Assess the finished video

Submit a 30 to 60 second video, your brief, the export settings and a decision log. Score each category from 0 to 4 and multiply by its weight divided by 4.

Criterion	Weight	Evidence
Story and audience	20	The viewer and question are clear; the sequence reaches a useful ending.
Meaning and evidence	20	Claims, quotations and demonstrations remain accurate.
Pacing and continuity	15	Cuts preserve natural speech and essential action.
Text and accessibility	15	Captions and titles are correct and readable on a phone.
Sound	15	Voice and supporting sound are comfortable and intentional.
Picture and delivery	15	Framing, colour and the final file support the brief.

Four means strong; three mostly strong; two developing; one major work needed; zero missing or unusable. Suggested completion: 70 points, every category above zero, and no unresolved misleading claim, privacy issue or essential speech/caption error. Your account’s branding and permitted resolution limits do not reduce the score.

Story and audience

Strong: Clear purpose, supporting structure and a complete payoff.

Developing: Purpose exists but one section is confusing or redundant.

Needs revision: The viewer cannot identify the message or the ending does not answer it.

Meaning and evidence

Strong: Claims are supported; qualifications and important words survive.

Developing: Minor ambiguity needs correction without changing the whole story.

Needs revision: A misleading cut, false claim or incorrect critical caption changes the meaning.

Pacing and continuity

Strong: Clean joins, purposeful holds and no unintended gaps.

Developing: Some rushed or slow moments, but the sequence remains followable.

Needs revision: Missing action, clipped words or gaps prevent understanding.

Text and accessibility

Strong: Clear hierarchy, comfortable reading time and useful contrast.

Developing: A few crowded or brief captions need revision.

Needs revision: Essential text is missing, unreadable or covers the demonstration.

Sound

Strong: Clear speech, controlled music and smooth starts and endings.

Developing: Occasional imbalance, but words are understandable.

Needs revision: Important speech is buried, distorted or cut off.

Picture and delivery

Strong: Important detail stays visible and the reviewed file plays correctly.

Developing: Minor framing or delivery issues need a final fix.

Needs revision: The wrong revision, failed playback or lost essential detail prevents use.

A worked scoring example

Here is an illustrative scoring example, not a result from a real student. A creator submits a 35-second notebook-wrapping tutorial. The opening shows the result, the steps are in the right order and the final file plays correctly. The second step is a little rushed, two captions are crowded and the music briefly rises above a quiet word. No claim or instruction is misleading.

The reviewer gives story 3 out of 4, meaning 4, pacing 3, text 2, sound 3 and delivery 4. The weighted scores are 15, 20, 11.25, 7.5, 11.25 and 15, for a total of 80. The work meets the suggested score threshold, but the reviewer still identifies useful revisions. A passing score means the learner demonstrated the core skill; it does not mean every detail is perfect.

Useful feedback would say: “At 00:16, the fold happens before I can see where the corner goes. Hold the close-up a little longer. At 00:22, split the two-line caption into shorter phrases. Keep the result preview because it makes the task clear.” The creator can then fix those moments without rebuilding the whole edit.

Now change the scenario: imagine the caption drops a crucial negative word and reverses a safety instruction. That is an essential accuracy problem, so the work needs correction even if the total score elsewhere is high. Do not average away an error that changes what the viewer is being told.

For your own review, write the evidence before the score. Record the exact exported revision you watched, then list one strength to preserve and two timestamped improvements. After revision, check the affected moments and the whole final file again. If you disagree with a peer's preference, return to the brief and the viewer's needs. The purpose of assessment is to improve the work, not to make every creator choose the same style.

Self-assessment and local progress are learning tools, not an externally accredited qualification. Use the workbook to record a human review and any resubmission.