THE COMPARATIVE STUDY: SOME THOUGHTS

In recent blogs I have focused on the Exhibition with particular reference to the things I’d seen (i.e. files submitted) as an examiner.

If interested please check out these recent blogs:

1 (June) Visual Arts Exhibition Issues

2 (July) Exhibition issues (part 2)

3 (August) Exhibition issues (part 3)

But today I am posting about the Comparative Study.

I was fortunate to be able attend the June Grade Award meeting at the IB assessment centre, and while there was able to engage in conversation with senior examiners in all three visual arts components.

Much of the conversation revolved around the kind of work being uploaded. Of course these issues will form and contribute to important parts of the Subject Report, but in the meantime here are some thoughts relating to four areas as described to me in informal conversations in Cardiff –

1 DESCRIPTION VS ANALYSIS

One thing that comparative study examiners brought up related to the balance between description, research and analysis: a number of studies were primarily descriptive, with little analysis.

It is relatively easy to simply describe what you see, and a number of students spent a little too much time in their comparative studies doing exactly that.

Informed analysis by its nature takes more time, thought and research. The stronger examples of Comparative Studies showed that the authors of these files could successfully use subject-specific language to demonstrate strong analytical skills.

2 OPINION

Similarly, it’s relatively easy to give an opinion, and again, a number of students felt that their opinion was important. In some cases this opinion seemed superficial and casual.

Students are not asked to give their opinion.
Students are asked to analyse formal qualities, interpret function and purpose, evaluate cultural significance and make comparisons and connections. At HL they are also asked to make connections to their own art-making.
If students do give their opinion, they need to show that it has been informed by the results of you research!

3 CHOICE OF ARTWORKS/ARTEFACTS (and THEME?)

One examiner felt that some choices of artworks appeared random: the selected artworks seemed almost accidental.

AVOIID THE OBVIOUS

For example, one student compared a couple of 19^th century statues by Bartholdi (Lion and the Statue of Liberty), Stella’s “Brooklyn Bridge” (1919-1920, Yale University Art Gallery) and a 15^th century Chinese handscrolll painting (from the New York Metropolitan Museum).

On one level, this choice has some elements in its favour, because (apart possibly from the Statue of Liberty) these artworks are not obvious or stereotypical.

Too often students simply select well-known artworks from the most well-known (Western, male, dead) artists: this implies a rather lazy response to this component. In some cases the choice of artworks was predictable and narrow, with many works from the ‘obvious’ artists being frequently discussed (e.g. Warhol, Picasso, Dali and van Gogh). The example of 4 disparate artworks is at one extreme of the ‘choice issue’ – they represent an unusual selection.

HAVE A LINKING THREAD?

On the other hand these four artworks have almost nothing in common. There are some 19^th – 20^th century French-American links, and the student who chose them obviously (? presumably) decided that there would be a lot to write about, but let’s be clear – the choice of art works is important in achieving a meaningful comparison.

Diversity is not necessarily a good thing, although if the student can identify implicit and creative links that somehow weave the selection together – and also meet the assessment criteria – it could still lead to a successful CS.

Students should choose their artworks with care: a thoughtful, considered and creative selection of artworks/artefact can make the difference between a great and an average comparative study

See Comparative Study thoughts – will you have a theme? (May 2015)