|
General Notes:
- Each score point is characterized by a variety of descriptors of work that would receive
that score. The descriptors are examples; it isn't expected that all the descriptors for a
scale point will apply to any one particular portfolio. In fact, some of the descriptors
may seem to contradict each other because the range of possibilities for work at a given
score point is so great. But the descriptors should all capture characteristics of work
that merits each score.
- Because there are only six different points on the scoring scale, each score point also
represents a band or range of accomplishment.
- There is no "preferred" (or unacceptable) content or style.
|
Look for engagement with a range of design principles such as:
- Balance
- Emphasis
- Rhythm
- Scale
- Proportion
- Value
- Figure/ground
Look for engagement with a range of color relationships such as (but not limited to):
- Complementary
- Analagous
- Value
- Monochromatic
6 — EXCELLENT BREADTH
- Wide range of color/design problems is presented.
- Work demonstrates active, successful [excellent] engagement with principles of color
and/or design.
- Work shows obvious, consistent evidence of thinking about color/design.
- There is a generally successful sense of experimentation and/or risk-taking with respect
to color and/or design.
- The work may use color and/or design principles in a sensitive or subtle way.
- There is a sense of imagination and/or inventiveness in the way color/design are
approached.
- Use of materials is appropriate to the color/design problems addressed and technique is
generally excellent.
5 — STRONG BREADTH
- Range of color/design problems is presented.
- Demonstrates active [strong] engagement with principles of color and/or design, although
there may be inconsistencies in the degree of success.
- There is evidence of thought about color/design.
- Most works go beyond the level of color/design exercises.
- Some works demonstrate a sense of successful experimentation and/or risk-taking with
respect to color and/or design.
- Most aspects of the use of materials are appropriate to the problems addressed and
technique is generally strong.
4 — GOOD BREADTH
- Work shows engagement with [focus on] color and/or design problems.
- Degree of success in solving color/design problems may vary.
- Range of color/design problems may be somewhat limited.
- Range of color/design problems may be very limited, despite strong to excellent quality.
- Work may be of good quality or better, but not entirely appropriate as color/design
submissions (for example, it may be in color, but not about color).
- Work may appear as successful solutions to color/design exercises, but not go beyond
that level.
- Work may demonstrate experimentation and/or risk-taking without complete success.
- Technique and use of materials show an emerging sense of competence.
3 — MODERATE BREADTH
- In general, work shows erratic or superficial engagement with color and/or design.
- Understanding of these issues is limited.
- Work may demonstrate good quality, but less [weak] engagement with color/design.
- Range of color/design issues addressed may be very limited, but with some success in
solving problems.
- Work may attempt to address a range of color/design problems, but with limited [weak]
success.
- Work may show little, if any, experimentation or risk-taking.
2 — WEAK BREADTH
- In general, work shows little engagement with color/design.
- Understanding of these issues appears to be minimal.
- Work may be of weak technical quality.
- There may be little demonstration of breadth.
- Work may be inappropriate in that much of it does not address color and/or design
issues.
- Work may attempt to address a range of color/design issues without success.
1 — POOR BREADTH
- Work shows no apparent engagement with color/design.
- There is very little demonstration of breadth.
- Technical quality of work is consistently poor.
- Very little work is presented.
- The slides are virtually impossible to see.
|