Submit an Academic Petition or Appeal

Petition Letter: NOTE: I have submitted this appeal request in a word document under documentation as it appears the formatting and quotation marks has been altered---

I have organized this document into three categories. I understand that the application calls for a concise reasoning for my request of regrading, however, due to events that occurred within the course, I have found it difficult to put all of my experiences within the recommended limit, thus I have organized the justification of this request into three parts, a description of how I believe my work should be graded, followed by a response to the official course goals and why I believe that I have achieved these, and finally a section describing my response to comments that I was given about my grading by Professor Sellars and why I disagree with her decision. Section one covers briefly the ideas discussed in depth in later sections.
I have submitted relevant pieces of evidence, mark schemes, rubrics and other graded materials, however, the images I have submitted for my final work were taken before the pieces were handed in, I did not take photos with the intention of submitting them for regrading so their angles are limited. I would like to note that the original platforms that the pieces were situated on warped further after presentation and split so I cannot take new photos of the work as it appeared when I presented it (I have since made new platforms, however, they are slightly different from the original ones as I gained access to tools for their completion). Additionally, it appears as though my peers or others within Ontario hall have been touching my pieces as I have discovered recently that some elements have been broken, detached, or otherwise damaged since I brought them to Ontario hall for the presentation of my work. If more photos are needed for re-evaluation, please let me know.
I requested an informal review of my grade but was denied this by Professor Sellars. With this said and due to biases that she has shown and conflicts that have been brought up to Dr. Smith, I do not feel that it would be appropriate for Professor Sellars to re-grade my work and request that she not be involved in the evaluation.

The grading scheme is broken down in ¿¿Official ARTF447 Syllabus 2019 Fall¿ as follows:
Grading Scheme Value Due Date
Studio work 90
Artist Statement 5 Due with completed studio work.
Participation 5 Seminar

I would like to note that took part in all seminars, completed my artist statement, and studio work.

As per the grade distribution for ARTF 447, as seen in ¿¿Course Grade Distribution¿, it can clearly be seen that one student received a -B (5 of the class), one a B (5), One a B+ (5), two an -A (11), nine an A (47), and five an +A (26). I am the student that received a B, and thus I have been graded within the bottom 2/19 people in my class. Upon seeing the quality of my peers work and analyzing my work against both Professor Sellars' grade scheme and that of the course as a whole, I do not agree that I should fall within the bottom 5-10 of the class. I believe that I should receive a grade of A or A+ in the course when looking at other work produced by my peers in the course and given my achievement of the course goals.

1. For the section below, please refer to ¿¿Prof. Sellars ARTF447 Rubric¿ for grading categories
Ability to communicate ideas through the work
I believe that given my statement, my intent is clearly evident within my work. Although anthropomorphic taxidermy had been used throughout history, my incorporation of it in detailed social scenes as representations of class, coincides with the course outcome of working towards a coherent visual thesis. This thesis will be solidified with the use of 3D-printed sculpture coinciding with these taxidermic models. Thus on the rubric, I believe under Ability to communicate ideas through the work my work falls under ¿¿Proficient¿.

Technical Skill. Engagement with methods, materials and processes
I believe the technical elements of my art work have been skillfully executed, this can be seen in the detail of the pieces and in the construction of the work. The cloth that I used reinforced my ideas as I picked each material with consideration of the colour, material type and size of the weave and thickness of the fabric to create a realistic portrayal of different status. The use of taxidermy reinforced my ideas as its historical association with trophies help convey the idea of status or wealth as a symbol of pride. When finished the 3D printed gilded plastic will lend well to my intent as stated in under the learning outcome, Speak to (verbally and in writing) the rationale for their creative explorations.(found in ¿¿Official ARTF447 Syllabus 2019 Fall¿). Thus, I believe that in the category, Technical Skill. Engagement with methods, materials and processes, my work falls under ¿¿Proficient¿.

