Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Achievement goal orientation and academic motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feedback[edit source]

Hi, have you considered putting some photos or colour into your book chpater? You're probably going to do that today, but just thought I'd ask as I think it would be a good addition :) --U3072703 (discusscontribs) 22:23, 25 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Editing of book chapter[edit source]

Hey, I've added some coloured boxes into your book chapter just so the sections are more distinguishable, if you would prefer not to have them you can remove the syntax its |} and

:) I also added in the title of your book chapter, the headings for the other sections which I am assuming you are adding in later, and I also added the syntax for a quiz, again if you do not wish to have a quiz you can remove the syntax. I only added it because the marking rubric suggests we have additional 'learning features' e.g. pictures, tables or a quiz and I didn't want to add the others in case you did not want them, although I would recommend adding them :)

I really like your book chapter, I think it is very informative and I think it flows nicely. You've done a good job! U3081383 (discusscontribs) 22:54, 25 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just noticed that the syntax for the coloured boxes doesn't show unless you look at this on edit U3081383 (discusscontribs) 22:55, 25 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Heading casing[edit source]

Crystal Clear app ktip.svg
FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings. For example, use:

==Cats and dogs==

rather than

==Cats and Dogs==

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:33, 26 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Editing tip - Linking to Wikipedia articles[edit source]

Crystal Clear app ktip.svg
Thank-you for your contributions to Wikiversity! I hope you don't mind being offered a Wikiversity editing tip. Links to Wikipedia article should be made as internal rather than external links. For example, [[w:Pet|pet]] creates a link like this: pet to the Wikipedia pet article. This is preferred to an external link like this or pet.

I hope this helps to further empower your Wikiversity contributions! -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:33, 26 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's Moodle site. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a 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. If you wish to dispute the marks, see the suggested marking dispute process.


Overall[edit source]

This is a basic but sufficient presentation.

Structure and content[edit source]

While the structure of this presentation appears logical, it feels rushed. It is important to choose only the important concepts to present in this overview. Viewers can refer to the chapter if they want to know more. Theory is discussed. Research is integrated throughout. Illustrative examples are not included.

Communication[edit source]

Communication is an area for improvement. The voice-over is too fast and difficult to hear (due to both audio quality and pace). The slides are somewhat unclear. The use of dot points could help to make the slides easier to follow. Also, it is best not to read directly from the slides. Simply present the most important information in text, and expand on it verbally. The inclusion of more images or figures could also help to make the presentation more engaging.

Production quality[edit source]

Basic production tools are used. The audio quality is poor, and is difficult to hear. The visuals are clear. The presentation lacks a professional feel, due to much of the feedback above. A link back to the book chapter is not provided. Image source information is provided.

ShaunaB (discusscontribs) 04:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chapter review and feedback

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. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Chapter marks will be available later via Moodle, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a solid chapter. Coverage of theory is good, and coverage of research is reasonable. The style is somewhat academic/dry and could benefit from, for example, some examples and case studies. For more feedback, see these copyedits and comments below.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Theory is reasonably well covered. The emphasis is more on general motivational theories could be reduced and the emphasis on achievement goal orientation theory could be expanded.

Research[edit source]

  1. Several research studies are cited, but could be described in more depth.
  2. The Reeve (2009) is over-used as a citation; consult primary, peer-reviewed sources.
  3. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
  4. Some statements were unreferenced - see the [factual?] tags

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression was reasonable.
    1. The opening sentence should be shortened.
    2. The Overview could benefit from a case study or example.
    3. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    4. The quality of written expression could be improved (e.g., where clarification templates have been added to the page).
  2. Layout
    1. Fancy formatting (background colours) were removed - keep it simple (e.g., see the style of Wikipedia articles)
    2. See earlier comments about heading casing
  3. Learning features
    1. Some links to Wikipedia and/or Wikiversity articles were added as external links - these should be changed to interwiki links
  4. Spelling
    1. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize -> hypothesise)
  5. Grammar and proofreading
    1. Check and correct the use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs. individuals')
    2. The grammar of some sentences need to be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags)
  6. APA style
    1. Check/correct APA style for in-text citations
    2. Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numbers (e.g., 10)
    3. Put in-text citations in alphabetical order.
    4. The reference list is not in full APA style.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:53, 1 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]