UNIVERSITY OF MALTA
THE MATRICULATION CERTIFICATE EXAMINATION
INTERMEDIATE LEVEL
ART
MAY 2010
EXAMINERS’ REPORT
MATRICULATION AND SECONDARY EDUCATION CERTIFICATE
EXAMINATIONS BOARD
IM Examiners’ Report – May 2010
IM ART
MAY 2010 SESSION
EXAMINERS’ REPORT
The examiners’ panel for May 2010 Intermediate Level in Art submits the following report on the
general performance of the candidates who sat for the said examination.
626 candidates registered for the examination.
candidates was as follows:
GRAD
NRU
%
A
35
5.6
B
78
12.5
Ċ
198
31.6
D
169
27
The breakdown of the Grades obtained by the
E
54
8.6
F
83
13.3
ABS
9
1.4
REĠ
626
100
Paper I (i) – Coursework
The Coursework portfolios were generally satisfactory. The Markers’ Panel made it a point not to
accept any portfolios which where not of the stipulated size and format. Despite some occasional
examples, candidates have generally shown that the objectives of the Coursework portfolio have been
understood and that – as often noted in earlier reports - the works presented are a selection of what
was produced during the course of studies. Considerable improvement was noted in how candidates
presented their work in the portfolios, particular after the circular issued by MATSEC instructing all
candidates to comply with the regulations that the portfolio itself should not be tampered with, i.e.,
enlarged or modified in order to fit in works which are larger than the required size. This circular is
also available on the MATSEC website www.um.edu.mt/matsec in the ‘Notices and Deadlines’ link
entitled ‘Notice to all Art Students’. However, there were some misguided instances were candidates
simply submitted all the work they produced, without undergoing the process of reflection, analysis,
and self assessment required in this paper. Some concerns over excessive mounting of individual
works remain. Excessive mounting should be avoided.
Paper I (ii) – Project
The themes presented for the Project generally engaged the candidates in creative research. This,
however, is not always reflected in the presented work and some candidates simply do away with
showing evidence of their research and of how their ideas developed and matured. This paper is not
about the presentation of a single Final Work. In other instances, some candidates failed to clearly
identify their Final Work, or failed to present enough literature that supports their creative processes.
Paper II - History of Art
The general level was satisfactory. Two works are required to be discussed synoptically and placed
within their appropriate art historical context. Some candidates use the title of the work of art as an
excuse to simply discuss the general biography of the artist concerned and thus move away on a
tangent from what was required of them. The use of proper artistic terminology is a must. Some
candidates do not show proper evidence of wider reading and simply stick to descriptive issues.
Paper II – Work from Observation
This paper offers two work from observation options (a) Still-Life and Natural Forms and (b) Human
Figure. Option (a) was, by far, the most popular choice. Option (a) candidates produced work which
was generally satisfactory, showing evidence of proper research and training in Still-Life. Work
produced for Option (b) showed that the approach to the human figure needs to be properly refined.
This has been noted in a number of earlier reports.
The Chairperson
Board of Examiners
October 2010
2