A LOOSE grid system of review,(used on BBC Get Writing) 

(Useful if you are in a group writing to a challenge or group project.)

<<TITLE (is it eye-catching, relevant to story?)

BEGINNING (Does it hook you, lead into the story, relevance)

VOICE/VIEWPOINT (Does it come across well, show personality, is it right for the story, well handled?)

CHARACTERISATION & DIALOGUE (Do the personalities show up, are they stereotypes, are they right for the story?)

USE OF ENGLISH/STYLE (Does it read well? Imaginitive use of language/imagery/layout, does it show 'sparkle'? Are there spelling errors/typos/jarring grammatical errors)

DRAMA (Is there good use of action, enough tension/conflict?)

EMOTION (Are we swayed by the narrator and identify our emotions with the narrator?)

STORYLINE/PLOT (Is it evident? Is there a beginning,middle,end? Interesting/ original?)

THEME (What's the underlying meaning of the story? Was it evident? Understandable?)

ENDING (Are loose ends tied up? Are you let down? Was it expected/original?)>>

****************************************

Another Critting Grid from BBC Get Writing

(more in depth)

<<TITLE
Excellent, intelligent and original
Suited the story
Uninspired

OPENING
Excellent - confident, immediately engaging
Original and inventive
Promising but needs a hook
Unnecessarily confusing
Slow start lacking pace and punch
More suited to a novel than a short story

CHARACTERS
Excellent - strong, instantly involving
True to life & believable
Good main character - others weaker
Stock types - one dimensional
Lacking in realism
Unsympathetic - damages reader's involvement

PLOT
Strong, confidently handled & interesting
Original, holds interest, but needs 'bite'
Improves following a confusing start
Good idea but loses direction / dynamism

VIEWPOINT
Excellent-consistent, appropriate to the story
Good -consistent, but a different VPoint would've been more appropriate
Weak - VP shifts around for no particular reason, or authorial intrusion

SETTING (if applicable)
Excellent - evocative, adds an extra dimension to the mood
Good - well described, but does not add to the story
Weak - over-described irelevant detail

SUBTEXT
Excellent - depth & richness at both the micro (word and sentence) and macro (story) level.
Weak - everything has surface meaning only.

ACTION & PACE
Page turning quality of highest order
Good control and pace throughout
Not consistent: interest lost occasionally
Irrelevant detail distracts & slows the pace
Too involved: many questions unresolved
Lacks a good narrative line

LANGUAGE
Excellent - sensitive word-use
Fluent and easy to read
Good - but some sections weaker
More economy required - padded
Confused / awkward construction

DIALOGUE (if applicable)
Excellent - adds to story's vitality
Strong - deepens characters and enhances the plot
Authentic and convincing
Believable but could do more to add to characterization
Too mundane and/or unrealistic
Needed dialogue to create more reader involvement

ENDING
Totally apt, building to good climax
Competent
Disappointing: predictable / drifts / lacks any climax
Confused - effort to tie things together that fails

GENERAL 'FEEL'
Excellent - entertaining & satisfying throughout
Quality writing to the end
Generally a good read, but not consistent
Fair, but somewhat run of the mill
Some merit - a competent story
Subject / treatment has limited appeal
Level needs to be raised though effort acknowledged

PRESENTATION
Professional, clear, clean layout
Generally good - few errors
Deficiencies in: layout / syntax / punctuation / spelling / typing>>

(I have found these grids to be extremely useful when I want to try my hand at constructive critiquing.)

spidey