Process, risk and problem solving
I had never done taxidermy or pattern making previously and in order to achieve the quality that I wanted, I repeatedly experimented with the materials until I found methods that worked for me, were effective, and resulted in a visual outcome that met my standards. This can be seen through my extensive pattern making, and practice of taxidermy. I believe in the category Process, risk and problem solving, that my work falls under ¿¿Proficient¿.

Ability to be self-critical and to apply feedback
When I was not getting constructive support from my advisor, I took the initiative to approach another art professor to improve and develop my work and ideas. I actively sought feedback because as an individual and a student in an environment with experienced artists, I recognize that outside perspectives on how I can further my ideas are invaluable to my creative development. Through the creation of my work, if a certain material or method was not working, I did research and experimented on ways to modify it. Within the physical creation of my work this can be seen through, for example, problems I was having with my original method of taxidermy to which I modified it and hair was not lost from the animals. In my intent, I was told by Professor Sellars that my project would not fit with guidelines. To remedy this I conducted research into Russian Fairytales, Pop cultural inspirations and the use of pop culture in art, and artistic movements such as New Aestheticism. I decided Russian Fairytales would not fit in with what I wanted to create and my ideas regarding Pop culture and New aestheticism were shut down by Professor Sellars. After being told by Professor Sellars in October that I ¿¿might as well not meet with¿ her, I reached out to another professor for advice onto what do to, and from that developed my final project idea. Additionally, I sought feedback on my artist statement from Professor Sellars, and although I received none, I repeatedly reached out to her. Thus, within the category of Ability to be self-critical and to apply feedback, I believe my work falls under ¿¿Proficient¿.

Communication and research skills
My ideas are clearly articulated within my statement. This statement also includes two artists whose art relates to my own work. Additionally, within a discussion that I had when presenting my pieces to Professor Sellars, I was asked a series of questions provided to me by her as seen in ¿¿Prof. Sellars ARTF 447 Evaluation Discussion Questions¿. During this time I elaborated on my research into contemporary artists working with taxidermy. Contemporary art encompasses all art created in modern times. I discussed artists (Lucia Mocnay and Mauizio Cattelan) whose art relates to, or inspires mine, as well as those within the contemporary community that I personally do not share many elements of but who I fit among with regards to the practice of contemporary taxidermy. Contemporary art theories and concepts encompass a wide range of topics, my exploration of socio-economic status, wealth and education fall within the large scope of contemporary art. My practice, though seemingly traditional, incorporates contemporary techniques in the creation my taxidermy and clothing (for example with the use of a sewing machine), and materials (for example with the use of polyester, fray-preventative glue, and iron-on hemming materials), and would be furthered through the use of 3D printing and scanning to create models. Thus, I believe that in the category, Communication and research skills, that my work falls under ¿¿Proficient¿.

Presentation/Work Set-up
My work in taxidermy can be seen now as I had intended for it to be displayed given the facilities and tools that I required (the boards that I had initially used in my presentation split shortly after I presented the work). The closures of University facilities during the beginning of the winter school term could not have been foreseen. I created the display platforms to the best of my ability given the tools (sandpaper), and facility (my apartment) that were available to me to finish my platforms. Given the closures, I had requested Professor Sellars for a short extension however was not allowed this. The use of a platform to display my taxidermy enhances the work as taxidermy has historically been presented on plaque-like surfaces which not only relate the work to traditional taxidermy, but also provide a surface that would be associated with a trophy. My use of miniature found-items enhances my work additionally as it creates visual context for the scenes presented. The rats have been carefully positioned and their relationship to the items around them carefully thought through to enhance the idea of wealth and sophistication. The work goes further than enticing engagement, the presentation on plaque-like surfaces solidifies the idea of a trophy while the furniture creates the sense of a small world that the figures exist within, and relationship between the subjects and their surroundings emphasizes my intent. It is because of this that in the category Presentation/Work Set-up I believe my work falls under ¿¿Proficient¿.

