Word of the Week - Decoded

in Proof of Brain5 days ago (edited)

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...

binary-4791836_1280.jpg
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

POB.png

Introduction

human-740259_1280.jpg
Image by 22612 from Pixabay

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.

POB.png

An Experiment of Community

hands-2888625_1280.jpg
Image by cocoparisienne from Pixabay

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.

POB.png

Evaluating - Decoded

Grading.PNG
Calumam - Outrageous WOTW

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

PointDescription
0
Fails to engage the reader to even click on the article
1
Thumbnail relates to the title of the article.
They will read an article reflective of its name by clicking the title.
2
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.
3
The title and thumbnail stand out among others.
Its catchy wording and visual imagery distract the user from other relevant articles.
4
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

PointDescription
0
Continuous errors.
These errors disconnect the user from the content presented by the creator.
1
Grammar, spelling, and syntax errors are still present to a sufficient degree that disconnects the user from the content created.
2
Errors exist randomly throughout the content.
It's distracting but doesn't permanently disconnect the reader with the content.
3
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.
4
Excellent grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation.
RARE distractions may occur in the article.
5
Perfect grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation.
There are no distractions to the user related to grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation.

3-Formatting

PointDescription
0
Chaotic formatting throughout the article.
No clear flow of writing or organization.
1
Article formatting is inconsistent, disorganized, and prevents the reader from connecting with the writer's message.
2
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.
3
Formatting is consistent and easy to read.
Formatting follows the writer's narrative.
4
The layout of the article and its presentation keep the reader engaged and asking for more.

4-Imagery

PointDescription
0
No images included in the article.
Image used conveys nothing about the article.
1
The images provided appear related to the content.
2
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.
3
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

PointDescription
0
Little or no discussion on any topic.
The article is meandering and not specific to any topic.
Article consists of rambling passages.
1
The article's topic is discussed to a degree by the writer.
They either list information do not give complete information.
2
The article's topic is discussed to a degree by the writer.
Some inconsistencies may exist that the article doesn't address.
3
The article's information is developed and engages the reader.
4
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.
5
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

PointDescription
0
A straight-forward discussion on the topic.
"Just the facts" with no opinion or engagement with the reader.
1
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.
2
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.
3
Writing is creative to a degree. The writer presents new and imaginative ideas. Good writing.
4
Writing is creative. Ideas and style guide the reader along with the story.
5
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

PointDescription
0
No perspective or point of view exists in the article.
The reader is reviewing opinions and facts alone.
1
The writer's perspective is unclear at times.
Shifts in dialogue.
Difficult for the reader to interpret the writer's meanings.
2
The writer's perspective is much clearer, but there are a few inconsistencies.
3
Perspective on the topic is clear and easily detected by the reader.
The writer's POV is consistent throughout the article.

8-Personality

PointDescription
0
No personal touches to the article exists.
The background details provided are a random collection of information that is unclear to the reader.
1
Little personality exists. What does exist is still random.
2
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.
3
The author guides the reader on a personal journey of opinion and feelings.
Writing is honest, enthusiastic, and unafraid.
Supporting details are relevant
4
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

PointDescription
0
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.
1
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.
2
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.
3
The article allows the user to know the author's point of view and understanding throughout the reading.
4
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.

POB.png

The Method

quality-control-1257235_1280.jpg
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

  • 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.
    • @calumam will accept the recommendation, or he will not. Ultimately, it will be his decision regarding the awardees if ties occur.
    • @calumam also has final authority on individual or category grades. He may raise or lower someone's points based upon his own review of the article.

Despite the controls we use, unfortunately, problems do occur.

POB.png

Plagiarism

security-5199239_1280.jpg
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

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.

POB.png

#TheTerminal

board-2433982_1280.jpg
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

@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.

POB.png

In Closing

image.png
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!

POB Banner 5A.gif

POB.png


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Sort:  

I just learned about the grading system today cause its my very first time participating.
This isn't really a piece of cake from the analysis and subjects discussed lol.

I am just wondering and imagining using all this grading system for over 50+ articles published.
This can only mean that you guys are really doing so well and putting in all the efforts to ensure this contest is run smoothly.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

It's a fun effort...now. In the beginning, I was asking myself what in the heck I signed up for. And then I understood but doubted. That's when I wrote these things down and became a believer.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Hehehehhe, its funny how you asked yourself what you signed up for.
Glad you are doing well now


Posted via proofofbrain.io

I'm pretty good now. Thank you very much. Things flow more steadily once a project gets going.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

I've been wondering how these evaluations are being done but then thanks a whole lot for actually decoding it. I think this might subconsciously set a lot of people writing in the right path, I mean it's a whole lot of angle to focus on for the people who are writing or participating but then it's also a lot of work to grade more than 60 people participating every single week. My ratings have been decent and I never knew how it was graded until today. Awesome.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Well, I don't know that I can call it work. Reading is something I enjoy. I like reading people's points of view. The grading is a challenge to a degree. That so many people participate in it means they also enjoy the challenge itself.

