Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Multimedia

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Multimedia - Creator guidelines

Online multimedia presentation to accompany the book chapter


Summary[edit | edit source]

Record and share an online multimedia presentation up to 3 minutes long about a unique, specific motivation or emotion topic, focusing on key problem(s) and answer(s) in psychological science. Address the same topic as covered by the book chapter. Worth 20%.

Overview[edit | edit source]

Create and share an online multimedia presentation which engagingly explains the problem and possible solutions suggested by psychological theory and research for the motivation or emotion topic covered in the book chapter.

Learning outcomes[edit | edit source]

How this assessment exercise addresses the learning outcomes:

Learning outcome Description
Be able to integrate theories and current research towards explaining the role of motivation and emotions in human behaviour. The multimedia exercise requires concise communication about key psychological theories and research for a specific topic. Visualisation of ideas and examples are encouraged, to help illustrate how relevant theories and research apply to understanding human behaviour.

Guidelines[edit | edit source]

Follow these guidelines in preparing a Multimedia presentation (and address the marking criteria):

  1. Overview: The presentation should explain the motivation or emotion problem, key points (related to theory and research), and emphasise practical, take-home messages.
  2. Style and format:
    1. The style is open - for example, the presentation could be in third person, second person, or first person narrative point of view.
    2. The format is open - for example, the presentation could be a screencast, slidecast, animation, or video.
    3. The emphasis should be on effectively communicating key psychological ideas using basic online multimedia tools.
    4. The presentation should serve as a "stand alone" work. The audience should not need to read the chapter in order to understand the key ideas. Avoid repeated references to the chapter, although the presentation should be hyperlinked to the chapter for further information.
  3. Platform:
    1. The recording should be available for public viewing online by streaming using a web browser (i.e., without having to login or download and play locally).
    2. The choice of hosting location for the recording is open. A common method is to create narrated slides using software such as Microsoft Powerpoint and to then export a video file to a hosting platform such as YouTube. Other potential methods and hosting spaces are listed here.
  4. Scripting: Better quality productions tend to be scripted beforehand and involve at least a few takes.
  5. Equipment: The recommended equipment for creating, recording, and sharing a multimedia presentation is a:
    1. recording device (e.g., computer, tablet, or phone) connected to the internet
    2. microphone (better sound quality will be achieved with an external microphone (rather than an inbuilt/onboard microphone).
  6. Length:
    1. 3 minutes (max.). Beyond 3 minutes will not be counted for marking purposes.
    2. No minimum.
  7. Attribution:
    1. Acknowledge academic sources used in the presentation in a list of APA style references (e.g., at the end of the presentation and/or in the description field).
    2. Make sure that permission is obtained to re-use any copyright restricted content in the presentation (e.g., images) and acknowledge the sources of such content (e.g., in the presentation and/or in the description field).
  8. Copyright:
    1. Indicate a copyright license (e.g., at the beginning or end of the presentation and in the description or license field).
    2. Preferably apply a Creative Commons license (e.g., Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International) so that it can be re-used. Alternatively, if all rights reserved copyright is preferred, then this should be indicated.
  9. Links:
    1. Provide a clickable, working hyperlink from the multimedia presentation to the online book chapter (e.g., from the description field).
    2. Provide a link from the book chapter to the multimedia presentation (by adding {{MECR3|1=the website address}} underneath the title).
  10. Submission: Submit the chapter URL (website address) and Wikiversity author name into the assignment drop-box via UCLearn.

Marking criteria[edit | edit source]

Balanced scales.svg

Multimedia presentations will be marked according to these criteria:

