It needs to be clearer

I was quite upset with the performance of one of my 4N pupils when he took his Art Paper 2 Exam and I gave him my immediate feedback on what he had not done (e.g. he was only effectively using 1/3 of the exam time to do his work), or what he could have done a whole lot better right after the paper had ended. I told him straight that with his current level of performance, he is not going to come close to even passing this paper when he sits for his 'O's next year.

What upsets me more is that this is a decent pupil, someone who had never once given me any sort of behavioural problem. He may not be the fastest in getting the point, but he puts in effort to keep up with the expectations and is always respectful to his teachers and peers. I can see that he felt really bad after hearing my feedback and had not once lifted his head the whole time.

I did whatever I thought was logical. Showing him exactly where he had done wrong, with visual reference to some of the much better examples his peers had produced so that he can see and realise the gaps. And specifically what he can do about it to get better. All the same kind of feedback which I had dispensed the previous time he had done poorly in a similar assessment.

I do not believe that the pupil did not want to get better. It is very likely that the pupil just did not truly understand exactly what he should do. And this clarity of instruction got to come from me. Rubrics, feedback, follow-up, practice. How can I be clearer at each stage for this minority group of pupils who have a greater challenge in comprehension? This is a question I always have to ask myself. If pupils do not gain value from our feedback, we cannot blame them for non-performance.