Rubric

Extending Abstract Structures A+ 10-9

Presents a well thought out argument that is applied to both art and aesthetics beyond the case
study. Student relates arguments back to appropriate philosophers who inspired their reasoning
with almost no errors. Student interacts with alternative theorists to provide greater meaning to
their argument and the overall context of art and aesthetics. Engages and critically responds to
alternative arguments with rebuttal that provides greater meaning to the overall argument and
context of art and/or aesthetics. Engages with case study and uses it to critically respond to answer
higher order problems surrounding art and/or aesthetics. Presentation is delivered in the given time
and follows standard oral presentation procedures with few mistakes.
Organising Multiple Structures A B+ 8-7
Presents a well thought out argument that is applicable to the case study. Where the case study sits
within the art and aesthetic is acknowledged but is not applied with further implications to the
larger questions of art and/aothetics. Student relates arguments back to their relevant philosophers
who inspired their argument with almost no errors. Student is able to differentiate and weigh up
alternative theorists to account for their argument. Engages and responds to alternative arguments
with rebuttal. Rebuttal is used to strengthen overall argument. Engages with case study and uses it
to critically create an original logical argument. Presentation is delivered in the given time and
follows standard oral presentation procedures with few mistakes
Valuing Multiple structures B 6-5
Presents a clear argument that is mostly applicable to the case study. Argument may pose
inconsistencies with larger questions about art and or the aesthetic. Occasional errors are made
about theorists but theories are still well used to support argument. Acknowledges and responds to
an alterative viewpoint to strengthen their own argument. Acknowledges case study to create a
consistent argument. Presentation is delivered in the given time and follows standard oral
presentation procedures however some mistakes may detract from the overall argument made.
Responding to Structure C+ - C 4-3
Argument is solely based around case study with limited acknowledgment of larger questions
surrounding art and/or aesthetics. Student is able to show similarities between their argument and
theorist. Limited acknowledgement of alternative viewpoints is shown. Rebuttal does not fully
comprehend the problems raised by alternative viewpoints. Highlights the case study to provide an
argument relevant to philosophy. Presentation is delivered in the given time however some mistakes
detract from the overall argument.
Receiving Structure Unsatisfactory 2-1
Argument has limited grounding to the chosen case study, with very limited acknowledgment of
larger questions surrounding art and/or aesthetics. Limited similarities between theorists and
original argument demonstrated. Alternative viewpoints briefly highlighted if at all. Presentation is
not delivered in the given time and follows very few oral presentations procedure