Discussing poetic works is usually conducted entirely verbally. The rating of a poem on various attributes is almost always done by verbal quantifications such as  ‘extremely powerful’ or ‘poor choice of words’ or  ‘largely lacking in coherence’. Annalisa can enhance this discourse by providing the opportunity to express such assessments of a poem’s quality in relation to particular attributes (e.g. coherence, rhyme) separately from the respondent’s preferences in relation to those attributes – and see why different people may respond very differently to the same work. This is not ‘reducing aesthetic judgment to numbers’, it is making slightly more explicit and more precise what is implicit and less precise and hopefully expanding the conversation. The attributes in the following hypothetical example are drawn from

http://poetrymagic.co.uk/critiquing.html

alt file here