National Art Education Association

Historical and Operational Perspectives of the Advanced Placement Program in Studio ArtAuthor(s): Steve WillisSource: Art Education, Vol. 57, No. 1 (Jan., 2004), pp. 42-46Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3194083 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 04:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.25 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 04:39:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Historical and

Operational

Perspectives of

The

Advanced

Placement Program

in Studio Art

BY STEVE WILLIS

ART EDUCATION / JANUARY 2004

The Advanced Placement Program (AP) has gone through many changes. The AP Program was initiated in the 1950s in response to colleges and public schools that wished to establish and assess college level curicula for academ- ically advanced high school students. "In the fall of 1954, the College Entrance Examination Board voted to accept the AP Program and to administer its exami- nations in the spring of 1956. The Board also requested that Educational Testing Service (ETS) be responsible for devel- oping the examinations" (Davis, 1997, p. 85). The popularity of schools offering AP courses has grown to 35 subject areas across 19 disciplines (Advanced Placemenlt Program Course Description: Studio Art, 2002, p. 1). The growth of the AP Program has not been limited to geographic boundaries, as the College Board of Trustees (Advanced Placement Yearbook, 1996) approved an AP International Diploma in 1995. In 1996, about 540,000 students worldwide took almost 850,000 examinations (Davis, 1997). In 2001, AP Readers evaluated over 1.4 million examinations. (Advanced Placemenzt Programn Course Guide: Studio Art, 2002).

From inception, the AP Progranm has remained focused on and committed to the education of all students. To this point, educators can receive curricular guidelines, assessment rubrics, publica- tions, and training in AP procedures. The overarching belief is that no qualified student should be denied an opportunity to take an AP examination, and, moreover, an AP candidate does not necessarily need to be taught in AP courses by AP instructors.

In 1996, about 540,000 students worldwide took almost 850,000 examinations (Davis, 1997). In 2001, AP Readers evaluated over 1.4 million examinations.

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.25 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 04:39:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

AP readers in the May 2001 session evaluated over 1.4 million examinations coming from over 13,700 high schools worldwide. Additionally, these scores were reported to the college or university the student requested. Presently, almost 1,500 institutions grant sophomore standings for successful examinations (Course Guide: Studio Art, p. 1).

Within any curricular and assessment system, like the AP Studio Art Program, it is important to delineate clearly the teachable objective and the performance criterion. To this end, The College Board (AP) organizes and presents Teacher Training Sessions and Summer Institutes throughout the world. Though mostly attended by teachers, administrators are also welcome. In the AP sessions, teachers receive training from experi- enced AP or college teachers who are frequently AP Portfolio Readers. It is common to find teacher-to-teacher dialogue concerning the appropriate strategies for developing college-level curricula sensitive to the high school students' abilities and artistic voices.

According to Course Description: Studio Art, "This College Board program [AP Studio Art] provides the only national standard for performance in the visual arts that allows students to earn college credit" (p. 3). However, AP workshop leaders do not present a standardized curriculum. Many workshop leaders provide curricular suggestions to the teachers (see http://collegeboard.com/ ap/studioart/) but remind teachers that specific curricula are a local decision. The AP Studio Art Program represents and encourages a variety of approaches for AP classrooms.

The Teacher's Guide to Advanced Placement Courses in Studio Art (1997) states that the number of students taking the AP Portfolio general or drawing courses "has grown from approximately 4,105 in 1990 to 8,802 in 1996, which repre- sents an average annual growth rate of about 19 percent" (p. 85). AP studio art has continued to increase from 12,018 portfolios in 1998 to over 20,000 in 2003 (personal notes, portfolio reading, The College of New Jersey, June, 1998 - 2003).

Portfolio History Initially, there was the AP Studio Art

Portfolio, initiated in 1972. As AP studio art grew, the Test Development Committee recommended expanding to two AP Studio portfolios. Consequently, the original portfolio grew into two. The original portfolio remained the Studio Art: General Portfolio, and in 1980, the additional portfolio became the Studio Art: Drawing Portfolio. Both portfolios were designed to assess the high school students' abilities to perform at the college level.

In 2002, the Studio Art: General Portfolio was eliminated and replaced by a 2-D Design and a 3-D Design Portfolio. Research conducted in 1998 by ETS indicated an overwhelming need to offer the three current selections of "Drawing, 2-D Design, and 3-D Design" (Course Description: Studio Art, p. 3) to align more closely with introductory college courses.

