Review Philosophy: to
be consistently practical and fair in our judging.
Our goal was to form a review process with an inherent consistency. To accomplish this, we chose to use a standard format. We then decided to limit the depth of evaluation to a simple three step resolution: Good (3) - Average (2) - Bad (1). There is a fixed numeric value for each step (as shown in parentheses) and these will add to form a total score for the review. Lyrics will be qualified by their score. The lyrics with the highest scores win. In the event of a tie, the judges will use their own discretion to chose the winner. Ties are possible, but we are looking for the best #1 [ Gold medal ]. In the future, if we have enough submissions, we might present in addition to the Gold medal [#1], the runners up of Silver [#2] and Bronze [#3].
After winning lyrics are picked, by their high scores, the judges will
add their personal comments and observations. This is where you get to
share in their experience and talent. These comments offer us insight as
to why they felt these lyrics were winner. Judges humor is appreciated
and is to be expected. Remember we're going to keep it light, not intense,
yet serious, but not too serious: you know, FUN.
Remember:
= well developed
[ Good ] ( 3 )
= adequately developed [ Average ] ( 2 )
= under developed
[ Bad ] ( 1 )
These are the marks which may be assigned while evaluating the merit of each of the following lyric elements. As each element is reviewed, the judge will assign a mark of the appropriate value. To determine an appropriate value for each of the elements, the judge will consider several questions. The lyric elements and their specific questions are outlined below.
|
9 Total Score |
This one made me really laugh. The words were well chosen and quite thoughtful. The way in which it rhymed was very creative. All in all, I enjoyed these lyrics and feel as though I could easily hear them in a song. Keep it up Mumbles
and send us some more.
|