Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Managers' emotional responses

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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.

Multimedia.png

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a basic, interesting presentation, but with its strong focus on a single case study, it lacked demonstration of an indepth understanding of psychological theory and research relevant to the topic.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. The single case study approach made for an interesting, engaging presentation, however the flip side was that it also meant that the focus on psychological theory and research was minimal. The slides didn't always match the audio (e.g., the last slide).

Communication[edit source]

  1. The visual presentation was basic, but effective. There was minimal use of images. The text on the screen was too small. The audio was interesting and sufficiently varied to maintain listener interest.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. The production quality is basic (video recording a slide presentation on a computer monitor). The main area for improvement would be to use screencasting software rather than videoing a computer screen. This would make the font crisper and easier to read. The audio was clear. A link the book chapter is provided on the first slide, but not in the presentation description. No copyright license is indicated in the presentation slides. A basic link is provided from the book chapter to the presentation.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 13:35, 7 November 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 11:09, 2 December 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. The strength of this chapter is its emphasis on management theory. The main weaknesses are the lack of research evidence and the quality of written expression.
  2. For more feedback, see these copyedits and comments below.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Management theory is well covered; emotion theory is less well covered (e.g., emotional intelligence could be useful).
  2. Establishing some clearer focus questions in the Overview could be helpful.
  3. A case study could help to illustrate key points.
  4. More linkage between sections could help the reader to follow the overall narrative/argument.

Research[edit source]

  1. There is little description of research on emotions in managers.
  2. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
  3. Some statements were unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression needs improvement to be of professional standard.
    1. Some sentences are overly long.
    2. The quality of written expression could be improved (e.g., where clarification templates have been added to the page).
    3. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
  2. Layout
    1. No Tables and four Figures were used.
    2. See earlier comments about heading casing
  3. Learning features
    1. The relevance of the Figures to the topic needs to be more clearly explained in the Figure captions.
    2. The text could become more interactive by including interwiki links.
  4. Spelling
    1. Spelling could be improved - see the [spelling?] tags
    2. 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')
  6. APA style
    1. Add APA style captions to tables and figures.
    2. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.
    3. The reference list is not in full APA style.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:09, 2 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]