Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Agreeableness and emotion

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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 11:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great read[edit source]

hey , that was a really interesting read. I would have thought that topic would have been hard to gather information on, but you found heaps and smashed it! Only thing i noticed - in your reference section it might need some work to be apa format, mainly by putting the journal articles into italics. Good luck with it all :) --U3083978 (discusscontribs) 20:42, 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]

Overall, this is a neatly presented piece of work.

Structure and content[edit source]

The structure is clear. A clear aim is articulated at the beginning of the presentation. Clear definitions provide a good foundation for the presentation. Research is incorporated throughout. Theory is not adequately addressed. For example, exploration of the theory behind the Big 5 personality factors could have been included. Illustrative examples could also be included.

Communication[edit source]

Communication is generally good. The voice-over is well paced, with good expression. The slides are neatly presented. Try to use dot points to put forward the important points, rather than full sentences or paragraphs. Inclusion of images and/or figures would help to make the presentation more engaging.

Production quality[edit source]

Basic production tools are used effectively. The use of Prezi gives a professional feel. The audio quality is good. There are some inconsistency between the volume between takes/slides. The visuals are clear. A link to the book chapter is not provided.

ShaunaB - Talk

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 basic chapter which could be improved by providing a better explanation of agreeableness and improving the quality of written expression. For more feedback see these copyedits and the comments below.

Theory[edit source]

  1. A poor definition/description of agreeableness is provided. The chapter could be improved by describing agreeableness as a personality dimension and explaining its facets.
  2. The Overview offers a somewhat confusing definition of negative affect as the relative absence of happiness, rather than the presence of unpleasant emotions.
  3. A case study or example could be helpful.

Research[edit source]

  1. Research is reasonably well covered and explained.
  2. When discussing important research findings, indicate the size of the effects.
  3. Some claims are not supported by citations (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Avoid one sentence paragraphs.
    2. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As mentioned above,")
    3. Some paragraphs are overly long.
  2. Learning features
    1. Interwiki links could be added to make the text more interactive.
    2. No images or tables were used.
  3. Layout
  4. Excessive use of coloured boxes/backgrounds was removed so as to aid accessibility/readability; strive for simple layout (e.g., as per Wikipedia)
    1. See earlier comments about heading casing.
  5. Grammar and proofreading
    1. The grammar of some sentences needs to be improved for the written expression to be of professional standard (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags)
    2. The word "that" is missing from many sentences (e.g., "the significant role that agreeableness plays...")
  6. APA style
    1. Check and correct the APA style formatting of in-text citations.
    2. The reference list is not in full APA style.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:58, 3 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]