The student met the criterion by using a variety of art-making forms, including 2D and 3D formats, demonstrating technical exploration and creativity. However, they could have improved by justifying their choices of format and materials about their conceptual intentions and by providing more comprehensive process documentation. While reflections were included, they lacked depth and specific analysis of formal qualities like texture, contrast, or rhythm, which limited the critical aspect of the investigation. Visual documentation of experimentation—such as step-by-step photos, labeled diagrams, or editing process screenshots—was insufficient, weakening the portfolio’s clarity and professionalism. In photography and digital media, minimal exploration of visual possibilities like angles, lighting, and tools made the material choices feel unjustified. Additionally, vague reflective statements and symbolic references (e.g., to deer or parrots) lacked personal or cultural context, reducing the clarity of artistic intention. The student should have used more subject-specific language and connected each visual choice to personal or thematic research to strengthen meaning. Overall, the portfolio demonstrated artistic potential but needed deeper analysis, clearer rationale, and stronger visual documentation to reach a higher level.
