Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Belongingness motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feedback[edit source]

Hey there, I haven't had a chance to read your chapter just yet, just quickly glanced over it, but I've noticed that you have not added any in-text links to other wiki pages. For example Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Social identity theory, Belongingness etc.

You also my want to add a few external links or links to other book chapters from previous years or the current year under the headings "External links" and "See also" respectively.

For example:
See also

External link

  • Maybe a youtube video here
  • Or some interesting article
  • Or blog or something

Linssen (discusscontribs) 05:09, 28 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 07:40, 6 December 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 good presentation. Well done!

Structure and content[edit source]

The structure is good, with a nice flow throughout. Theory and research are well integrated. The practical focus of the 'Approaches to coping with Rejection' slide was a strength. A concluding slide was included, but no introductory overview was provided. This could have included the content of the presentation, including the theories discussed.

Communication[edit source]

Information is articulated well through the voice-over and slides. A good amount of information is provided using both methods. The voice-over is generally well-paced, with intonation and appropriate pauses between sentences and slides. The inclusion of images made the presentation more engaging. Use of more illustrative examples would be beneficial.

Production quality[edit source]

Production tools used are simple but effective. Audio volume is very low, has a slight echo and the ending was cut off. Quality of visuals is good. The lines on the slide background are somewhat distracting from the text. A link to the book chapter is provided. No indication of copyright license is 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 reasonable chapter. Theory is good. Research could be more indepth. The written expression was hard work at times to read (very long paragraphs, lack of examples etc.)
  2. For more feedback, see these copyedits and comments below.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Theory was reasonably well covered.
  2. The connection between social identity theory and a need for belongingness was probably the weakest. One or more examples may help.
  3. It could be helpful/interesting to connect this chapter to the work on social capital
  4. The lack of examples or case studies etc. made for a pretty 'dry' chapter.

Research[edit source]

  1. Some research is covered, but not in a lot of depth.
  2. Did you consult Maslow (1943)? If not, don't cite it.
  3. Some statements were unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)
  4. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. The Overview could be improved by being more specific (e.g., what theories will be covered). An example (e.g., case study) could be helpful too.
    2. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    3. The quality of written expression could be improved (e.g., where clarification templates have been added to the page).
    4. The Conclusion could be improved by providing some more concrete, take-home messages.
  2. Layout
    1. A few Figures and no Tables were used.
    2. See earlier comments about heading casing
  3. Learning features
    1. The text could become more interactive by including interwiki links.
    2. Quiz questions are used effectively to encourage reader engagement.
  4. Spelling
    1. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize -> hypothesise)
  5. Grammar and proofreading
    1. The grammar of some sentences need to be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags)
    2. Check and correct the use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs. individuals')
    3. Use abbreviations such as "e.g." inside brackets and "for example" outside brackets
    4. Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numbers (e.g., 10)
  6. APA style
    1. Check/correct APA style for in-text citations
    2. When there are three or more authors, subsequent citations should use et al.
    3. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.
    4. The reference list is not in full APA style.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:40, 6 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]