Psych2Go Script Evaluation Grading Scheme

This grading scheme is designed to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of scripts for Psych2Go projects. Each script will be assessed based on the following criteria, with a scoring system that reflects the importance of each element.

1. Hook Effectiveness (15 points)

Criteria: Voice out the hook and assess its impact. Would you genuinely want to continue listening after hearing the hook? Does it capture attention and spark curiosity?
Scoring:
13-15 points: The hook is highly engaging, compelling, and makes you eager to listen to the rest of the video.
10-12 points: The hook is somewhat engaging but could be more impactful.
7-9 points: The hook is average; it may not strongly capture attention.
0-6 points: The hook is weak or ineffective, failing to create interest.

2. Thesis and Introduction (15 points)

Criteria: Clearly identify the thesis or main insight. Does the introduction present the current stance on the topic and outline the direction the video will take?
Scoring:
13-15 points: The thesis is clear, insightful, and the introduction effectively sets up the topic and direction.
10-12 points: The thesis is somewhat clear, but the introduction could better establish the topic and direction.
7-9 points: The thesis is unclear or weak, and the introduction lacks direction.
0-6 points: The thesis is missing or poorly defined, and the introduction is ineffective.

3. Skeletal Draft and Point Selection (15 points)

Criteria: Have you created a structured outline of the points you’ll address? Are these points thoughtfully chosen based on research or personal insight?
Scoring:
13-15 points: The outline is well-structured with carefully chosen points based on thorough research or deep personal insight.
10-12 points: The outline is decent but could benefit from more structure or better point selection.
7-9 points: The outline lacks clarity, and the points seem randomly chosen or poorly justified.
0-6 points: The outline is missing or lacks coherence, and the points do not support the thesis well.

4. Subject Matter Understanding (15 points)

Criteria: How well do you understand the topic? Could you answer questions or provide further details if needed?
Scoring:
13-15 points: You have a deep understanding of the topic and can confidently speak as a subject matter expert.
10-12 points: You have a good understanding but might struggle with in-depth questions.
7-9 points: Your understanding is average; there are gaps in your knowledge.
0-6 points: Your understanding is weak; you may struggle to explain the topic beyond the basics.

5. Use of Analogies (10 points)

Criteria: How many analogies are used in the script? Are they effective and relevant? Do they enhance understanding?
Scoring:
9-10 points: The analogies are relevant, effective, and enhance the audience’s understanding.
7-8 points: The analogies are somewhat effective but could be more relevant or better explained.
5-6 points: The analogies are weak or not particularly useful.
0-4 points: Few or no analogies are used, or they detract from the content.

6. Credible Sources and References (10 points)

Criteria: How many credible sources or references are used? Are notable experts mentioned, and can you provide source links if needed?
Scoring:
9-10 points: Multiple credible sources are used, with notable experts mentioned and sources readily available.
7-8 points: Some credible sources are used, but there could be more depth or variety.
5-6 points: Few credible sources are used, or the references lack credibility.
0-4 points: No credible sources or references are used.

7. Engagement Strategies (10 points)

Criteria: What strategies did you use to keep people engaged throughout the script? Did you plan to relate your story to the audience’s struggles, use specific language, or include recent events?
Scoring:
9-10 points: Clear, effective engagement strategies were used, keeping the audience interested throughout.
7-8 points: Some strategies were used, but they could be more impactful or consistent.
5-6 points: The strategies used were weak or not particularly effective in keeping the audience engaged.
0-4 points: No clear engagement strategies were evident in the script.

8. Alignment with Psych2Go’s Mission (15 points)

Criteria: How well does the script align with what Psych2Go represents? Does it effectively help people with mental health issues? Is the company’s mission addressed cohesively in the introduction?
Scoring:
13-15 points: The script aligns strongly with Psych2Go’s mission, clearly addressing mental health and the company’s purpose.
10-12 points: The script aligns with the mission but could more clearly address mental health and the company’s goals.
7-9 points: The alignment is weak, with little connection to Psych2Go’s mission.
0-6 points: The script does not align with Psych2Go’s mission or purpose.

9. Actionable Steps and Character Inclusion (10 points)

Criteria: What actionable steps will you ask the audience to take? Is there a character in the script that requires design input from the team?
Scoring:
9-10 points: Clear, practical steps are provided for the audience, with a well-defined character concept for the design team.
7-8 points: Some actionable steps are included, but they could be more specific or impactful. The character concept is somewhat clear.
5-6 points: The steps are vague or not actionable, and the character concept is unclear.
0-4 points: No actionable steps or character concepts are included.

10. Challenges Faced (5 points)

Criteria: What was the hardest part of this project, and why was it difficult? Reflect on the challenges you encountered.
Scoring:
5 points: You clearly identified the challenges and provided thoughtful reflection on why they were difficult.
3-4 points: You identified some challenges but did not fully explore or reflect on them.
1-2 points: You provided a vague or superficial response to the challenges faced.
0 points: You did not identify any challenges.

11. Potential for Expansion (10 points)

Criteria: If you were to bring this topic to its full potential, what additional work or research would be needed? How much time or resources would be required?
Scoring:
9-10 points: You provided a detailed plan for expanding the topic, with clear resource and time requirements.
7-8 points: You have some ideas for expansion but lack detail or feasibility.
5-6 points: Your expansion ideas are vague or lack practicality.
0-4 points: No additional work or research is proposed.

12. Uniqueness and Market Saturation (15 points)

Criteria: Is this thesis or angle already covered by other YouTubers or content creators? What makes your approach unique?
Scoring:
13-15 points: The topic is unique, with at least 3 clear differentiators from existing content.
10-12 points: The topic has some unique elements but could be more distinct from existing content.
7-9 points: The topic is somewhat covered by others, with few unique aspects.
0-6 points: The topic is heavily saturated, with little to no differentiation from existing content.
Final Score Calculation:
Total Points: 130
Grade Breakdown:
117-130 points: Excellent – The script is well-crafted, insightful, and stands out in the market.
97-116 points: Good – The script is strong but may need some refinement in certain areas.
78-96 points: Average – The script has potential but requires significant improvement.
0-77 points: Needs Improvement – The script lacks key elements and does not meet the desired standards.

This grading scheme will ensure a comprehensive evaluation of scripts, considering both content quality and alignment with Psych2Go’s mission.”