IB Visual Arts SL key terms

The externally assessed IB component in which you research, analyse and compare artworks by different artists from different cultures and times, then draw informed conclusions. It carries 20% of the final SL grade.

Examining how an artwork is built visually: composition, line, shape, colour, tone, texture, scale, space and materials, judged on what is visible rather than on biography or intention.

A basic building block of art such as line, shape, form, colour, value, texture or space. Naming which elements dominate a work and how they interact supports precise comparison.

The arrangement of elements within the frame or space, including balance, rhythm, focal point, cropping and use of negative space. Comparing compositions reveals how artists direct attention differently.

The idea that each material or process has its own expressive and technical possibilities and limits, such as oil's blending versus watercolour's transparency. Analysing this shows why an artist chose a medium.

The material or category of material an artist works in, for example oil paint, bronze, video, textile or clay. The medium shapes what can be made and how a viewer reads the work.

The specific way a medium is handled, such as impasto, glazing, sgraffito, batik resist or stop-motion. Technique is evidence of skill and of deliberate expressive choice.

The beliefs, traditions, institutions, politics and audience expectations surrounding an artwork's making. It explains why similar subjects look radically different across societies and periods.

The period, events and conditions in which a work was produced, including wars, technological change or art movements. Dating a work accurately prevents anachronistic interpretation.

The practical, ritual, devotional, commemorative or political job an artwork performs for its users. Function often dictates format, scale, material and placement more than aesthetics do.

The person or institution commissioning and funding a work, whose status, taste and demands shape the result. Knowing the patron clarifies constraints on subject, size and material.

The identifiable symbols and subject matter in an artwork and their conventional meanings, such as a skull for mortality. Reading iconography depends on knowledge of the culture that produced it.

The use of colour, object, animal, gesture or setting to carry meaning beyond its literal appearance. Symbolic readings must be justified by evidence from the work and its context.

A reasoned account of what a work means and how it achieves that meaning, supported by visual and contextual evidence. Strong interpretation acknowledges alternative readings rather than asserting one truth.

Deliberately borrowing or reusing another artist's imagery, style or object, often to critique originality or power. Comparing an appropriated work with its source exposes shifting meaning.

A loosely shared set of aims, methods or styles adopted by artists at a particular time and place, such as Cubism or Arte Povera. Movements help situate works but should not flatten individual differences.

The recognisable, consistent way an artist or group handles form, colour, mark-making and subject. Comparing styles across cultures reveals both shared problems and distinct visual solutions.

A judgement about the compared works that is grounded in analysed evidence and contextual research rather than personal taste. It should state what the comparison reveals about both works.

Bringing separate observations, sources and comparisons together into a coherent overall argument. In the comparative study, synthesis distinguishes a genuine conclusion from a list of separate facts.

A meaningful link drawn between works, such as shared theme, borrowed technique, parallel function or contrasting response to one event. Connections must be explained, not merely asserted.

Direct evidence such as viewing the artwork itself, a museum visit, an interview with the artist or your own experiment. Primary evidence strengthens claims more than secondhand description.

Material produced by others about the work, such as catalogues, reviews, documentaries or scholarly articles. Sources should be evaluated for reliability, bias and relevance before use.

Recording the source of a fact, quotation or image so a reader can trace it. Consistent citation protects academic honesty and shows the research behind a comparative study or portfolio.

Presenting your own work and crediting all borrowed words, images and ideas. Uncredited copying, including of another student's portfolio, is malpractice and can invalidate results.

The externally assessed component documenting sustained experimentation, research, reflection and refinement of ideas across media. It carries 40% of the SL grade and must show development over time.

Deliberate testing of media, tools and supports to discover their behaviour and potential, recorded with samples and notes. Breadth of exploration matters less than depth and clear purpose.

Trying unfamiliar processes, formats or combinations with an open outcome, then evaluating what happened. It is judged by the quality of learning shown, not by whether each attempt succeeded.

Choosing an approach whose result is uncertain in order to extend your practice, such as an unfamiliar scale or material. Documented risk with evaluation demonstrates genuine artistic growth.

Written or recorded thinking that evaluates what you did, why, what worked and what to change next. Specific reflection referencing evidence is far stronger than general statements of satisfaction.

The iterative improvement of a work or idea through repeated testing, editing and decision-making. Evidence of refinement includes dated versions, annotated changes and rejected alternatives.

The systematic recording of process through photographs, dated samples, annotations, sketches and notes. Good documentation lets an examiner reconstruct your thinking and verify sustained engagement.

The aims, questions or ideas you set out to explore and communicate in your work. Clear intentions allow you and others to judge whether the resolved artworks succeed.

Research into artists, processes, theories or traditions that directly informs your own making. It should be visible as changed decisions in your work, not only as written summary.

The internally assessed component in which you select, curate and present resolved artworks with a curatorial rationale. At SL it carries 40% of the grade and is assessed on the presented body of work.

Selecting and arranging works so they communicate a coherent idea to a viewer, including decisions about sequence, spacing, lighting and labelling. Curation is an argument made through display.

A short written statement explaining the exhibition's concept, why these works were chosen and how they relate. It must match what is actually shown and be written in your own voice.

A finished work in which technical, formal and conceptual decisions have been carried through to a considered outcome. Only resolved works belong in the exhibition; unresolved studies belong in the portfolio.

How an audience physically and psychologically encounters the exhibition, including sightlines, scale, pacing and text. Curators design this experience to make the concept legible.

Made for, or dependent on, a particular location so that meaning changes if the work moves. Recognising site specificity prevents misreading installation and architectural work.

An artwork that arranges objects, space, light or media so the viewer enters or moves through it. Its meaning comes from the whole environment rather than from a single object.

Work combining two or more materials or disciplines, such as paint with textile, text or video. It invites comparison of how different media carry different meanings within one piece.