Work ethic and time-management
I showed up to every meeting prepared to discuss my work with my advisor. I consistently came to meetings with new research, experimentation and/or ideas. Throughout the term I was consistently working to develop my project in order to create something that was both important to me and met with the strict limitations set by my professor. Despite a lack of constructive feedback given to me during the course, I believe that my work and practice has not only surpassed my personal goals but exceeds the course requirements as I was able to self-direct my work, work independently, consistently engage in experimentation or research, explore and expand on my studio practice, develop my rationale for my project, relate research into contemporary art communities, and the use of taxidermy in modern society as well as historical and contextual areas to my project, and finally, to create a cohesive body of work that works towards a visual thesis. Finally, I did not work within my studio space as I was prohibited due to the involvement of dead animals in the production of my work, but within my own home, I ensured that my area of production was a safe environment for me and those within the premises and surrounding areas. Therefore, I believe that in the category of Work ethic and time-management that my work falls under ¿¿Proficient¿.

2. Here I will relate my work to the intended learning outcomes for 447 and 448. Please refer to ¿¿Official ARTF447 Syllabus 2019 Fall¿

Create a coherent body of work to present a display for evaluation that is working towards a coherent visual thesis.
Though the creation of anthropomorphic taxidermy, presented a display that works towards my thesis as described in the document ¿¿Artist Statement¿. Although due to unforeseen University closures after the Winter term had begun, I was not able to complete all the elements that I initially intended to, this does not detract from the outcome as I have created a body of work that is working towards the visual thesis that I have mentioned in my statement. The pieces that I created are coherent as they are of the same nature, medium, and in support of the same idea.

Relate visual, thematic and theoretical research to their own work.
I have done research into taxidermy, Victorian Era social elements, fashion, methods of creation (hand sewn vs machine, material types-silk vs cotton, etc., colours used) within the time period, and class in the era as well as anthropomorphic taxidermy, miniatures, pattern creation and design, and both historical and contemporary artists who work(ed) with taxidermy. The research into the historical background of my subjects can be seen in the design of outfits, display of the scenes, and use of taxidermy within my pieces, as well as in writing within my statement. Although I do not comment on historical artists within my statement, this is because I was told by Professor Sellars to focus on contemporary artists; however, some historical taxidermists and artists that I have looked into include Walter Potter, Martha Maxwell, William temple Hornaday, and Carl Akeley, who were instrumental in the development of taxidermy within the 19th and 20th centuries. From traditional taxidermy, I was inspired to situate my subjects within seemingly realistic setting, with props and interactions that can be recognized as used by people. Although I do not follow the same themes as many contemporary taxidermy artists, through my research into the aforementioned artists, I was able to learn where my art within this medium stands in the contemporary art community. I drew inspiration most notably from Maruizio Cattelan, whom I was first introduced to the work of in the winter of 2019. Apart from historical examples and Norman Bates in Psycho, Cattelan was a large inspiration of mine to try out taxidermy in my art.

Explore and expand a creative and critical studio practice.
Before this project I had never done taxidermy, pattern making, or working with miniatures, and had done little sewing, woodworking or 3D printing. Through my practice, tests, and experimentation I was able to develop my skills tremendously. I pushed the boundaries of my abilities and strove to create the best work that I could. Taxidermy is a relatively safe activity, but I made sure to take precautions, using animals that were raised in disease-free environments as feeder rats, using disposable scalpels and safely discarding the blades after I used them, and ensuring that materials such as Borax were safely contained and disposed of after use. Before starting this project, I did not have an extensive knowledge on pattern making and taxidermy. Through working, I am by no means an expert on either, but I believe that I have surpassed what I thought I would be able to achieve within such a short time. My experimentation was instrumental in this as by doing tests, I discovered more effective ways of creating, such as how far up the leg to cut the bone of a rat, how to stuff one successfully, the thickness of wire that I found most effective, modifying and creating patterns to fit animals with accentuated proportions and even how to create an outfit that could be physically dressed on a taxidermic, rigid rat.

