The Paramaters of Visual Art Assessment as a Measurement Instrument for Learning Products of Art Painting, Sculpture, Ceramic and Batik

Main Article Content

Sugito Sugito
Wahyu Tri Atmojo

Abstract

Assessing learning products of visual art was unlike evaluating other learning products. Due to its relation to visual outcomes, the first assessment required proper sensitiveness and measurable references. The research was intended to be the effort to acquire parameters of visual art assessment, especially of art painting, sculpture, ceramic, and batik assessments. The findings could be used as instruments in various visual art learning activities. Data were collected by distributing a list, interviewing the informants, and having Focus Group Discussion. The respondents were visual art lectures in the Faculty of Arts and Literature in one of the state universities in norther island of Sumatera, Indonesia. They were excellent at visual art and equipped with required sensitiveness. Besides, they also had relevant education with art painting, sculpture, ceramic, and batik. The findings, in the form of assessment parameters, were first, parameters of visual art assessment were form similarity, proportion, spatial depth, technique, composition, content, ambiance, brightness, color harmony, and texture. Secondly, parameters of non-figurative sculpture assessment were technique mastery, proportion, smoothness, expression, volume, space, and idea authenticity. Thirdly, parameters of figurative sculpture assessment were visual anatomy, proportion, motion effect, and drapery. Fourthly, parameters of ceramic assessment were technique mastery/finishing, innovation creativity, novelty, smoothness, expression, harmony, and need (market need). Last, parameters of batik assessment were technique, authenticity, modernity, color harmony, innovativeness, need finishing, and affordability.

Article Details

How to Cite
Sugito, S., & Wahyu Tri Atmojo. (2021). The Paramaters of Visual Art Assessment as a Measurement Instrument for Learning Products of Art Painting, Sculpture, Ceramic and Batik. Lakhomi Journal Scientific Journal of Culture, 2(1), 17-34. https://doi.org/10.33258/lakhomi.v2i1.421
Section
Articles

References

Anastasia, Anne and Susana Urbina. 2007. Tes Psikologi. Translated. Robertus Hariono S. Imam. Jakarta: Indeks.
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 1991. Dasar-dasar Penilaian Pendidikan. Jakarta: BumiAksara.
Bahari, Nooryan. 2008. Kritik Seni, Wacana Apresiasi, dan Kreasi. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Bell, Gredler, M.E. 1991. Belajar dan Membelajarkan. Translated. Munandir. Jakarta: Rajawali Press.
Bloom, Benjamin S, Hasting Thomas J, and George F. Madaus. 1977. Handbook on Formative and Sumative Evaluation of Student Learning. New York:McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Buchori, M. 1983. Teknik-teknik Penilaian dalam Pendidikan. Bandung:Jemmars.
Fitzpatrick, Jody L, Sanders, James R, Worthen, Blaine R. Program Evaluation.New York: Pearson Education Chestnut Hill Interprise, Inc.
Gie, The liang. 1976. Garis Besar Estetik. Jogjakarta: UGM.
Purwanto. 2011. Penilaian Hasil Belajar. Yogjakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Read, Herbert. 1973. The Meaning of Art. Terjemahan. Soedarso. Yogjakarta: ASRI.
Unimed, Tim Dosen. 2012. Penilaian Hasil Belajar. Medan: Unimed Press.
Uno,Hamzah B and Satria Koni. 2012. Assessment Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
Zainul and N. Nasution. 1997. Penilaian Hasil Belajar. Jakarta: PAU