Each of these portfolios is divided into three equally important categories: Section I: Quality, Section II: Concentration, and Section III: Breadth. Both the 2-D and Drawing portfolios require a maximum of 29 images: 5 quality,

12 concentration, and 12 breadth. The 3-D Portfolio allows for a maximum of 25 images: 5 quality, 12 concentration, and 8 breadth.

Each school packs its portfolios and dispatches them to New Jersey. Thousands of portfolios from locations throughout the world arrive at the designated AP Studio Art Portfolio reading site at The College of New Jersey located in Trenton.

Pre-evaluation: Standard-Setting Sessions

Before the weeklong reading starts, the Portfolio Evaluators (readers) arrive from locations from North America and Europe and settle into the college accommodations. The next morning, all readers report to the first Standard- Setting Session (SSS). Introductions are made for the benefit of all readers as there is normally a 10-15 % change from year to year. Readers are limited to a 6-year tenure, but at times, veteran readers return.

After introductions, the Chief Reader reminds the readers to assess portfolios without bias, to move through the process expeditiously and above all, to consider the students and their work as the most important aspect of the process. After the Chief Reader finishes the introductory remarks, the 3 Exam Leaders and 12 Table Leaders meet with small groups of readers. In these groups the readers are reminded to follow strictly the AP expec- tations for the portfolio evaluations. These expectations are delineated clearly in the Advanced Placement Studio Art Poster and The College Board Advanced Placement Program Course Description:

Figure 1. This figure indicates the assessment range within a rubric and the overlap between rubrics.

JANUARY 2004 / ART EDUCATION N

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.25 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 04:39:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Finite decisions must now be made on infinite variations, and the visual benchmarks act as touchstones to guide the readers to a solid under-

standing.

Figure 2. Section 1: Quality originals set out for evaluation. Photographs by the author.

Studio Art (2003). During this time, the conversation is focused on general clarity -the basic level of visual language expected from candidates regardless of the type of artwork submitted. This conversation is equally important for new and veteran readers.

Two days prior to the readers' arrival, the Chief Reader, the 3 Exam Leaders, and the 12 Table Leaders arrive at the reading site to conduct preliminary business, but most importantly, they select a battery of exemplars to be used in the SSS. The examples selected cover a full range of student artwork. It is important to note that SSS benchmarks are selected from the current submis- sions, keeping those artworks as the leading factor in establishing equitable examples from an international distribu- tion. During the SSS, the readers' training uses the examples the Chief Reader, Exam Leaders, and Table Leaders had previously scored (See rubrics on-line at http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/ repository/sg_studio_art_02_ 11395.pdf).

In the first session of the SSS, readers know in advance that the six examples represent each rubric level. In this session, scores may be determined by comparison, and readers frequently say, "If that is a 3, then this has to be a 4" (personal notes, June, 2003, College of New Jersey). This makes the evaluations easier and the first session usually proceeds without much discussion. However, in the subsequent sessions there are no guarantees that all rubric levels are represented. This is a more difficult and realistic circumstance. Finite decisions must now be made on infinite variations, and the visual benchmarks act

as touchstones to guide the readers to a solid understanding. This may be the most important aspect of reader training. Rarely does portfolio work fall neatly into one rubric descriptor. Some portfolio examples may demonstrate excellent rendering but poor visual organization, or sophisticated color application but weak conceptual development. However, there are portfolios that are clearly excellent, mediocre, or poor. The borderline examples are the ones that readers consider and reconsider, pondering how to score the images with respect to the rubrics. During each SSS, the scoring decisions and discussions about the exemplar and rubric range are necessary and fruitful because these benchmarks establish the current type of imagery being produced across the diversity of the candidates' portfolios. AP Studio Art images, along with other important information can be viewed at http://collegeboard.com/ap/studioart/ or http://apcentral.collegeboard.com.

During this SSS, each reader's artistic and scoring preferences, perceptions, and personalities become obvious. For example, reader A, being traditional and technical, may assign a score of 2 on a particular section, whereas, reader B, being conceptual, may assign a score of 5. This would be an unacceptable variation in the actual scoring process as scores may be no more than two points apart. For example, a range of 2, 3, 4 is accept- able, but a range of 2, 3, 5 requires an additional evaluation.