Speak to (verbally and in writing) the rationale for their creative explorations.
I will admit that I am not the most gifted at verbal communication, as per the reasons for my accommodations; at times I find that I cannot verbalize my thoughts and perspectives as well as I can describe them in writing. However, I have worked to better explain my rationale verbally, and have ensured that it is clearly conveyed within my statement. In short, I have chosen to explore taxidermy as it is a historical practice and is of interest to me. It allowed me to portray scenes in miniature with subjects while simultaneously enveloping my work with the rich historical background of animal preservation, trophies, and the concept of beauty in nature. Most significant to my work is the use of taxidermy as trophies. My scenes are not simply narratives, but act as symbolic displays of sophistication, they depict materials, status, relationships, and education that would have been seen as valuable within the 19th century. In the contemporary world sophistication does not come with wealth, material wealth does not come with education. In modern society it is difficult to distinguish class, as class for the most part is not as segregated as it has been in the past. Some wealthy individuals may spend their money on designer items as symbols of wealth (and so may people who are not wealthy), but many individuals in higher socio-economic classes do not do this. I have chosen the Victorian era as it is not only an area of interest to me, but it marked the turn of an era from individualized symbols of wealth, to mass produced items, leading to a decline in the visual separation of class. The scenes are to be 3D printed in plastic and gilded in gold leaf, acting as trophies. The same Victorian era scenes will be used in these trophies in order to draw parallels between the taxidermy (historical trophies), and gilded scenes (contemporary trophies) and inspire contemplation about symbols of wealth and sophistication.

Develop the ability to self-direct and time-manage within a safe and collaborative studio space.
I came into ARTF 447 with an idea of what I wanted to create. Having not been provided with any support by Professor Sellars, I approached another professor for advice on how to further develop my work. After working with Professor Sellars for a few weeks, I realized at the beginning of October there was something very wrong. Professor Sellars told me that if it were to continue with my original idea (which I had never received any constructive feedback on, and which was still in its early stages as I had been focusing on the other avenues of research that Professor Sellars had requested I do) that I might as well not meet with her for the rest of the semester¿. No advice onto how I may add on or further develop this idea was given to me. With this said, I think I have done remarkably well in self-directing my work as besides the feedback given to me by another professor inspiring me to create 3D models, I have created this project completely on my own. I worked constantly throughout the semester to appease Professor Sellars demands for artwork that she wanted to be made, artwork that as she desired it, which had nothing to do with my interests. I approached ARTF 447 with the idea that this is my final year, the art that I create now will be that which I will use in applications for Masters programs and so it should represent what I want to create. My colleagues were allowed by their advisors to explore areas that they desired, yet I was being told that if I did the same, I might as well just work completely on my own. Although I did not start creating elements of my final project until mid-November, the months prior to that were spent conducting research, gathering supplies, and doing experimentation. As I mentioned, there was only one week during which I set aside my art to focus completely on my other courses, to study for midterms, (Upon informing Professor Sellars that I did not think I would be able to complete any work that week I was told by her not to study for my exams, which accounted for 30 and 20 of my other courses.) There were some weeks that I did not spend the full 24 hours on this course, however, this was because I was inhibited from continuing my work as I was put in a position of uncertainty where I did not know what I could create that I wanted to create that would result in a passing grade from Professor Sellars. I made up for this in other weeks where I worked longer than the required time commitment. As I mentioned, I was told before I had even started my project that I would score in the lowest mark range in multiple sections. Each meeting with my advisor was extremely stressful and ended with me feeling unheard, my views being overlooked, and a feeling of anxiety and stress because everything I put forward was instantly dismissed regardless of my perspectives, or even academic research that I had to back it up. What I am trying to convey is that I was able to self-direct, and I consistently worked on research and/or art-making throughout the term, however, I did not feel safe in the environment that I was in. I did my best to stay on track and work consistently, but this hostile and unsupportive environment slowed my progress. When the term ended and I was left to work outside of this environment, I was very successful in the completion of the taxidermy and sewed elements of my project, working consistently throughout the break.