  1. Structure and content (30%):
    1. Overview (10%): Outline focus question(s) and/or the purpose of the presentation. Consider introducing a specific, "real-world" problem or case study.
    2. Selection and organisation (10%): Explain the application of relevant motivation or emotion theory(ies) and research to the problem
    3. Conclusion (10%): Provide practical take-home message(s). Take-home messages are very brief summaries of what the best available psychological science says about the sub-title question. They can also be practical, self-help, implementation-type messages.
  2. Communication (50%):
    1. Audio (25%):
      1. Clear, well-paced, engaging style of audio communication. A common mistake is to verbalise too many technical words and concepts too quickly and in a monotone manner.
      2. Speaking rate: Target 125 to 150 words per minute for public speaking. In other words, develop a script that is no longer than 450 words to fit within the 3 minute maximum. More info: [1] [2]
      3. Some excellent examples of short, clearly explained audio about scientific findings can be found on the Great Moments in Science ABC Radio National podcast by Dr Karl Kruszelnicki. For example: What we know about misophonia, the 'hatred of sounds'.
    2. Video (25%):
      1. Clear, easy-to-grasp, interesting style of visual communication. A common mistake is to present too much text and/or use font which is too small.
      2. Consider supplementing text-based visuals with tables, pictures, and/or diagrams. But also try to avoid over-complicated visuals because it can be difficult for a viewer to simultaneously process audio and video.
  3. Production quality (20%):
    1. Meta-data (5%): Accurate title and sub-title (i.e., matches the book chapter), informative description, copyright license, and links to and from the book chapter
    2. Audio recording quality (5%): Clearly audible with minimal background noise (e.g., use a microphone)
    3. Video recording quality (5%): Clearly visible (e.g., not too light/dark, good resolution, not blurry or jerky).
    4. Licensing (5%):
      1. Copyright ownership and licensing for the presentation is clearly indicated (as appropriate to the hosting platform) - options include all rights reserved and Creative Commons licenses (e.g., see Figure 1).
      2. Provide evidence of permission to re-use any material copyright restricted by others. A common mistake is to re-use copyrighted images without permission and acknowledgement.
Figure 1. Example of a YouTube video which has been published with a Creative Commons Attribution license and which explains the copyright source for images used.

Grade descriptions[edit | edit source]

This marking rubric describes typical characteristics of multimedia presentations at each grade level:

Grade Description
HD (High Distinction) An excellent, professional multimedia presentation which effectively communicates how key concepts from motivation and/or emotion theory and research can be applied to a specific, applied problem. The presentation is well-scripted, well-paced, and clearly structured. Audio and video quality are excellent. Engages the viewer and retains interest. Clear take-home message(s). Production quality makes effective use of simple tools.
DI (Distinction) A very good multimedia presentation. Key concepts are well covered and summarised. The presentation is well-scripted. The presentation may be more pedestrian or lacking in quality of insight or production compared to HD presentations. Nevertheless, the presentations provides a valuable and useful overview of key relevant theory and research about the topic.
CR (Credit) The presentation does a competent job of informing the viewer about key theory and research about a specific topic. Unlike higher-grade presentations, this presentation has some notable flaw(s) or omission(s) in either content (e.g., coverage may be unbalanced) and/or style (e.g., too fast) and/or an aspect of production quality (e.g., audio background noise) which may make it somewhat difficult for a viewer to follow. Nevertheless, the presentation successfully communicates the main information.
P (Pass) The presentation is sufficient as a basic recorded presentation of key psychological science theory and research in relation to an applied problem. However, these presentation are typically rudimentary (e.g., minimalistic text-based slides with narrated audio) and/or pedestrian (e.g., rapid, monotone verbalisation of dot-points) and may also exhibit technical problems (e.g., poor sound quality). The presentation likely lacks depth of insight about the topic and often doesn't provide illustrative examples (or overly indulges in a specific example) or can be overly detailed and lacking in selectivity of key content. Nevertheless, the presentation succeeds in communicating the main ideas in an understandable manner. The presentation is unlikely to be well planned or scripted and may be too long or short.
F (Fail) The presentation does not provide a sufficiently indepth an/or watchable overview of the problem and what is known from a motivation or emotion theory and research point of view. There may be little or poor preparation of material and/or poor production quality. The presentation may attempt to compensate for a lack of adequate content by overly focusing on a narrow aspect of the topic and thereby missing the overall target. Technical problems may include poor quality picture, audio, or both. The presentation is typically frustrating for a user to watch because it is difficult to understand the presentation's purpose and/or to learn from the presented material.

Submission and marking process[edit | edit source]

  1. Submit the chapter URL (website address) and Wikiversity author name into the assignment drop-box via UCLearn
  2. Submissions will be evaluated according to the marking criteria.
  3. Late submissions will be penalised -5% per day late, up to 7 days late. Submissions more than 7 days late will be awarded 0.
  4. For assessment submitted by the original due date, marks and feedback should be returned within three weeks of the due date.
    1. Marks will be available via UCLearn
    2. Feedback will be available via the book chapter's talk/discussion page.
    3. Availability of marks and feedback will be notified via UCLearn Announcements.
  5. If you don't understand or disagree with your mark and/or feedback, then please see the marking dispute process.

See also[edit | edit source]