Level 5 — Advanced · Technical & Evidence-Based Writing
Task 65: Writing an Evaluation with a Named Criterion
Write a comparison that names its criterion before judging — never calling something 'better' without saying better at what, the way Lesson 65 taught you to read.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this task, you should be able to:
- Name the specific criterion behind a comparative claim before making it
- Support the evaluation with evidence that matches the stated criterion
- State a trade-off the 'better' option still carries
Introduction
Lesson 65 taught you never to accept "better," "effective," or "successful" as complete on their own — always ask better at what, effective for what purpose. This task asks you to write an evaluation that names its criterion up front, rather than leaving the reader to guess it.
The Rule, for Writing
Core Concept
State the criterion first ("in terms of speed," "for reliability"), then the comparative claim, then evidence that actually matches that criterion — not evidence for a different dimension used to support an unrelated claim. Close with one honest trade-off.
Example
In terms of processing speed, the new system is clearly better: it handles transactions in half the time. In terms of setup cost, however, it is worse — the initial investment is nearly triple the old system's.
Your Turn
Your Turn
Compare two real or realistic options from your field (two tools, two methods, two vendors). Name your criterion explicitly before judging, support the claim with evidence matching that exact criterion, and state one dimension where the "better" option is actually worse.
Vocabulary in Context
criterionnounformal
the specific standard used to judge something (মাপকাঠি)
Often with evaluation criterion, meet the criterion, main criterion
“Cost was the main criterion used to compare the bids.”
trade-offnounneutral
a disadvantage accepted in exchange for an advantage (বিনিময়ে ত্যাগ)
Often with trade-off between, accept a trade-off, difficult trade-off
“The cheaper option involves a trade-off in reliability.”
Model Answer
Show a model answer
In terms of accuracy, the automated inspection system is clearly better than manual checks: it catches nearly 98% of defects, compared with roughly 85% for a trained human inspector. In terms of upfront cost, however, it is worse — the equipment and calibration cost far exceed a year of manual inspection wages. For a facility processing high volumes daily, the accuracy gain likely justifies the cost; for a smaller operation, it may not.
Self-Check
Self-Check
- Did you name the criterion before making the comparative claim?
- Did your supporting evidence actually match the stated criterion, not a different one?
- Did you state one dimension where the "better" option is actually worse?
- Did you write directly in English, without composing the paragraph in Bangla first?
Next: Writing 66 — Writing a Calibrated Risk Statement: hedging a claim exactly as strongly as the evidence allows, no more and no less.