Short Story CriteriaCriteria for short stories
Evaluation criteria - short story competition
If you take part in the competition, your story will be numbered and the judge will just match your story by name and number. The criteria are described in detail below. Once the tales have been reviewed by the judge, the tales, which on board received an 80% or better score, should be forwarded to the second session.
In the second readings, referees should reread all the top 20% assays and have a moderate debate on their contents and value before the vote. Default short story style (12 point fonts, borders, etc.), as well as orthography, punctuation, language and use.
It'?s the frame of history. The development of history (points for originality/innovability). This is the basic story which is unveiled through action, dialog and imagery. A sound that is appropriate to the story and the story, that is clear and interesting and communicates the atmosphere or "feeling" of the story very well. These 10% should only be given to articles that really impressed the reader, and these articles should probably make it to second readings.
Evaluating short novels | Composing short novels, consulting a schoolteacher for creativity and creativity
Once I was contacted by an organization that ran a short story contest and asked if I could suggest a "points system" to evaluate a short story - points for story storyline, styles, characterization, etc. I was asked if I could use the points system. Surely I have not used such a system in evaluating my students' work, and I trust that this paper could calm anyone who has the feeling that I have in the other papers tend to judge a story in this way.
Belles lettres is an artwork and cannot be assessed as we might assess responses to mathematical or general enquiry issues that may be "right" or "wrong". The important aspect of a story, such as story storyline, characterization, point of views, styles and so on, but trying to evaluate a story primarily according to these criteria is to assess it from the false end.
The story must be evaluated according to its own merit and as a whole. The different histories differ so much from each other that it is not possible to take over a firm catalogue of criteria. When it worked, I could then say that it worked because the story or characterization or styles etc. were well managed, and when it didn't work, I could say that one or the other area, like story or characterization or styles, had let it down.
History as a whole came first, and I only used those subsidiary criteria when they were important characteristics of that particular story, and I could use them to tell why a story had worked or not. If a story works or not, depends on whether it convinces, whether it attracts you into its universe, whether you find it thrilling or touching, whether you bring the character to life as true human beings, whether you have the feeling to have learnt something, or whether you had fun in the end, or whether you just liked it.
It felt like the organization that tried to evaluate short story by using impartial norms was doing things in an unreasonable way. Readers' personal experiences should be the most important clue as to whether a story works or not, and then, for example to write a review, comment on a student's story or evaluate a contest, we can discuss issues such as storyline and characterization when appropriate to the story in question.
Assuming the jurors of a contest are seasoned reader who can express what they like or dislike about a story, and provided there is a jury and not just one individual, there is no need why they should not be primarily led by their own story subjectivity.