Exams: 2012 Studio Art 3-D Design: Quality Samples

Print this page
beginning of content:

3-D Design: Quality—Section I

The student works displayed on this page are reproductions of actual works submitted by students in June 2012.

All of the samples here were chosen because they clearly represent different points on the scoring scale for Section I, Quality. In the course of the AP evaluation, each section of the portfolio is scored on a six-point scale. Once the evaluation is complete, the various scores assigned to each student's portfolio are combined and transformed into the final AP grade of 1-5. The requirement for Section I of all three Studio Art portfolios is five pieces.

Each group of works is accompanied by a brief rationale for the scores awarded to the works. We greatly appreciate the generosity of the students who have agreed to share their works in this way.

Click an image to view a larger version.

Quality Sample 1: Michela Bentel, Choate Rosemary Hall, Wallingford, Conn.

Score: 6

Rationale for Score

  • The work demonstrates excellent accomplishment in a broad range of sculptural approaches, including additive, subtractive, and fabrication processes. Abstraction, invention, and observation from nature are handled with equal finesse.
  • The work shows both original vision and a confident articulation of the elements and principles of design.
  • Image 1 demonstrates the student's ability to reveal a form in marble, with attention to the expressive properties of the material. With equal skill, in image 2, the student constructs an object from photographic images, Plexiglass, and light.
  • Overall, the work demonstrates excellent breadth and quality.

Quality Sample 2: Brandon Tejo, Sanford H. Calhoun High School, Merrick, N.Y.

Score: 5

Rationale for Score

  • The principles of 3-D design are thoughtfully investigated in both complex and minimal constructions.
  • The imaginative architectural forms evoke multiple associations, from sailboats to Ferris wheels, from birdcages to skeletons.
  • The work exhibits well-informed decision making in the activation of space; however, craftsmanship has not received the same careful attention.
  • Overall, the work is of strong to excellent quality.

Quality Sample 3: Eric Blitzer, Landon School, Bethesda, Md.

Score: 4

Rationale for Score

  • The works engage the viewer with an energetic approach to activating space.
  • The works demonstrate some imaginative ideas and purposeful manipulation of the elements and principles of 3-D design.
  • Each work exhibits a thoughtful and clear idea, but the intentions are not fully realized, and the craft is unrefined.
  • There are uneven levels of accomplishment among the five works, but overall they demonstrate good quality.

Quality Sample 4: Jalen Leichman, Milwaukee High School of the Arts, Milwaukee, Wis.

Score: 3

Rationale for Score

  • The work reflects a superficial consideration of the elements and principles of 3-D design.
  • The work shows little attention to the activation of physical space.
  • Some risk taking and intention are evident (image 1), yet the technical skills needed to realize the intentions are limited.
  • There is an emerging level of accomplishment among the five works, and overall they demonstrate moderate quality.