During the SSS, these discrepancies provide a catalyst for involved conversa- tions that clarify the rubrics and clearly establish the assessment range within and

between rubric numbers. In these instances, the Table Leaders remind the readers to rely on the rubric descriptors, not personal preferences. After multiple portfolio sections are scored, combined with the conversations, agreement is reached and divergent scores fall closer to the norm. This agreement is not based on similarity of work nor individual preferences, but on an understanding of basic visual art language combined with the stated AP expectations. Of course, sometimes there are disagreements among the readers that result in a discrep- ancy of the scores. Even with discrepan- cies, the composite scores for all of the portfolios are remarkably similar.

The composite score reliability for the 2002 Studio Art portfolios, as estimated by Cronbach's Alpha, was 0.92 for the Drawing Portfolio, 0.90 for the 2D Design Portfolio, and 0.90 for the 3D Design Portfolio. These values take rater [reader] agreement into account (personal notes, September, 2002, Krishna Tateneni, Educational Testing Service). In all cases, discrepancies are not detrimental to the student because each discrepancy requires an additional evaluation by Table Leaders, Exam Leaders, or the Chief Reader. Throughout the entire grading process, rubrics are clarified, and descriptors are honed to precision.

Each portfolio has three sections (Quality, Breadth, and Concentration), and the nine SSSs provide readers with significant practice prior to assigning actual scores. Each section has an SSS, and scoring is rehearsed before actual grading occurs. Readers may be retrained individually.

I

ART EDUCATION / JANUARY 2004

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.25 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 04:39:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Figure 3. Readers Joe Baker (front center) and Janet Rogers (back right) examine slides of the Section 2: Concentration.

Evaluating the AP Portfolios Although some teachers may prefer

evaluating the slides in conjunction with the original artwork, evaluating each section together provides a comparative evaluation within the portfolio. The distribution of each section for an independent evaluation provides a broader range of scores and a broader degree of equity among the diversity of images. For evaluation, each portfolio section is distributed to different areas.

The Section 1: Quality originals are displayed on tables in a large area where three different readers walk down rows of tables to individually evaluate port- folios. For Sections 2 and 3, readers evaluate slides at light tables. The port- folios are separated into the three sections for evaluation and great care is given to protect the artwork and ensure its safe return to the students. As with all AP examinations, security and confidentiality are strictly maintained.

Although the sections are viewed separately, the scores from each section by each reader are compiled to derive the comprehensive score. A minimum of seven different readers assigns scores. Three readers evaluate Section 1, and two examine Sections 2 and 3. The highest raw score is 42, which represents a score of 6 by each reader in each section of the portfolio. The raw score balances the three readers in Section 1 with the two readers in each Section 2 and 3. Each section is valued at one-third.

Figure 4. Exam Leader Ron Leax closely observes slide submissions. Photographs by the author.

The Chief Reader is responsible for assigning readers to the different locations and establishing their duration at each location. Readers may spend the morning evaluating original artwork and the afternoon evaluating slides. The Chief Reader balances gender, location, ethnicity, and teaching level among the readers in each team. In this instance, "teaching level" refers to a balance of readers from both secondary and college levels. This is an important consideration because the AP Portfolio acts as a transi- tional bridge between the two institu- tions. Additionally, the Chief Reader, Exam Leaders, and Table Leaders contin- ually monitor the readers' scores for trends or biases.

Portfolio Divisions Section 1: Quality consists of five

actual works which demonstrate the candidate's highest achievement in the area of quality. Originals in the 3-D Portfolio are submitted only in slide format. Quality, as defined by the AP Program, is evident in the concept, composition, and technical skills of the work. It can be found in very simple as well as elaborate work (Advanced Placement Program AP Studio Art 2002- 03 poster).

The five artworks for Section 1 are taken out of each portfolio and displayed on table surfaces where they are evaluated independently by three different readers. The Table Leaders, the Exam Leaders, or the Chief Reader reevaluates discrepant scores.

Section 2: Concentration is submitted with a maximum of twelve 35mm slides intended to show the devel- opment of a particular idea through visually related works. The Concentration is "An in-depth, personal commitment to a particular artistic concern" (Advanced Placement Program AP Studio Art 2002- 03 poster).

In addition to the slides, the candidate is instructed to respond to three questions designed to encourage the candidate to expand and clarify the nature of the concentration project: 1. Briefly describe the nature of your

concentration project. 2. Briefly describe the development of

your concentration and the sources of your ideas. You may refer to specific slides as examples.