3. My response to the comments in ¿¿Prof. Sellars ARTF447 Assessment¿
I believe that the work that I produced and steps that I took to produce that work has been under evaluated substantially. There are 6 areas of criteria on the rubric provided to me by Professor Sellars: Ability to communicate ideas through the work, Technical Skill. Engagement with methods, materials, and processes, Process, risk and problem solving, Ability to be self-critical and to apply feedback, Communication and research skills, Presentation/Work Set-up, and Work ethic and time-management.

Work ethic and time-management
Since the beginning of the semester I had disagreements with Professor Sellars about my work. She did not read my preliminary project outline (seen in ¿¿Initial Project Proposal sent in June¿) when she accepted me as her supervisor. Midway through September she asked me to change my project. In attempts to remedy this, I came each week from September into October with new ideas and responses to the art that she wanted me to create backed with research. The weeks that I did not do more research, I did experimentation and worked to create my final pieces. There were only two occasions that I met with Professor Sellars with no mentioned progress, one week because I had two midterms, and the other during which I had done research into 3D printing. As my ideas had been constantly put down previously, I was hesitant to come forward with my research (however I told her about this idea later). I was penalized for not meeting the guidelines that my Professor told me I set, however, I never set these deadlines, and instead explained to her that because I had never done taxidermy or pattern making, that I was not sure how long this would take and thus could not set strict deadlines. This can be seen in the supporting document, Sculpture Contract with her comment clear in, Prof. Sellars ARTF 447 Assessment. I have accommodations and as well, explained to my Professor not only this year but over the past 3 years that I have had her as a Professor, that I need to have a solid plan in order to work. My Professor inhibited this repeatedly in attempts to get me to create an artwork that she wanted, not one that I desired to create (even up to two weeks before the due date), thus I did all that I could to find a middle ground. Professor Sellars had made up her mind about the mark that I would be receiving early in the semester; she made repeated comments about criteria I would score low in without me even starting my project. As shown in the timeline I have provided, my involvement in the course was regular. I spoke to Professor Arauz throughout the term, first going to him in September about course requirements and then a week later about course expectations. In Professor Sellars comments it says that it is important to determine what I should change to meet expectations, however, any idea that I came to her with was shot down without reason other than her own personal preference and specific desires as to what the project should be. The course expectations are stated in the document ¿¿Official ARTF447 Syllabus 2019 Fall¿, none of these expectations were mentioned when I was told my work would not meet them, instead the reasoning behind my Professor's claim that I would not meet the expectations were because she did not view my art as contemporary art but as ¿¿craft¿ despite the term ¿¿contemporary art¿ being used to describe all art created today. Thus, if I created art during modern time, by definition it is contemporary art. It is important to emphasize that this course expectation is not actually listed within the course expectation handout to be used by professors and students in ARTF 447 and 448 (Refer to ¿¿Official ARTF447 Syllabus 2019 Fall¿). With this said, I was given a grade within the C range in this section, I disagree with this because I consistently worked throughout the semester and met with the official course expectations for 447 as provided.

