The Proof of Brain Word of the Week contest, created by @calumam, is a popular event. It challenges people to write articles specifically addressing a challenge word presented each week. As if that wasn't challenging enough, Cal decided to add something extra to the mix...
Introduction
Welcome fellow Hivians to Word of the Week - decoded. In today's post, we're going to speak about the extra challenge added by @calumam.
I'm talking about the Word of the Week Grading Criteria. It consists of 9 separate categories we grade each article against. When I saw it, the criteria reminded me of every exam I take at school and work. I saw it for what it was immediately.
An Experiment of Community
Can the HIVE adjust its writing to meet a goal? Can content creators align their writing to engage the reader? I've learned over the last two weeks that, yes, we can.
The results have been amazing. I have been moved by many of your posts...dozens, actually.
People became highly engaged in each article, and there was an observable change in the quality of articles each week. It's taking much longer to scrutinize your work, and that's a good thing. It means you're focusing on the reader. You're trying to capture and engage the reader in your story—a story centered around a topic you did not choose.
A story you want to bring to life in the minds of those around you. Before we can reach that level, however, we must challenge ourselves to adapt.
Without further adieu, the following section sheds light on the criteria we use when reviewing your work.
Evaluating - Decoded
We are human. We err, and such is the way of life. Cal wrote the grading criteria, and I wrote my interpretation of the bases to that criteria. The bases originate from a review of multiple resources referenced in the title where applicable.
Please help us to improve these tools by discussing them in the comments below.
Each category can be assigned a value of 0 - 5 though not all categories currently reach the 5th point ranking.
1-Title/Clickworthiness
| Point | Description |
|---|---|
| Fails to engage the reader to even click on the article | |
| Thumbnail relates to the title of the article. | |
| They will read an article reflective of its name by clicking the title. | |
| The thumbnail relates to the article's title. | |
| The title's wording draws readers' interest and entices them to step into the author's world. | |
| The title and thumbnail stand out among others. | |
| Its catchy wording and visual imagery distract the user from other relevant articles. | |
| Draws the reader to click on the article regardless of content. | |
| The title and thumbnail stand out among them all. | |
| The reader gets drawn to clicking on the link despite their own intents. |
2-Grammar/Writing
| Point | Description |
|---|---|
| Continuous errors. | |
| These errors disconnect the user from the content presented by the creator. | |
| Grammar, spelling, and syntax errors are still present to a sufficient degree that disconnects the user from the content created. | |
| Errors exist randomly throughout the content. | |
| It's distracting but doesn't permanently disconnect the reader with the content. | |
| A few errors may exist in grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation. | |
| Errors do not present much of a distraction, if at all, to the user. | |
| Excellent grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation. | |
| RARE distractions may occur in the article. | |
| Perfect grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation. | |
| There are no distractions to the user related to grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation. |
3-Formatting
| Point | Description |
|---|---|
| Chaotic formatting throughout the article. | |
| No clear flow of writing or organization. | |
| Article formatting is inconsistent, disorganized, and prevents the reader from connecting with the writer's message. | |
| There may be formatting issues in the article that distracts the reader, but it is minimal. | |
| Example: Pasting website links within a passage without using markdown language. | |
| Formatting is consistent and easy to read. | |
| Formatting follows the writer's narrative. | |
| The layout of the article and its presentation keep the reader engaged and asking for more. |
4-Imagery
| Point | Description |
|---|---|
| No images included in the article. | |
| Image used conveys nothing about the article. | |
| The images provided appear related to the content. | |
| The images reflect the writer's topic. | |
| It allows the user to anticipate the topic's discussion or prepare them for the creator's delivery. | |
| The images draw the reader into the content. | |
| Images are appealing enough to keep the reader engaged and intent on learning about the content. | |
| It presents a visual story to the reader. |
5-Informative
| Point | Description |
|---|---|
| Little or no discussion on any topic. | |
| The article is meandering and not specific to any topic. | |
| Article consists of rambling passages. | |
| The article's topic is discussed to a degree by the writer. | |
| They either list information do not give complete information. | |
| The article's topic is discussed to a degree by the writer. | |
| Some inconsistencies may exist that the article doesn't address. | |
| The article's information is developed and engages the reader. | |
| Article is developed. | |
| The writer introduces the topic and takes the reader on an informative journey. | |
| The writer asks questions that intrigue the reader enough to challenge or add to the conversation. | |
| Very well-developed introduction and article body. | |
| The writer engages the reader and creates interest. | |
