Internal assessment (Level 3 Art History standards)
What the internal standards assess
The Level 3 Art History internal standards are 91485 (media and processes), 91486 (constructing arguments), 91487 (values placed on art works) and 91488 (a theory and art works). Each is worth 4 credits and is teacher-assessed, then checked through NZQA external moderation. Internal assessment usually takes the form of a written report, essay or presentation. The standards test sustained, source-based art-historical thinking: you select appropriate art works, use evidence, and structure a response that meets the specific explanatory notes.
Core rules and concepts
- Match the standard, not just the topic. 91485 asks how media and processes shape the work; 91486 asks you to construct a reasoned argument; 91487 asks you to examine different values; 91488 asks you to apply a named theory.
- Use a small, well-researched set of works. Two to four works analysed closely usually beats a survey.
- Reference everything. Use a consistent citation style and distinguish primary evidence (the work, artist statements, reviews) from secondary interpretation.
- Show your reasoning. State a position, support it with specific visual and contextual evidence, acknowledge a counterpoint, and reach a judgement.
Worked example
Standard 91486. Claim: 'An art work's value depends on the artist's original hand.' Work: Duchamp, Fountain (1917). A strong response defines 'originality' two ways. If originality means manual craft, the readymade fails. If it means conceptual selection, Fountain succeeds: Duchamp chose, signed and exhibited a manufactured urinal, and the Stieglitz photograph and The Blind Man editorial constructed its meaning. The counterargument-that the work borrows industrial labour-is answered by the institutional theory of art, which locates value in the art world's recognition. The response cites sources and returns to the object's evidence: signature, orientation, title, exhibition context.
Traps
- Plagiarising or paraphrasing secondary sources without citation.
- Writing biography instead of addressing the standard.
- Choosing works with too little reliable source material.
- Reducing 'values' to price alone.
- Naming a theory without applying its concepts to specific works.
- Ignoring the required format or audience.