Presentation/Work Set-up
I requested an extension on the work done in the semester not only because of my accommodations but because of the constant stress, discomfort and anxiety that meetings with Professor Sellars caused me, inhibiting me from creating. My extension was until January 10, 2020. During the winter break, I designed and created the outfits and taxidermy for my project, wrote a draft of my artist statement, and planned to print my objects within the first days of class. I had already during the school year, researched period dress, material, design, taxidermy, and techniques for creating taxidermy and historical dress. I had previously discussed the presentation of my artwork with Professor Sellars. I was told that I would have to attach my pieces to a base for the presentation of the work. I did not initially intend on doing this however, as per her suggestion, I decided to attach the pieces to 1x1 foot platforms. I bought a plank about a week before the due date and had it cut into 1x1 foot squares. When I purchased the wood it was flat, however, by the end of the week it had begun to warp. It continued to warp further even after the due date and later split. With this said, I did not have access to a planer, miter saw, joiner, or router to finish the platforms but sanded them by hand for a smoother and more finished appearance. I emailed the school facility, SparQ studio's, during the break who conveyed to me on January 6th that they were not open for the first few days of classes. It was not financially feasible for me to rent tools for this over the break as I would have cost me 150 for each of the tools per hour, totalling at least 600 without tax (I inquired at Exotic Woods Inc.), and so because of University closures, I was unable to finish the display platform to the quality that I had intended. Upon finding out about the closures, I contacted Professor Sellars and requested a slight extension to my deadline to accommodate for these unforeseen circumstances, but was denied this. In Professor Sellars comments about my work, she suggests using a plinth, however, as my advisor, she had never suggested this to me previously. I thought about using plinths, however, I would not have been able to anchor the mice directly onto them in accordance to her request, and in attempts to satisfy my Professors request chose small platforms. I positioned these on a table for the presentation of my final artwork. I chose this because historically, much taxidermy has been displayed on walls, shelves or tables. Upon seeing my display, Professor Sellars told me that instead of using a table in Ontario Hall, I should have built my own or bought one. I have never built furniture, nor was I ever told by her that I should build one before the final critique. The table was not part of the artwork and, similarly to the platforms, I did not have the tools to create one if wanted to. It was just not reasonable for me to have buy or make one and at no point had it been indicated to me that this would result in a poor grade. In fact in the past, many students have displayed work on University provided tables and platforms. In her comments on my presentation, Professor Sellars commented on the effectiveness of the use of miniature found objects, however, this is not reflected in the grade for this area of criteria. I know that I did not present my artwork as well as I had intended, however, it was due to facility closures, I believe that I was penalized too harshly for this given these closures, my lack of resources, lack of feedback and advice, and that all other elements of my presentation were not displayed in the marking (though were commented on).

Communication and research skills
I not only did extensive research into ideas, historical background (including materials, costume, society, etc.), and techniques, I also conducted research into different artists both historical and contemporary who have worked in taxidermy. My artist statement describes two contemporary artists whose work relates to mine. Additionally, however, Professor Sellars requested during the presentation of my artwork that I elaborate on my research into my work in a contemporary context. During this discussion I spoke about a number of contemporary artists that I did not mention within my artist statement (refer to Prof. Sellars ARTF447 Evaluation Discussion Questions). I had previously spoken to her about these artists as I conducted extensive research toward the end of the semester. In total I talked to her about at least 7 contemporary artists in addition to a few historical artists (Including Claire Morgan, Iris Schieferstein, Xiau Yu, Geza Scollosi, Robert Roschenburg, Damian Hurst, Maurizio Cattelan, and Lucia Mocnay). Although I do not know the number of contemporary artists she required me to relate my work to, I do not believe that this display of research and understanding of taxidermy in the contemporary art world deems a grade within the D range. I understand that I did not complete all elements of my artwork that I wanted to within the semester, however it is important to note that the artist statement that Professor Sellars marked me on was not my final artist statement but the draft that I sent her a week before the presentation at her request. Additionally, I repeatedly requested feedback on the draft which was ignored. My final artist statement that I brought to my presentation states that I will create 3D printed and gilded trophies. During a meeting with Alejandro Arauz, I was told that ARTF 447 and ARTF 448 though have separate course codes, can be viewed as continuous courses during which the work can overlap. With this in mind, I chose to write that I would in the future create 3D printed models, because of University closures for exams and Christmas, I knew that I would not be able to complete the 3D printed pieces by Jan. 10, however I have no intention of leaving them undone. I have met with various members of SparQ studios and have arranged to scan and print the pieces that I created last semester. Although like with the wooden platforms, I was not able to finish these pieces (print them) for the presentation of my artwork because of University closures, I have every intention of finishing them and am taking steps to do so. And despite this 3D printing element not being included in this portion of the course, my work still reflects ideas presented in my artist statement It is for these reasons that I do not believe that I should be getting the grade I received in this area.

