Full Points

Student has recorded their time spent reviewing all the documentation in Part 1, demonstrating they’ve spent sufficient time looking at all included images and video links in depth.

Room for Improvement

Student records too little time (i.e. only a few minutes) to fully engage with all the images and/or videos included in Part 1. This will vary depending how much documentation is given.

Zero

No time is recorded.

Full Points

Student thoughtfully describes their observations, associations and initial impressions about the artwork(s) based ONLY on the documentation available in Part 1 of the assignment. Student makes clear and detailed reference to the artwork(s) to support their observations.

Sufficient

Room for Improvement

Student’s description of their observations, impressions and associations about the artwork are generalized, vague, and/or lacking in detail or depth.

Insufficient

Zero

Student submits a completely unconvincing response that isn’t clearly related to the artwork documentation in Part 1 or to the Association writing prompt / no writing submitted in this section

Full Points

Association response is at least 200 words in length.

Room for Improvement

Association response is between 175-199 words in length.

Zero

Association response is under 175 words in length.

Full Points

Student lists at least 2-3 independent research sources (beyond those given in Part 2) by title, author name, and url link in the Bibliography section of the template.

Sufficient

Room for Improvement

Bibliography lists only one resource, demonstrating that the student has conducted little independent research.

Insufficient

Zero

No independently researched sources are listed in the Bibliography section of the template.

Full Points

Student gives a thoughtful account of what has shifted in their understanding about the artwork(s), clearly discussing material from the resources given in Part 2 AND from at least one independent source in their bibliography.

Sufficient

Room for Improvement

Student’s account of their understanding is superficial or unconvincing and/or lacks clear reference to EITHER the included Part 2 resources or their independent research.

Insufficient

Zero

Student submits a completely unconvincing response that isn’t clearly related to any Background research or to the Understanding writing prompt / no writing submitted in this section

Full Points

Understanding response is at least 200 words in length.

Room for Improvement

Understanding response is between 175-199 words in length.

Zero

Understanding response is under 175 words in length.

Full Points

Student gives a meaningful, thoughtful and personalized argument for their final assessment of the artwork(s) which clearly demonstrates the progression of their ideas, impressions and observations.

Sufficient

Room for Improvement

Final assessment is superficial, vague and/or lacking in depth and specificity / student reiterates things written in previous sections without expanding those observations into a convincing, culminating assessment.

Insufficient

Zero

Student submits a completely unconvincing response that isn’t clearly related to the artwork(s), to research about them, or to the Assessment writing prompt / no writing submitted in this section

Full Points

Assessment response is at least 200 words in length.

Room for Improvement

Assessment response is between 175-199 words in length.

Zero

Assessment response is under 175 words in length.

Full Points

Student consistently attributes sources by name and title accurately and properly quotes and paraphrases when referring to someone else’s words or ideas.

Room for Improvement

Student sometimes, but not consistently, quotes, paraphrases, and attributes by name the authors/artists whose words/ideas/artworks they are sharing

Zero

Student fails to properly attribute any sources by name/title, or to quote/paraphrase properly, thereby risking a situation of plagiarism.