The boy is new to my class room. But in the years before my colleagues surely have taught him how to get round the problem when an English word just doesn’t pop up. You are to describe it using words you do know. In spite of our efforts he uses Dutch words in an English sentence:
The clothes on page 28 are made of stof and bont in particular.
If he had referred to “the stuff clothes are made of” and “the skins of animals” he would have earned a point for having seen the textures in the painting. But I don’t accept such use of language after Christmas in the first year, let alone such a sentence being produced by a third year student. He has seen what was asked for but he fails to communicate it properly. No point.
So, yes, his mark for Art depends on his fluency in English, to some degree. He has to excel in hands on work to make up for poor English in his writing on Art.
The results of the Cambridge Checkpoint Tests May 2010 have been published in European Platform’s TTO-forum. My school, Ulenhofcollege, ranks fifth out of eleven, which is quite good. With a score of 3.8 a school has shown that their pupils have reached the B2 level of the CEFR in wreading and writing, we have a score of 4.1. CS Vincent van Gogh stands out at the first place with an overall score of 4.4. I wonder how they do it.