Ability to be self-critical and to apply feedback
In the comments Professor Sellars gave me with regards to my Ability to be self-critical and to apply feedback it is written that after much discussion my proposal meets the course outcome criteria. On this note I would like to mention that I was never told by Professor Sellars that my proposal met the course criteria until I received this document after my grading; she maintained a skepticism and disagreement with my idea, telling me to change different elements until my last meeting with her at the end of November, just over a week before the final deadline. My initial proposal idea can be seen in the document ¿¿Sculpture Contract¿. The course outcome criteria can be seen in the document ¿¿Official ARTF447 Syllabus 2019 Fall¿. I was told that my work would not meet the criteria because it was not contemporary (which as aforementioned, describes art that is created in modern times). I was not given any feedback or suggestions for ways that I could modify my idea or add to it while still maintaining any part of my desired intention. I was self critical in that I created many different copies of patterns and clothing in order to get it exactly how I wanted it for that historical period. When something did not turn out with the quality that I wanted or appearing as I wanted it, I would remake it in a way that met with my goals. In taxidermy I was critical of the quality of the product I created, with attention not only to the colour of the rats, but also the shape and size of the forms inserted into their skins and the quality of the work done. I modified the forms and materials used. In addition to the feedback regarding attaching the rats to their display surface which I acted upon, Professor Sellars suggested that I use small objects to further my displays, I applied this with found objects and created scenes. I was told by my Professor to create taxidermy scenes based on Russian Fairy tales, however, after conducting research into these stories, I found that almost all, if not all, are based off of German fairytales. She suggested that I do this because I am a quarter Russian and Professor Sellars thought therefore Russian fairy tales would be very relevant to me (I would like to emphasize that I am a quarter Russian, I do not speak the language and have never visited the country, and although I am proud of my cultural background, it does not mean that I should be made to feel by my Professors that I have to create art inspired by it). Also it did not fit my theme for the year and I would have had to modify my plans for paintings I will create in ARTF 448. However, when I informed her that my initial idea, using taxidermy paired with miniature costume to discuss wealth and sophistication within the Victorian Era, was relevant to me not only because I have done extensive research into Victorian Era fashion as art (in an IB extended essay), but I have volunteered or otherwise been involved at Black Creek Pioneer Village for almost 15 years, I was told by Professor Sellars that it was not in fact relevant to any of my interests or to me at all. This is conveyed additionally in her comments under this section where it is stated that my research has not benefitted my understanding of the historical context of my work. In reality, as my work touches on Victorian Era symbols of wealth, I not only incorporated scenes that socially would have represented wealth, but also was attentive and critical of the materials, using high quality cotton, silk satin, lace, and high quality wool for the outfits of the subjects portrayed as wealthy, while using polyester, and a rougher cotton (cheaper materials) for the dress of the maid- the colours of the materials being authentic to the era. I was told by my Professor then to think about pop culture, so I came back after brainstorming and researching, with an idea of using period films, recreating a scene from them and accompanying my display with a quote from that scene. Like my initial idea, this was shot down, as my Professor said, because it references films about historical time periods- an element that nowhere in the course expectations it says cannot be explored. When I came to her with the idea of 3D printed models she seemed to be agreeable, however 1-2 weeks later, in the last meeting of the term (November 26th) I was again faced with a newfound disagreement to the idea that she had previously agreed with (3D printed models) and was told that instead of scanning the taxidermy that I was creating, that I should copy someone else's 3D file and print an artwork such as Jeff Koon's Balloon dog. This was particularly interesting to me because she previously told me that my work was unoriginal (however I have not seen rats with human-shaped bodies, and have not seen animals been used in this way to create a humorous affect setting rats in scenes of wealth, nor had I seen anthropomorphic scenes created with the intention of highlighting social class distinctions and sophistication). However, I was being told by my Professor to completely copy someone else's 3D file of another artist famous artwork- and to her, copying this well known artists work was an original idea. One could say that no oil painting that contains a nude or fruit or flowers is original because there is a shared element of the use of flowers or the human body in them or that a still life or landscape is didactic because it portrays a real-life object. Simply put, when one chooses to ignore symbolic or intentional elements of an artwork, it becomes didactic and unoriginal. As I was not getting constructive feedback from Professor Sellars, I took the initiative to approach another professor for his opinion on how I could develop my work. Not only did he recommend contemporary artists working with taxidermy, from this discussion I was inspired to incorporate 3D scanning and printing into my project. The incorporation of this element allowed me to further my intent with the plan of creating 3D-printed and gilded trophy-like statues of taxidermy. Thus it is because of the extensive research into contemporary artists working in taxidermy, through my process during which I constantly remade clothing pieces in order to ensure they fit and appeared as I wanted them to (this can be seen in the attached documents labeled ¿¿pattern¿, critically chose the rats that I would use for my pieces based on their colouring, size, and quality of their fur; and through the initiative I took to get the support I needed by approaching another professor for advice on how to improve my work, that I do not believe that I should receive the grade of C that Professor Sellars has given me.