3. What medium or media did you use? (Advanced Placement Program AP Studio Art 2002-03 poster). The slides of both the Concentration

and Breadth sections are viewed exclu- sively at a light table. The readers frequently rely on a large magnifying glass to examine the slides. At least two readers independently evaluate each section. As with Section 1, discrepancies are reexamined by Table Leaders or Exam Leaders.

Section 3: Breadth is also submitted in slide format, but differs from the Concentration section. The Breadth section asks the candidate to provide "A variety of experiences in using formal, technical, and expressive means available to the artist" (Advanced Placement Program AP Studio Art 2002-03 poster).

JANUARY 2004 / ART EDUCATION

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.25 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 04:39:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Summary More than 60,000 teachers are trained

in AP coursework each year. In 2001, more than 1.4 million examinations were administered. Clearly, the AP Program is reaching out to the needs of the academi- cally advanced high school student by having college level curricula available.

Does the AP program reach every student? No. Some schools prefer to emphasize other options. Does the AP Program offer flexibility in how schools and students meet the AP course expectations? Yes, as found within the extensive AP Program information and teacher training available for all high schools that wish to offer AP courses. Approximately 13,700 high schools worldwide participate.

Is the AP Program elitist? No. The AP Program is available to every student. Additionally, there is consistent dialog between workshop leaders and the regional offices to clarify any misinforma- tion concerning elitism. Clarity is found in conversations concerning scholarship opportunities, as well as discussions with the AP workshop participants stating that equity and accessibility must be assured across regions, schools and students. Certainly, the AP workshol) training that I provide other teachers emphasizes that all curricula must be inclusive and sensitive to diversity.

Does AP provide breadth in course offerings and curricular approaches? Yes. Currently there are 35 subject areas and courses continue to be added to the AP repertoire. Teachers are encouraged to develop a meaningful and substantial curriculum that is focused on the partic- ular needs of the individual student to find success within the AP Program.

The AP Program offers students, faculty, and communities the opportunity to see first-hand how students compare academically in a global society. A 1998 ETS study concluded "that students with qualifying grades of 3 or above on AP Exams earn higher grades in advanced college courses than classmates who have taken the prerequisite college course" (Online: http://apcentral.collegeboard. con/colleges).

Clearly, the AP Program is in demand as evidenced by its continued growth. Equally, there is evidence that the AP Program strives to present course offerings and faculty training that are current and meet the needs of the academic community. In contradiction to reports by educational critics and legisla- tive bodies that schools and teachers are failing to meet student needs, more than 1.4 million AP examinations were admin- istered in 2001 indicating that schools are providing avenues for academic accelera- tion for high school students by high school teachers in the high school setting. When students, faculty, and parents seek academic challenges, they are found within the Advanced Placement Program's 35 subject areas across 19 disciplines (Co urse D)escrif io) : ISslptio Art, 2002, p. 1).

In 2003, more than 20,000 art students took the challenge and submitted their AP portfolios for evaluation (personal note, (ollege of New Jersey, June, 2003). For those seeking rigor in studio art, any of the three portfolio examinations offer exciting and challenging possibilities.

Steve Willis is Assistant Professor of Art Education at Southwest Missouri State University in Springfield, Missouri. E-mail: stw997@smsu. edu

REFERENCES A guide to the advanced place?nent program.

(1997). [Brochure]. Princeton, NJ: The College Entrance Examination Board and Educational Testing Service.

Adval7 ced pl(a cl ete t prograo m co trsc desc,ript io(: Stludio art. (2002). Princeton, NJ: College Entrance Examination Board and Educational Testing Service.

Advanced placement yearbook. (1996). [Brochure]. Princeton, NJ: College Entrance Examination Board and( Educational Testing Service.

Davis, M. (Ed.) (1997). '7Tach (es (gt idc to ladva ctd placel(mentl coulrses inl stlIdio (?rl. Princeton NJ: The College Entrance Examination Board and Educational Testing Sertice.

2002-03 Advancl ed placem.en-.t studio Oart poster. (2002). Princeton, NJ: The (ollege EIntlrance Examination BIoard ain( Educational Testing Service. Online: htt;p://apcentral. collegeboard. com/colleges

| ART EDUCATION / JANUARY 2004

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.25 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 04:39:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions