not set their own intentions and merely following prescribed exercises without exploring alternative approaches Weaker-scoring PP submissions frequently rely on unreliable sources or resort to imitating artworks found on social networks, undermining the authenticity and originality of their own artistic practice. Additionally, some portfolios presented evidence of extensive research into topics that only loosely connect to the artwork, resulting in much of the presented information being irrelevant.

HELPFUL TIP FROM MISS A: I like to encourage my students to start their PP screens with a few screens (1 or 2 max) with an exploration of initial ideas and intentions as well as some well done sketches, mind maps or photographic collections (which we organize into digital contact sheets). This works especially well if you are particularly skilled in illustration as you can ‘show off’ your good work.

CRITICAL INVESTIGATIONS

It is important not just to show research into other artists, but also to show connections between the artists studied and the impact on candidate work. You want to show that you have deeply considered artworks and explored artist’s processes and how they are inspiring your process. There must be a visible connection between artists’ studied and the students’ own work. You should aim to critically analyze the artworks studied, and not include large chunks of biographical information.

HELPFUL TIP FROM MISS A: I found that my students are influenced by many different artists and artworks in varying degrees of influence. Some artworks are BIG CRITICAL INVESTIGATION influences; these are usually the student’s favourite works and they tend to show up in many different ideas and processes. For those, I encourage students to do a full critical investigation screen. Then there are NAME DROP artworks and cultural ideas that also influence, but to a lesser extent, maybe through a section of an artwork or smaller choices. For ‘name drops’, essentially, I encourage students to include the image that is influencing them and explain how the influence is relevant to that stage. My students also find they are influenced in a peripheral way; perhaps in their exhibition design or maybe an aesthetic or something they saw that helped them organize their thoughts to look in more depth for specific artists/artworks- usually these are from artworks seen and explored in GALLERY VISITS.

*Remember to label works with Artist Name, Artwork Title, Date, Medium, Size, Location (if in a recognized museum/gallery or URL if a more obscure work)

A GENERAL FORMAT FOR CRITICAL INVESTIGATION:

I suggest for your CRITICAL INVESTIGATION you include a brief discussion of the artist and personal relevance, an in-depth artwork analysis (using Feldman’s Analysis)

ARTIST DISCUSSION AND PERSONAL RELEVANCE: You may want to discuss the historical significance, cultural significance and/or artistic/stylistic/aesthetic significance. Here, you also want to discuss how the artist relates to you, perhaps how you found/learned of the artist (if it is a relevantly unknown artist) and how the artist/artwork inspires/influences your artwork

ARTWORK ANALYSIS: Focus specifically on the artwork and analysis it in-depth, paying particular attention to the formal elements. Feldman’s Analysis is a good tool for this.

ARTWORK RE-CREATION: I encourage my students to do this at least once for a BIG INSPIRATION. It helps to learn so much more about the artist’s choices and techniques and enhances their analysis as they explore the artwork in such depth. All re-creations are not the same. You could try and copy an artwork exactly as the artist made it with the same medium – or you could copy sections of it. You might try the same artwork with another medium or another image of your choosing in the style of the artist.

For Criterion B: Critical Investigation IB notes that high-scoring PP submissions that were successful in this criterion presented an art-making practice that was in consistent dialogue with the work of others. The work of others was used in generating ideas, in determining media, techniques, and approaches to making. High level PP submissions engaged critically with the work of others and demonstrate a meaningful integration of research into their art-making practice. Critical investigations often involve an in-depth examination of formal elements, contextual factors, and underlying meanings, while considering their own interpretations and broader perspectives. Higher-preforming PP submissions utilized their knowledge to improve the quality of their own work, solve creative problems, generate ideas, and further develop their artistic process. Their investigations were woven throughout the process and candidates would refer to investigating at different stages. In doing so, stronger portfolios genuinely reflected an increasing awareness of how investigations influence and shape their art-making process by engaging in dialogue with the work of others.

For lower-scoring PP submissions, the critical investigation was all too often presented as an afterthought in the process portfolio. This suggests that it still does not play an integral part in the developmental stages of candidate artmaking. Many portfolios neglected all together the critical investigation, with entire projects presented without the consideration of, or investigation into the work of others. Some portfolios confused the critical investigation of the work of others, with a biographical presentation of an artist. Other portfolios that struggled in this criterion presented an artist or artwork alongside their artmaking which may have had some visual similarities but did not analyse or integrate the work in relation to their own making.

SKILLS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCESSES

This is the big one. It is worth double compared the the other components.  This component should be represented on most every screen.  The examiner will always be judging your skill and use of technique.  So for your PP submission, make sure to show your best sketches and take photos clearly showing off every detail of your technique and process.

For this component specifically, focus on 3 different screen types: IDEA DEVELOPMENT (EXPERIMENTATION), COMPOSITION DEVELOPMENT, PROCESS

Within Criteria A: Skills, Techniques, and Process is a very important stage that is too easily overlooked and so helpful to really score well in this category. Consider your IDEA DEVELOPMENT  This is where your experimentation of thoughts/materials/medium happens.   This section encompasses a large area (and time) of your two-year journey.   These screens will also help bump up your image-based screens quota- and could very well include multiple photos of pages from your Visual Arts Journal.

For a high-scoring PP submission, it is important for your artworks to be not one-off ideas done at the last minute. You want to present a well thought out, conceptualized, experimented, and practiced ideas. Also,  If you are a one idea, one night before deadline type of artist then you are doing yourself a disservice. Because your first idea is NEVER your best idea.

It is important to show EXPERIMENTATION or exploration, not simply photos of pieces as you make them (process). You can show exploration and experimentation in a variety of techniques (even if these are not used). This is for all media – digital media should include screenshots (with layers visible so it is obvious you are not tracing/copying and pasting) of different compositions and techniques, etc. High-scoring PP submissions have pages FILLED with technique and medium experimentations exploring the possibilities deeply. Weaker candidates showed only the development photos of each piece – sometimes one per page.

This is where you:

• Narrow down your ideas from your Initial Ideas/Intentions
• Discuss how you are going to make your idea work.
• Show experimentation of materials/forms/ideas
• Combine ideas/colors/thoughts/artist inspirations
• Discuss the successes and challenges of experimentation

*This is where you show your experiments –  ‘I tried this”, “I like how this artist does this” – “what if I combined this idea and this idea”. This is the work leading to your final idea – but not your final composition ideas*

COMPOSITION IDEAS is another super important screen.  Do not miss this. Try a few different composition ideas and strategies.  You can use composition strategies – like Rule of Third, Rule of Odd, Golden Mean, Formal Balance – to organize your ideas into various compositions, and then once you have chosen your ‘strong’ composition idea, you can experiment further with color schemes and/or scale(resizing) or Principles of Design or Manipulations to create the composition that most strongly delivers your message.

And finally, PROCESS – this is where all the photos you took as you created your work come in handy.  Sadly, IB PP Submission is not equipped for time-lapse videos (yet?)

It is best if you can show at least 5-10 photos of your work in different stages of progress – from beginning to end.  With each picture, comment, reflectively and evaluatively of what you are doing/challenges you are encountering/unexpected results/successes and how it relates back to your intentions.

• What you are doing (precisely)
• What techniques, methods, and materials are you using? Why/
• What is challenging? What is happening that you didn’t predict? How are you working around it?
• What is successful? Why?
• What is the next step? How are you planning for that?

For Criteron A, IB notes that high-scoring PP submissions impressed with ample evidence from the visual arts journal of an in-depth exploration and experimentation with materials and techniques. These were followed by more focused discrete projects that highlighted the development of assured art-making processes. Experimentation played a crucial role in the development of higher-performing PP submissions. The candidates explored new techniques, materials, and processes to push the boundaries of their practice and show growth and artistic development. This was supported by thoughtful selection of materials and techniques with clear communication of how they would be purposefully used. Stronger PP submissions presented a rich tapestry of visual evidence across all art-making forms with equal weight.

