Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Chapter/2011/Feedback

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
General feedback about the
book chapter exercise

This page summarises general feedback about the Motivation and emotion book chapter exercise, 2011.

Marks[edit]

The mean mark was 73.5 for 2013 (without late marks)and 71.4 (with late marks), 73/100 for 2011, and 72/100 for 2010.

Example chapters[edit]

One good way to get further feedback is to look through some of the very good chapters, such as:

Also note the feedback that can be found on each chapter's talk page.

Marking criteria[edit]

Below are some general comments about this exercise.

Overall[edit]

  1. Overall, the standard was high. Many embraced the exercise and provided interesting, indepth chapters which clearly embraced the self-help book theme and, in so doing, demonstrated a good understanding of relevant theory and research.

Theory[edit]

  1. The best chapters were build on a solid understanding of relevant emotion and/or motivation theory in relation to the specific topic of interest.
  2. The best chapters provided critical analysis of theory, based on research and relevant argument.
  3. The best chapters provided conceptual diagrams, examples, and/or case studies.

Research[edit]

  1. This was probably the least well performed area. Not all chapters demonstrated clear evidence of a close reading of key research related to the topic area.
  2. Some chapters cited research but did not describe key studies in any particular depth (e.g,. methodology, results and implications).
  3. Some indicators of high performance in this area was reporting on results of meta-analyses, reporting about effect sizes, and including relevant summary tables and/or graphs about key research findings.

Written expression[edit]

  1. The quality of written expression varied widely - from highly professional, polished writing in full APA style through to weaker chapters which often lacked proofreading, clarity, and APA style.
  2. The best chapters combined theory/research content with additional learning features, such as captioned images, interwiki links, quiz questions, and links to further resources, such as videos.
  3. Image captions: These ranged from non-existent to minimal to more richly informative. But, generally, too little information was provided in image captions.
  4. A focus on focus questions is the general introduction would have helped to improve many chapters.
  5. A focus on take-home messages in the summary section would have helped to improve many chapters.
  6. Rich formatting of the title heading was popular; in many cases this has been simplified to be compatible with book printing.
  7. Talk page engagement was often also a good indicator of the effort put into improving the expression of ideas to an audience.

More info[edit]

  1. Some more commonly repeated 2011 feedback is here: {{MEBF/2011}}
  2. 2010 general feedback

See also[edit]