Art paper draws positive reaction

FOLLOWING THE 2008 art exam, criticised by both teachers and students for being too “exacting” and obscure in places, there was trepidation about yesterday’s paper. On the day, however, it turned out to be well received.

Jane Campbell of St Joseph’s Convent of Mercy, Navan, Co Meath, said it was the most straightforward and consistent paper she had seen in a long time.

“My students were very happy with it. It asked the mainstream questions and looked at all the areas that you would expect.”

“There was very little that would surprise students,” she said, but she warned that the complexity of language in both papers may have been a shortcoming.

“There was a lot of specialist language, words like form, imagery and so forth. I worried that students with poor language skills may have struggled with that aspect. There was nowhere to find out what those terms meant.”

Helen Comiskey, Teacher’s Union of Ireland (TUI) representative, received positive feedback from her students. “My students were very happy. Our predictions came up and there were no surprises.” She said the ordinary exam was good this year, with Newgrange, the Casino at Marino and the Tara brooch all featuring as expected.

“The biggest difficulty was remembering to answer all parts of the question. Students can get carried away with a topic they know well, but often miss the supplementary parts, which causes them to lose marks.”

Ms Campbell was also happy with the ordinary-level paper, especially later questions on Van Gogh’s Sunflowers and Rodin, but said a question that focused on modern artist Brian King was “over-specific” for that level.

The higher-level paper was universally praised, with Ms Campbell in particular praising the overall question layout.

“I have never seen the format done so consistently. In every question, students were asked to name, describe, discuss and give examples.” However, she warned, the exam demanded fact-heavy answers with a minimum of waffle.

Angela Griffith, of the Institute of Education, said students would not have been happy with a question on early Renaissance art. It asked students to compare artworks depicting different religious scenes. She said students would not expect such comparisons and it may have caused confusion.

Ms Griffith said the section on general appreciation was very accessible. She singled out the gallery question as well phrased. It asked students to discuss works seen in a gallery, instead of the building itself. Ms Campbell said this shift in emphasis would be very helpful to students.

This year the balance between painting and sculpture was well-judged, said Ms Comiskey.