One big hurdle to achievement in this criterion was the inability to meet the art-making forms requirement or not demonstrating consistently high levels of achievement in the range of presented art-making forms. Often low-performing PP submissions appeared overly directed by teacher-led tasks, while this was important evidence of learning, it lacked the intentionality in leading to purposeful candidate exploration. Many lower-performing PP submissions present processes that are more procedural step by step and lack the necessary visual evidence of experimentation, which is a crucial aspect of criteria A. Although some candidates mentioned the material choice, most weaker portfolios lacked clear material intentionally and tangible evidence of exploration and experimentation with a variety of materials. Lower-scoring PP submissions failed to provide sufficient documentation of the art-making process instead relying on text-heavy pages with no supporting evidence.

TRY SOMETHING A BIT NEW. GO 3D?

In their yearly review, IB is noticing that the majority of PP submissions primarily present evidence of drawing, painting, printmaking, photography, and digital illustration. It is possible to meet the requirements by focusing on these forms, there is an overall lack of evidence of three-dimensional artmaking. This offers candidates very narrow experiences of artmaking and led to PP submissions that were often unimaginative, lacking in intentionality, and with little experimentation.

REVIEW, REFINE AND REFLECT

This component will show up throughout your screens.   During your idea gathering, you will be reflecting on what ideas are good.   During your critical investigation and artistic inspiration, you will be discussing what you like about the artist’s works and how they inspired you.  During your idea development and art-making process you will be reflecting on what works, what doesn’t, and how you can improve. 

HELPFUL TIP FROM MISS A: I like to tell my students that IB doesn’t want to hear that everything is all ‘sunshine and rainbows’. Examiners want to see that you have had a MEANINGFUL LEARNING EXPERIENCE and that you have ACQUIRED LEARNING and GROWN and DEVELOPED through your ARTISTIC PROCESS.  So you must show your failures.  Your re-starts.  And be honest with things that you don’t like.  Be EMO.

FIRST REFINE. It is not enough to just create a reflection of your project – as the rubric calls for review, refine, and reflection.  So in order to satisfy this requirement, you should look at your earlier works and see how you can re-think and/or refine some of your ideas to create stronger work. You should strive to have at least one screen discussing how you have refined an idea.

This is where you:

• Discuss what is not successful with the original work/idea/concept
• What new ideas have you learned/found out that you think will make the project more successful?
• Show sketches of a refined idea
• Show process/examples of a failed attempt and/or process refinements

THEN REFLECT. Obviously. Every screen should see some reflection.  A good rule of thumb is to use Feldman’s Analysis – but aimed at your art-making process. You can include a photo of your finished work (small, just for reference, no need to take up valuable process space)if you feel like it will be relevant, but it is not necessary.  

Consider including your reflections AS YOU WORK:

• What was successful in the process?
• What challenges did you have during the process and what did you do to solve them and/or how did they change your direction?
• What would you change if you could start again?
• What did you learn by doing this project?
• What was your initial intention with this artwork – were you successful – or did it change direction? Why?

For Criterion D: Reviewing, Refining, Reflecting, higher-achieving PP submissions embedded reflective processes into the making. It was natural to find evidence of this criterion in portfolios that were experimental and with sustained practices because it was inherent to the art-making practice. High-level PP submissions presented a range of artworks, both successful and less successful, allowing them to analyse their own creative process by leveraging the insights gained from this analysis, to further develop their work. These portfolios facilitate a dialogue with themselves through an iterative process, utilizing reflection to establish stronger connections between concepts, content, techniques, and materials.

It was clear when the text was written as an afterthought and not a part of a meaningful developmental process. Long narrative reflective texts described successes and challenges but did not offer opportunities for refining works that were already completed. Weaker PP submissions often included poorly documented steps accompanied by superficial or descriptive comments that provided little insight. Moreover, they failed to employ subject-specific language, which further limited the depth of analysis. Many low-scoring PP submissions omitted any reflection on what they had learnt and how they had developed as an artist.

THINK YOU DONE?  THINK AGAIN.

NOW…..EDIT, REVIEW AND CONSIDER YOUR PRESENTATION AND SUBJECT-SPECIFIC LANGUAGE

When you have organized all your screens and have shown a strong representation of the work that you have done during the past two years.  Review your screens.  Go back and read them closely and make sure that you have used correct Art Vocabulary.  Many a good student has lost points due to not using art terms.   Also, check your citations and labels.  And be sure to include a List of Sources on the last screen (this doesn’t count into your screen count)

This section of the rubric is looking for 3 distinct things (in order of importance): REFERENCING, SUBJECT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE, CREATIVE AND LEGIBLE PRESENTATION

CREATIVE PRESENTATION: Notice it says CREATIVE yes, but also LEGIBLE.  And for those high-scoring PP submissions – LEGIBLE is definitely more important.  

• Keep your screens clean and easy to read. 
• Add creative touches – but make sure they do not impede readability.
• Fonts should be no smaller than 12 (except for image labels/citations)  
• For text – use clear and easy-to-read fonts. 
• Headings can be slightly creative – but don’t use obscure hard-to-read fonts. 

SUBJECT SPECIFIC LANGUAGE: This is your art vocabulary.   USE IT. AND USE IT PROUDLY. (bold it). Check out Miss A’s Glossary for more help with your Subject-Specific Language

REFERENCING: More and more this is becoming so relevant with digital apps and AI, it is easy to submit sub-par and non-original work. Be sure to protect your integrity and present all your hard creative work with the respect it deserves.

• CITE quotes and specific information with in-text citations.
• CITE general or paraphrased information with URLS at the bottom of the same screen. Use MLA format if you are high level.
• LABEL all images properly directly under the images.
• Create a LIST OF SOURCES – properly formatted (we do MLA to be consistent), in alphabetical order – with VALID sources (not pinterest/wikipedia/etc….) for the last screen
• For more on referencing, check out Miss A’s Visual Referencing Guide

The process portfolio is a visual document and images remain indispensable for assessing this task. Text-based portfolios must be supported by high-quality visual evidence. For Criterion E:Presentation and Subject-Specific Language, IB notes that many PP submissions rely too heavily on text to guide the examiner’s experience of candidate achievement. 

The highest-performing PP submissions(even when text-heavy) clearly utilized text to support a predominance of visual evidence. Stronger PP submissions focused on a smaller number of artworks, allowing for detailed exploration of experimentation, processes, refinements, and reflections. These portfolios showcased rich visual evidence that is organized coherently. They demonstrated a clear understanding of the importance of sequencing processes and using subject-specific language. Additionally, they include evidence from a Visual Arts Journal, showing a comprehensive engagement with the creative journey. Higher-performing PP submissions presented the same quality of evidence across all forms.

Lower-scoring PP submissions presented poor-quality imagery, a lack of subject-specific language and inadequate visual evidence, making it difficult to understand the artistic processes and developments. Low-scoring PP submissions lack coherence and fail to demonstrate a strong engagement with experimentation and reflection.

TO USE AI OR NOT TO USE AI

IB notes that candidates utilizing AI struggle with appropriate citation. Even when the citations of AI may have been done accurately, AI’s contribution to artmaking did not present any additional benefits. Just because the technology is available, does not mean that it is useful. While AI often added additional steps of complexity to the creation of images, it reduced the evidence of authentic candidate engagement with the generation of images and sometimes functioned as a cap on limitless human imagination.

BE TRANSPARENT. BE SAFE. RESPECT YOUR HARD WORK: The introduction of AI and the increased use of digital technologies poses additional challenges for assessment. Many recent PP submissions contain either plagiarized works or showed minimal artistic intervention in digitally altered pieces, and so greater focus (obviously) will be placed in authentication moving forward.