Scholarship

=Comparison of Descriptors:= ||
 * = =Current Version= ||= =Draft Revised= ||
 * [[image:current.jpg]] || [[image:photo.PNG width="720" height="540"]]

//**Sam's response to the draft document for your consideration:**//

1. We do not need the word integration and synthesis as integration is part of synthesis. Therefore delete integration. 2. Skills are part of knowledge. Knowledge includes skills about processes and procedures in artmaking. Remove skills and include in the explanatory notes this idea of skills as part of knowledge 3. Logical can negate the ability to create surprising and dynamic ideas in Art making. We suggest the word strategic to describe development. 4. Do we need the word complex in terms of situations? Some situations may not be complex at all just clearly and carefully resolved in a body of work.
 * Scholarship Performance descriptor suggestions.**

1. a) integration of what? established practice? b) The word abstraction in the vernacular of art already exists as a movement or style. This is very dangerous as it reads as if only abstract work (work of an abstract style or proposition) can be awarded outstanding performance. Therefore we do not need this bullet point. Delete it. 2. How is independent reflection evidenced in the work? how do we know it is independent from looking at the work? 3. Why is communication part of these descriptors? Is the word convincing appropriate?
 * Outstanding Performance descriptor suggestions.**

//If you have any questions about any of this please contact Sam at samueleng@gmail.com.//