No linked challenges.
No linked visions.
C.A.R.S Rating System
Massidea.org’s current rating system could be replaced with a more sophisticated rating system that caters for both peer and expert reviews. My idea is to apply web-based content evaluation method known as C.A.R.S.
What is C.A.R.S
C.A.R.S is a method which is used for e.g. evaluating the quality of web-based articles. It’s fairly easy to use. Although most articles do not fill every criterion mentioned, it will help to determined whether an article is good quality of not. C.A.R.S stands for the following: Credibility, Accuracy, Reasonableness and Support. These 4 elements could be used in Massidea.org by giving them 3 or more variables in order to make the elements more understandable and more easily rateable. In addition, more well-defined variables bring more added value to the entire evaluation/rating process from which both the service and its users benefit.
These values could be for instance:
Credibility: Authentic, Reliable, Believable
Accuracy: Factual, Detailed, Up-to-Date, Comprehensive
Reasonableness: Objective, Consistent
Support: Use of Sources, Corroboration
Reader could give e.g. 1-5 stars against one or more variables thus reviewing the article efficiently and more thoroughly.
What is the importance and who benefits
Both the Massidea.org service and the users benefit more from the C.A.R.S rating system than from the Thumbs system. Firstly it would make the service more sophisticated and not to mention more aligned and competitive with the modern content sharing solutions and services. Therefore Massidea.org would also be more credible and valuable tool for its users in regards of sharing, discussing and using content but also in terms of collaborating with others.
Readers having to evaluate content more extensively rather than just liking or disliking it, would also force them to actually internalise what is being communicated. More importantly this system would be a quick, more easy-to-use solution for readers to communicate their opinion about the content than the commenting function.
This rating system would provide short yet efficient data of the content quality for potential interest groups through peer review thus highlighting good quality content from the rest of the mass. Since the C.A.R.S rating system is based on several variables and on the values given against these variables by users, it would be easily implemented to the current Hall-of-Fame. This in return would bring further visibility to good quality content and good writers.
Let's complimented the ideas of "masscollaboration" and "massinnovation" with "massevaluation"
McGraw-Hill. 2011 Consulted at 11.04.2011 http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0079876543/student_view0/research_center-999/research_papers30/conducting_web-based_research.html
Your idea/solution in one sentence: Creating a more sophisticated rating system for Massidea.org
Do you a have better idea?
or
Would you like to comment?
Log in or Sign up
Comments