Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Trauma-informed therapy

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comment[edit source]

Hi, Whilst doing my chapter on the Wounded Healer paradigm, I came across this article on developmental trauma that I think may be helpful to your chapter development. Best of luck with your chapter: https://cptsdfoundation.org/2020/07/13/the-wounded-inner-child/

added resource[edit source]

Hi, I have added in a review that could be useful for this chapter in line with the research requests of using meta-analyses or literature reviews https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michael-Woodworth-5/publication/254734638_A_Review_of_Trauma-Informed_Treatment_for_Adolescents/links/54e38d680cf2b2314f5d7553/A-Review-of-Trauma-Informed-Treatment-for-Adolescents.pdf --Brianna Meddemmen (discusscontribs) 12:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Heading casing[edit source]

FYI, the recommended Wikiversity heading style uses sentence casing. For example:

Self-determination theory rather than Self-Determination Theory

Here's an example chapter with correct heading casing: Growth mindset development

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:25, 13 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

(ZaraU3077613 (discusscontribs) 22:49, 29 August 2021 (UTC) = ZaraU3077613 08:49, 30 August 2021 (UTC))Reply


Topic development feedback[edit source]

The topic development has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a general feedback page. Please also check the chapter's page history to check for editing changes made whilst reviewing the chapter plan. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Topic development marks are available via UCLearn. Note that marks are based on what was available before the due date, whereas the comments may also be based on all material available at time of providing this feedback.

Title[edit source]

  1. The title is correctly worded and formatted
  2. The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted

User page[edit source]

  1. Excellent - used effectively
  2. Description about self provided
  3. Consider linking to your eportfolio page and/or any other professional online profile or resume such as LinkedIn. This is not required, but it can be useful to interlink your professional networks.
  4. Link provided to book chapter

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Summarised with indirect link(s) to evidence
  2. Add direct links to evidence. To do this: View the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click "compare selected revisions", and then use this website address as a direct link to evidence for listing on your user page. For more info, see Making and summarising social contributions.
  3. We are targeting an international audience, so nation-specific help resources are not so useful.

Headings[edit source]

  1. Excellent
  2. See earlier comment about Heading casing
  3. Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic
  4. Use default heading formatting (e.g., avoid bold, italics, underline etc.)

Key points[edit source]

  1. Key points are underdeveloped or missing for most sections
  2. Avoid overcapitalisation (APA style) - more info
  3. For sections which include sub-section include key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings
  4. Overview:
    1. excellent explanation and overview of the topic
    2. maybe consider adding a statistic about % of people likely to experience trauma?
    3. also consider adding description of the problem and what will be covered
      1. focus questions
      2. an image
      3. an example or case study
  5. Direct quotes need page numbers (APA style) - even better, write in your own words
  6. Expand theory and research
  7. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters. This is particularly important for this chapter as there are several other chapters about closely related concepts.
  8. Consider including more examples/case studies
  9. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. hasn't been developed
    2. what might the take-home, practical messages be?
    3. in a nutshell, what are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title?

Figure[edit source]

  1. A figure is presented
  2. Caption uses APA style
  3. Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text
  4. Cite each figure at least once in the main text

References[edit source]

  1. OK
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. punctuation
    2. capitalisation
    3. doi formatting

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Excellent
  2. External links
    1. None added
    2. A link from the See also has been moved into this section

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:25, 13 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's UCLearn site. Written feedback is provided below, plus see the general feedback page. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below. If you would like further clarification about the marking or feedback, contact the unit convener.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a basic presentation.

Overview[edit source]

  1. Add and narrate an initial title/sub-title slide, to help the viewer understanding the focus and goal of the presentation.
  2. Create an engaging introduction to hook audience interest.
  3. Focus questions are presented.
  4. Establish a context for the topic, to help the viewer understand.
  5. Briefly explain why this topic is important.

Content[edit source]

  1. The presentation addresses the topic.
  2. An appropriate amount of content is presented - not too much or too little.
  3. The presentation is well structured.
  4. The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological theory.
  5. The presentation makes little to no use of relevant psychological research.
  6. The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice.
  7. Include citations.
  8. Check and correct grammar (e.g., R's -> Rs).

