Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2018/Codependency and self-esteem

Topic development feedback

The topic development 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 the chapter plan. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Topic development marks are available via UCLearn. Note that marks are based on what was available before the due date, whereas the comments may also be based on all material available at time of providing this feedback.

Title, sub-title, TOC Excellent User page Excellent Social contribution Well done, but see suggestions for how to record social contributions Section headings Well developed Avoid having only one sub-section within a section Check consistency of capitalisation (use lower case) Watch out for getting overly complicated - keep it simple. For example, some sections are unnecessary (e.g., how to measure self-esteem) because they are not directly related to answering the question (the sub-title). For such topics, consider linking to related Wikipedia/Wikiversity material for more info. Similarly, there is no need for every chapter to have a "what is emotion" section. Define emotion briefly and link to further info, to allow focus on the specific topic for this chapter. "Relevant theory" - bit vague as a heading Be selective about what theories to use. Better to make effective use of a small number of highly relevant theories that light usage of many theories. For example, attachment theory is probably the most relevant of the mentioned theories. The across the lifespan info is interesting, but not central to addressing the topic, so may not warrant such a significant role in the planned structure for the chapter. Key points Overview, Conclusion, and Quiz are under-developed A case study earlier on (rather than Example study) could help the reader to better understand the topic. Image Use APA style for figure captions References Use APA style Resources See also - for some other possibly relevant chapters, see "Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Relationships External links - identity resources more directly related to the exact topic (the topic is not Rosenberg's self-esteem scale or measurement of self-esteem)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:11, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Comments

Hi there, I've just edited your figure titles so that they are APA formatted now :) also just bolded your reference in figure 2, just because James said that we don't need to reference our figures as the image has that information embedded in it :) It's looking really good :) good luck --MaddieCarleton (discuss • contribs) 01:33, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

social contribution

Hi there i love your topic. i think its really interesting how you have done it throughout the life time! an idea you could implement is to have a small example or picture next to each age group to enhance the readers experience. it also might help make clear if you specify what ages make up each section! good luck on your chapter it looks really good! Joog 17 (discuss • contribs) 1:42, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

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.

Overall Overall, this is a reasonably good chapter in that it addresses the topic with coverage of theory and research. For additional feedback, see below and these copyedits. Theory This topic could benefit from presenting one or more case studies earlier on (e.g., perhaps a problematic copendency and then the same or a different person negotiating through copendency to healthier relationships and more independent self-esteem). This could help to illustrate the phenomenon in a practical way for readers and be more focused towards solutions. Theory is reasonably well described and explained. Research The review of research tends to overemphasize a single, small, qualitative study and lacks a more comprehensive review of the breadth of relevant research. Greater emphasis on major reviews and meta-analyses would be helpful. Some statements are unreferenced - see the tags Written expression Written expression Overall, written expression is of basic to reasonable standard. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences. Use third-person perspective (e.g., avoid "we"). Many sentences are unnecessarily wordy - strive for the simplest expression of the point being made. Layout The chapter was well structured, with major sections using sub-sections. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings. Learning features Basic use of a case study (I've moved it up to Overview). Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words would make the text more interactive. Basic use of images. Basic use of tables. Basic use of quizzes. Spelling, grammar, and proofreading. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour). Spelling can be improved (wasn't of professional standard). Check and correct use of commas. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags). More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard. Check and correct use of that vs. who. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's). APA style Direct quotes need page numbers. Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numbers (e.g., 10). References are not in full APA style e.g., Check and correct italicisation and capitalisation.

Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's Canvas site. Written feedback is provided below, plus see the 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.

Overall Overall, this is a solid, reasonable presentation. Structure and content A case study or example could help to bring the topic to life. The verbal content is well selected and well paced. The visual content contains too much direct cut and paste material from the book chapter and too little customisation to the specific requirements of a 3-minute overview. Overall, the presentation is well structured. Theory content is well selected and explained. There is insufficient emphasis on reviewing/summarising research evidence. Communication The narration is well placed and easy to follow. The visual presentation is overly text-heavy - viewers are highly unlikely to read all of this text whilst listening to the audio within the three minutes. Use less text and larger font so that it is easier to read. Production quality Audio recording quality is poor - review microphone set up. Visual presentation uses too much text - rationalise and use less text and larger font to emphasise key messages (consider using bullet-points). The book chapter provides the more detailed information. What is the copyright license for the images (e.g., Figure 5) - did you have permission to re-use? No copyright license is indicated.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:28, 11 November 2018 (UTC)