| The author's point is clear about the focus of the article and presents it effectively. |
6-Creative
| Point | Description |
|---|---|
| A straight-forward discussion on the topic. | |
| "Just the facts" with no opinion or engagement with the reader. | |
| The article's topic is discussed to a degree by the writer and may lack creativity. | |
| The article presents opinions or facts with little or no discussion. | |
| The article's topic is discussed to a degree by the writer. | |
| Discusses views in passing versus directly. "I think this is the way it goes," and moves on. Doesn't expand upon their thoughts. | |
| Presents some innovative thinking and attempts to connect with the reader at a personal level. | |
| Writing is creative to a degree. The writer presents new and imaginative ideas. Good writing. | |
| Writing is creative. Ideas and style guide the reader along with the story. | |
| Writing is extremely creative. | |
| Ideas and style are refreshing and imaginative. Talented writing. | |
| The read is pulled into the storyline and experiences the writer's point of view. |
7-Perspective
| Point | Description |
|---|---|
| No perspective or point of view exists in the article. | |
| The reader is reviewing opinions and facts alone. | |
| The writer's perspective is unclear at times. | |
| Shifts in dialogue. | |
| Difficult for the reader to interpret the writer's meanings. | |
| The writer's perspective is much clearer, but there are a few inconsistencies. | |
| Perspective on the topic is clear and easily detected by the reader. | |
| The writer's POV is consistent throughout the article. |
8-Personality
| Point | Description |
|---|---|
| No personal touches to the article exists. | |
| The background details provided are a random collection of information that is unclear to the reader. | |
| Little personality exists. What does exist is still random. | |
| Some personal touches to the article exists. | |
| The background details provided appear random, but it adequately demonstrates the author's personal views about the subject matter. | |
| Article shares relevant information, facts, and experiences. | |
| The author guides the reader on a personal journey of opinion and feelings. | |
| Writing is honest, enthusiastic, and unafraid. | |
| Supporting details are relevant | |
| The language is thought-provoking and tells a personal story. | |
| The author is unafraid of sharing their emotions or providing feedback to the community about them. |
9-Affinity
| Point | Description |
|---|---|
| The author's article would not appear to synch with the reader for any number of reasons. | |
| The reader is not engaged in the story and does not feel connected to the author. | |
| The author's article may appear to synch with the reader briefly at least once during the reading. | |
| The reader may be engaged in the story. | |
| An affinity between the author and reader may exist briefly but quickly passes. | |
| The article allows the user to understand the author's point of view throughout the reading. | |
| Moments of detachment may occur for one reason or another. | |
| The article allows the user to know the author's point of view and understanding throughout the reading. | |
| The author's writing compels the user to step into their shoes and observe the world as they see it, feel it, and interact with it. |
The Method
- We review articles individually and assign them a grade according to the rubric.
- Contestants get automatically ranked by order of their points total.
- If ties occur among the contests, then the articles get compared to each other.
- In my case, I would compare the articles with similar grades and then make a recommendation.
Despite the controls we use, unfortunately, problems do occur.
Plagiarism
We check for it—every article. No excuses. Plagiarism is a universally detested behavior both IRL and on the blockchain.
Please make sure you reference your work according to the expectations of the blockchain.
- Do not use someone else's work without citing it in the body of your writing.
- If you wish to include a list of references at the end of the article, no problem. However, we need to see where you are citing them in the article.
- We use a combination of automated tools with manual searches.
- Indications of plagiarism will be met by immediate DV. The community expectation should be to include a comment about the DV reason.
Users DV'd for plagiarism have options:
- Speak courteously to the person assigning a DV. Ask for an explanation if one is not already assigned.
- Accept the feedback, correct the article and, if necessary, let the person assigning the DV know.
- I will normally reverse a DV on the first instance. It won't happen, or should happen, a second time.
No one is under ANY obligation to remove a DV. The moral of the story is that if you're new or unaware of the acceptable behaviors, then ASK!
The blockchain has a vested interest in your success. I feel that we would all love to help and guide versus search for inconsistencies that speak of fraud.
If you are new or unfamiliar with HIVE, you have options for learning available.
#TheTerminal
@brittandjosie and other awesome people at @theterminal run the group #TheTerminal. They've been a great help to me during my time here and were among the first people to respond on that fateful day when I wrote my introductory post.
If you want an idea of a great group for new users, you only need to look in their direction to start your journey.
In Closing
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay
Thank you for reading and following on throughout my Hive journey.
What are your thoughts on the grading criteria? Let's discuss this below!
If you like this article, please consider upvoting and subscribing to @scholaris!