By writing these bases down, everyone gets an insight into what I believe is @calumam's mind. Consider it a cheat sheet. I wonder though if the bases are written down now, if things will become more challenging...


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Irrespective of how you tend to enjoy it, I still believe that its quite the task and sometimes enjoying doing it makes it lesser of a task.

You're right, nevertheless things won't become more challenging. I think it'll become more comprehensive for the participants meaning you'll have even more tougher job to do as a judge.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

You have good points. I feel I stop enjoying the work when I come across potential plagiarism or blatant acts of it. Then the true detective/enforcement work begins. I definitely don’t enjoy that part.

I find this evaluation criteria very useful. It is something i hope to use as well for the hive naija weekly theme contest which should start next week.

Good work in explaining the various level. I think this should offer some form of clarity to those who need it


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Thank you very much. I'm glad you find it useful. It took a long time to develop it.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

It's almost the same evaluation process with the one I saw last week by calumam. Thanks for sharing this tho, it's helps to know the grader is expecting of an article


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Hello. It's actually the same thing. What I did here was to provide a breakdown by category and points to @calcumam's criteria. In this manner, you can shape the content of your article to address the criteria.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Merits system explained with admirable precision of details, @scholaris. What @calumam has been doing with POB - WOTW is not just another contest, it's an event!

Well done. Thanks for this, folks!


Posted via proofofbrain.io

I agree. It has become quite the event. Stay tuned for tomorrow's post on WOTW!


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Great input, well elaborated and Noted @scholaris.

Please we'll need more elaboration on the abuse of tag as well. I believe no one will ever want to get disqualified at one certain stage of the contest or the other. Thank you🙏


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Thank you very much for the feedback. I appreciate it. I think it will serve to make things much more interesting.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

thank you very much for the info you provide, this really helps me, especially I'm new to this community, with this info it's easier for me to classify my writing in today's competisi. again thank you very much @scholaris


Posted via proofofbrain.io

You are very welcome. Thanks go to you as well for your interest and participation. Also to @calumam for its creation.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Excellent analysis! Thank you for covering the topic of plagiarism so well! Thanks for the mention of our project, too! ✨

Thank you for the compliment and regarding the coverage of plagiarism. Tomorrow I touch on some groups monitoring plagiarism. I've got a soft spot for your guys. You do awesome work.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Great post... a pleasure to read, as always! I've been following for a while, and imagine I'll continue to. This 'decoder' for the contest grading criteria was exactly the information I needed to take first place in every WOTW contest I enter from now on. Fortunately for everyone, my work season has started, so I probably won't be entering for a few months.

In the meantime, I'll be checking out the competition, and using some of the POB voting power that calumam and the community were sweet enough to bestow on me. I was happy to give this a full upvote, even though you'd already earned quite a wad for this post with just 46 votes. Well deserved, I say, thank you!


Posted via proofofbrain.io

You are very welcome. We eagerly await your entry into the contest. I'm proud to have provided you with the tools for your eventual etymological domination!


Posted via proofofbrain.io

It is nice to see the operation of a transparent system, full of work and commitment.😊 Thanks. Greetings.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Thank you very much!


Posted via proofofbrain.io

I don't have anything to add. Same as you, when I have a paper due at school, I usually go over the rubric to read what they expect for the highest scores...then let 'em have it! Thanks for sharing!

By the way...I hope you enjoyed my take on the word this week...I wanted to be different....

I knew it! It...worked by the way. This time! LOL!


Posted via proofofbrain.io

Great post, mate! I really don't think there is any modification on your system to judge the articles. And now, its very clear to me all the points. Hope in next contests i upgrade my quality by now.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

oops

Now i know why I get 1, 3, 4, or even 0 on most of the columns

With this, I think I will have to adjust my entries, starting with the one for this week..hhehehhe

Thank you for explaining sir, I have been disturbing @espandorr's life over the meaning of each grading criteria..lol

Now his is free from my questioning claws because I have a bookmarked post that explains everything

Thanks again


Posted via proofofbrain.io

You are very welcome. That was the hope for these explanations. I’ve seen an impact of them already. I’m glad you approve.

this is a great grading system. nice of you to share as it help greatly to know what to focus on before going into the contest


Posted via proofofbrain.io

This publication is one of the best tools we have been given.
Now we will know what aspects we should take care of, what we should improve, and not only with the idea of winning the pob-wotw. No. I am sure that all these lines you list will serve us as guidelines to produce quality content at any time: attractive title, personality reflection, logical sequence of ideas, etc.
A gem!
That's why I give it a reblog.
Thanks for sharing it with us.


Posted via proofofbrain.io

This really sheds more light on the tables, Weldon @scholaris for the tireless and relentless hard work to make sure that everything goes as planned and that a week is not missed out.


Posted via proofofbrain.io