Creative Writing Scale
Creative Writing includes poetry, fiction, and humor.
Switch to Informational Writing
| | Style & Voice | Organization | Grammar & Mechanics |
|---|
| 10 | | | |
|---|
| 8 | | | |
|---|
| 6 | | | |
|---|
| 4 | | | |
|---|
| 2 | | | |
|---|
Please rate this article using the check box and sliders above. Submit your ratings to go to the next article.
As you move the slider, you will see an explanation of the currently selected rating in this box. You can see all the rating explanations as a table. Once you are familiar with the rating scale, feel free to hide this explanation box using the link below.
- Publisher's message is fully developed with complementary tone, noteworthy diction or visual techniques, and abundant detail
- Media is exceptionally crafted
- Supporting elements (maps, polls, videos, tables, product listings, etc) are present and enhance visitor engagement
- If relevant, contains excellent step-by-step instructions or insightful analysis
- Content is objective and includes concrete and vivid detail, and is not spammy
- Publisher's message is developed with correct tone and varied diction or visual techniques
- Media is high quality
- Supporting elements enhance visitor engagement
- If relevant, contains very good step-by-step instructions or useful analysis
- Content includes concrete and vivid detail, and is not spammy
- Publisher's message is partially developed despite unremarkable tone, diction or media techniques
- Content speaks to specifics, but contains some generalities
- Supporting elements, if present, do not distract the visitor
- If relevant, contains average step-by-step instructions or analysis
- Content is likely to be helpful, but may contain some spammy elements
- Publisher's message is burdened by inconsistent tone and tedious diction or media techniques
- Supporting elements, if present, at least do not distract the visitor
- Content relies on generalities rather than specifics
- Content is unlikely to be helpful, and may contain clearly spammy elements
- Publisher's message is indiscernible or nonexistent. Unnecessary emphasis is placed on keywords
- Media and supporting elements, if present, are a distraction
- Content is incomplete or simply filling space
- Content is not helpful, and may contain clearly spammy elements
Substance is a measure of the quality of the content and its presentation. Some things to consider:
- Is the content fully developed with complementary tone, noteworthy diction or visual techniques, and abundant detail?
- Are media assets included superb and original?
- Is the content free of spammy elements?
- The content contains smooth transitions within a logical, unified structure that emphasizes and supports the publisher's message
- Title is clear and specific, and very well supported by the content
- Descriptive, supportive headings are included
- Visually the content is very attractive
- All links, media, and supporting elements (including products) are relevant and complement the content visually
- The content contains a logical structure that supports the publisher's message
- Title is clear, but may be broad
- Necessary subheadings have been included and are descriptive and supportive
- Visually the content is attractive
- All links, media, and supporting elements (including products) are on topic and complement the content visually.
- The content contains structure but it is not developed well enough to fully support the publisher's message
- Title is good but broad
- Subheadings, if present, are relevant but do not add value
- Visually the content is average
- There may be links, media, and supporting elements (including products) that are only tangentially related to the topic, and they don't distract from the content visually
- The content may not contain a logical structure, reducing the impact of the message the publisher may have had
- Title is ok, but broad or not fully supported by the content
- Subheadings, if present, are not supported
- Visually the content may be below average
- links, media, and supporting elements (including products) are not directly related to the topic, and they may distract from the content visually
- The content may contain structure, but it is indiscernible or arbitrary.
- Title is not clear, specific, or supported by the content
- Subheadings, if they are present, are deceptive or distracting
- Visually the content is poor
- Otherwise, the content lacks any useful organizational elements.
Organization is a measure of scanability, visual appeal, and the general flow of the work. Some things to consider:
- Are the titles and subheadings specific, useful, and supported by the content?
- Is information presented using the most appropriate supporting elements and text formatting?
- Can you scan the page and quickly locate specific information?
- Is everything included in the page, such as links or feeds, necessary and relevant?
- Is the page visually appealing?
- All or nearly all language in accordance with standard usage
- Demonstrates an excellent command of the English language with well-chosen words and fluent sentences
- Deviations from standard usage are infrequent and minor, and do not significantly detract from the page
- Demonstrates a good command of the English language with appropriately chosen words and readable sentences
- Some significant or frequent minor deviations from standard usage, that begin to detract from readability or credibility of the page.
- There may be noticeable issues with word choice or sentence structure.
- The title may have minor grammatical errors
- Many significant deviations from standard, and while the page is still understandable, these errors detract from its readability or credibility
- There may be significant issues with word choice or sentence structure. The article may contain only phrases.
- The title may have significant grammatical errors or is nonsensical
- Abysmal grammar or profuse spelling, punctuation, and capitalization issues make the page very difficult to read or understand.
- The written content may be gibberish, generated artificially by a translation tool or an article spinning tool.
Mechanics refers to punctuation, spelling, and capitalization. Grammar refers to the way words are combined to form sentences. Some things to consider:
- Is the page mechanically sound?
- Are the sentences in the page complete?
- Are the subject and verb in agreement?
- Is the voice consistent and appropriate?
- Message is fully developed with complementary tone, noteworthy diction or visual techniques, and abundant detail
- Engaging; uses literary techniques in a creative and appropriate way (e.g. alliteration, metaphor, word play, irony, puns)
- Voice is confident and appropriate; a strong sense of both authorship and audience
- Unconventional; Surprises the reader with unusual associations
- Message is developed with correct tone and varied diction or visual techniques
- Solid work, but not thoroughly engaging
- Author's voice is discernible, but inconsistent
- May have a weak conclusion or more ordinary imagery and comparisons
- Message is partially developed despite unremarkable tone, diction or media techniques
- Apathetic voice; could have been written by almost anyone
- Sentimental, predictable, or cliché
- Message is burdened by inconsistent tone and tedious diction or media techniques
- Author's voice is completely indiscernible
- Not original; borrows ideas or images from popular culture in an unreflective way
- Mechanical and cognitive problems so basic that voice doesn't even figure in.
- Shallow or perfunctory effort
Style & Voice measures imagery, literary technique, sense of author, and the originality of presentation and message.
- Work functions well as a whole
- Piece has a clear flow and a sense of purpose
- Visually the content is very attractive
- Title is clever and/or thought-provoking
- Has either a strong lead, developed body, or satisfying conclusion, but not all three
- Visually the content is attractive
- Title is well thought out
- Uneven. Awkward or missing transitions. Weakly unified.
- Visually the content is average
- Title may be cliché.
- Wanders, repetitive, or inconclusive
- Visually the content may be below average
- Title is awkward or unoriginal
- Structure is indiscernible or arbitrary. Connection between the title and content is unclear.
- Visually the content is poor
Organization is a measure of structure, visual appeal, and the general flow of the work.
- With the exception of appropriate poetic license, all or nearly all language in accordance with standard usage
- For poetry intended to be of a specific form, meets all criteria of the form
- With the exception of appropriate poetic license, deviations from standard usage are infrequent and minor, and do not detract significantly from the work
- For poetry intended to be of a specific form, meets all or nearly all criteria of the form
- With the exception of appropriate poetic license, some significant or frequent minor deviations from standard usage that begin to detract from readability
- For poetry intended to be of a specific form, does not meet some of the criteria of the form
- Many significant deviations from standard usage, and while it is still understandable, these errors detract from its readability or credibility
- For poetry intended to be of a specific form, fails to meet many of the criteria of the form
- Abysmal grammar or profuse spelling, punctuation, and capitalization issues make this very difficult to read or understand
Mechanics refers to punctuation, spelling, and capitalization. Grammar refers to the way words are combined to form sentences. For poetry you may also consider adherence to the intended poetic form.