When writing reviews I attempt to go over a rubric I made for my writing, here it is… I would love to hear some insight into what you thought about it?
|Flow/Spark||Are enough words used to be clearly understood but not too many as to make it boring. |
Do you bring along the reader into your world… or just start the review in mid sentence of a thought…
|Shares a definite POV|
Transparent in Political Allegiances
|One can easily tell the POV of the author. The author shares where they are coming from.|
|Digestible by everyone, anyone, not just lit or history majors||One does not need a degree in Political Science or History to understand the book.|
|Usefulness||Was the review Useful? Research needed to see what makes a useful review.|
Author shares the motivation that was there to begin to read book.
Author outlines the evidence collected in telling the tale.
|Word Choice||How well did you communicate|
Do you have a mixture of 8th Grade and Collegiate Words
Did you define all uncommon words.
|Sparking Interest in Buying Book: |
Why they need the book.
|Did you answer why would anyone be interested in this subject?|
Are their links to outside resources?
Quotes outside authors and their material.
|Desire to share with others||The Reviews rewarding enough to share with a friend without a fear of embarrassment. |
And not something the execs at Publix would frown on.
|KISS||Keep it simple short and sweet. Do not meander through the daisies|
|Title||Does Title both engage and clue in the perspective reader|
|Be Specific: Were assumptions made |
about collected knowledge, should not
be Publix but Publix Grocery Stores. No one in the PDX knows what Publix is….
|Integrity||Are the examples real or are you attempting |
to look smarter than you are?