Process, risk and problem solving AND Technical Skill. Engagement with methods, materials, and processes
I agree with the grades that have been indicated on the section regarding technical skill and problem solving as aforementioned, I constantly self-edited what I created when it was not at the standard that I wanted, and additionally, when I faced an obstacle, I worked to overcome it, such as in the sizing of the outfits. My technical skills within the project can be seen through the attention to detail, with many of the buttons being functional methods of opening and closing garments, and through the quality of that which I created.

Ability to communicate ideas through the work
With regards to the final criteria area, Ability to communicate ideas through the work, I think it is important to note that although in my Professor¿¿s comments, she states that artists that I mentioned in my statement, such as Lucia Mocnay, uses taxidermy to show an original idea through creative use of material practice, when I had come forward to her at the end of the term with information on Mocnay, specifically that she is a contemporary artist who explores themes in historical fashion within her work centered around anthropomorphic taxidermy (similar in some themes to what I have done in my project), I was told by my Professor (who had never heard of Mocnay or done research into her art) that this artist, who has exhibited at galleries and whose work resides in museums, is not an artist. Similarly, I was told repeatedly that what I intended to create was not art but craft and that I would be given a low grade within this area. It is interesting because despite my Professor telling me that this artist is not an artist, she uses it in her feedback to tell me that unlike Mocnay, my art is didactic. On this note, I also do not believe my art is didactic, my Professor states that my objects represent exactly what they are -- a realistic historical representation of 19th century human attire and Victorian practice of anthropomorphic taxidermy,. Through this statement I can only reason that my statement has not been read and that my art is being looked at as it had before it was even created, by someone who is unable to accept an alternative perspective and who is set in their ways about the meaning (or assumed lack of meaning) behind it. The objects are a realistic historical representation of 19th century human attire and the Victorian Era practice of anthropomorphic taxidermy, but what is being ignored is that the interaction between the subjects influences the meaning, I am commenting on wealth and sophistication within my piece, thus the interaction between the subjects is very important. Additionally, I use animals in taxidermy to comment about people in society, I am not commenting on animals with animals, and thus, the objects do not represent exactly what they are. I have modified the animals to have physical human qualities such as body shape, and so they as animals are not even represented as animals would naturally physically be. Though my work depicts realistic Victorian Era clothing on anthropomorphic rats, this does not mean that there is no symbolic importance to the use of rats, an animal seen as dirty, associated with disease and poverty, in a scene of wealth. Although I did not finish the 3D printed pieces for the presentation, they are written in my proposal as pieces that I will finish, because of the overlap of 447 and 448, this promise for completion should not be ignored. I have drawn connections to the traditional use of taxidermy as trophies, and as such have created scenes of wealth and sophistication to be displayed on these trophies. These would be complimented by the printed and gilded copies of the work, drawing on the contemporary image of trophies, allowing the viewer to understand the relationship in a contemporary context. Finally, the artworks that my Professor mentions as historical works that are similar to mine simply do not include articles of clothing with the exception of boxing badgers, where the badgers are wearing gloves, they are purely pieces that include animals positioned anthropomorphically. My artwork explores class while these display scenes of animals in school or a bear standing with a tray. This demonstrates that my statement had been ignored, which makes me wonder if my Professor¿¿s previous promise to give me a low grade despite not seeing any of my work, was in fact a promise that came with oversight of my finished work and statement of it.