Evidence-Grounded Judgment
Whether every evaluative judgment is paired with a specific pointer to an actual location or detail in the work that grounds it
The five levels
Each anchor describes what separates one level from the next — not a general description of quality. This is the text the evaluator itself reads.
-
Level 1 Below Standard
Every judgment is unmoored with no pointer to the work at all ("very beautiful", "a weak piece")
Example "This is a strong text" without naming any line or element grounding the claimed strength
-
Level 2 Approaching
Some judgments carry a general pointer ("the composition as a whole"), not a specific checkable detail
Example "The characters are convincing" without naming any specific character or scene
-
Level 3 At Standard
Most judgments are paired with a specific pointer (a position, a line, a color, a scene) traceable in the work
Example "The dialogue in the third scene reveals character without being preachy" — a specific pointer grounds the judgment
-
Level 4 Above Standard
Nearly every judgment is grounded in a specific piece of evidence, and the evidence itself is precise and literally verifiable in the work
Example Quotes a literal phrase from the text or describes a precise visual location before judging it
-
Level 5 Exemplary
Every single judgment without exception is grounded in specific evidence, and the evidence is chosen to build a coherent critical argument rather than a scattered list of observations
Example Every piece of evidence serves a single argumentative thread building toward the critique's conclusion
Where does your own work sit on these levels?
Submit one work to be read against this criterion alone: your position across the five levels, why you are not higher and why not lower, three literal quotes from your own work, and one exercise with its success check. Your first card is free.
Price: 7 SAR · Included in Pro & Artist Plus · First one free — Pricing details
Read my work by this criterionOther criteria in the same art
How clearly the critique distinguishes "what is in the work" (description) from "my opinion of it" (judgment), rather than blurring them in one undifferentiated sentence
The five levels →How closely the work's details the critic describes (color, shape, composition, word, rhythm) match what is actually present in the work
The five levels →Whether the critique goes past the first impression to uncover relationships or causes not obvious on the surface, rather than stopping at surface-level description
The five levels →The critic's distinction between "what is seen in the work" and "what it is presumed to mean or symbolize", and whether the move from the first to the second is signalled
The five levels →Whether the critic's judgments hold together across the text, rather than contradicting themself evaluating the same element or equivalent elements
The five levels →Whether evidentiary grounding is sustained throughout the text, rather than concentrated in one paragraph while the rest of the critique is unmoored judgment
The five levels →The critic's use of the discipline's own terms (composition, rhythm, contrast, plot, maqam...) with their precise conventional meaning in that art, rather than as loose metaphor
The five levels →Whether the critic explicitly distinguishes between what is personal taste preference and what is judgment grounded in a general, defensible artistic standard
The five levels →