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A Conclusion slide is presented with very good take-home message(s).

Audio[edit source]

  1. The audio is easy to follow.
  2. The presentation makes good use of narrated audio.
  3. Audio communication is clear.
  4. Consider slowing down and leaving longer pauses between sentences. This can help the viewer to cognitively digest the information that has just been presented before moving on to the next point.
  5. Basic intonation. Consider using greater intonation to enhance listener interest and engagement.
  6. Audio recording quality was good. Probably the microphone is a bit too close (some buffeting).

Video[edit source]

  1. Overall, visual display quality is basic.
  2. The presentation makes basic use of text-based slides.
  3. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read.
  4. The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time.
  5. The visual communication could be improved by including some relevant images and/or diagrams.
  6. The presentation is basically produced using simple tools.

Meta-data[edit source]

  1. The chapter title and sub-title are missing from the name of the presentation - this would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  2. A written description of the presentation is not provided.
  3. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding.
  4. Links to and from the book chapter are provided.
  5. The presentation is incorrectly categorised as being for kids. This introduces limitations, such as being unable to add the presentation to a playlist. More info.

Licensing[edit source]

  1. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the presentation but not in the meta-data.
  2. A copyright license for the presentation is not provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Chapter review and feedback[edit source]

This chapter has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a general feedback page. Please also check the chapter's page history to check for editing changes made whilst reviewing through the chapter. Chapter marks will be available via UCLearn along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a basic chapter.
  2. Well under the maximum word count, so there is room to expand.
  3. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits.

Overview[edit source]

  1. Solid Overview.
  2. Explains the problem or phenomenon.
  3. Clear focus question(s).
  4. Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest.

Theory — Breadth[edit source]

  1. Relevant theory is reasonably well explained.
  2. The content about trauma can be summarised; cut to the chase. The key content starts with the section which is titled "Principles of trauma-informed care".
  3. How are the principles of trauma-informed care applied in the therapies discussed? Ideally, there were would be a more detailed match between the principles and the therapeutic practices discussed.
  4. Build more strongly on other trauma-related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters in this category: Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Trauma).

Theory — Depth[edit source]

  1. Reasonable depth is provided about the selected theory(ies).
  2. More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts.

Research — Key findings[edit source]

  1. Basic overview of relevant research.
  2. More detail about key studies would be ideal.
  3. Greater emphasis on effect sizes, major reviews, and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.

Research — Critical thinking[edit source]

  1. Insufficient critical thinking about research is evident.
  2. Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by:
    1. describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies
    2. discussing the direction of relationships
    3. considering the strength of relationships
    4. acknowledging limitations
    5. suggesting specific directions for future research
  3. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags).

Integration[edit source]

  1. Insufficient integration of theory and research.

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Key points are summarised.
  2. Add practical, take-home message(s).

Written expression — Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is good.
  2. Layout
    1. See earlier comments about heading casing.
    2. Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections.
  3. Grammar
    1. Use serial commas[1] - they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by grammaticists. Here's an explanatory video (1 min).
  4. APA style
    1. Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used as an ironic comment, as slang, or as an invented or coined expression; use quotation marks only for the first occurrence of the word or phrase, not for subsequent occurrences" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159).
    2. Figures
      1. Figure captions should use this format: Figure X. Descriptive caption in sentence casing. See example.
      2. Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).
    3. Citations use correct APA style.
      1. Do not include author initials.
    4. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation[2]
      2. Check and correct use of italicisation

Written expression — Learning features[edit source]

  1. Overall, the use of learning features is basic.
  2. Very good use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text more interactive. See example.
  3. No use of embedded in-text links to related book chapters. Embedding in-text links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project.
  4. Basic use of image(s).
  5. No use of table(s).
  6. No use of feature box(es).
  7. No use of quiz(zes).
  8. Some use of example therapies, but case studies or more examples would be ideal.
  9. Good use of interwiki links in the "See also" section.
  10. Basic use of external links in the "External links" section.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~1 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:06, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply