Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2018/Surrogate motherhood motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comments[edit source]

Hi, this is interesting topic actually about the surrogate and motherhood I found one article that might be useful for your topic. --Gamze102 (discusscontribs) 15:13, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Gamze102 thank you very much for the article suggestion, I looked at it and it was so helpful and I have incoporated it into my chapter, so i really appreciate your contribution.

Suggestion[edit source]

Hey there, this is a really interesting topic and I look forward to its completion! I think you have a good set up and have used images well, but one of the figure captions does not match the others! I'm not sure how much research you have done but article may help with Gestational surrogacy good luck! --U3160212 (discusscontribs) 11:21, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much @U3160212 for your positive encouragement and feed back, I have fixed the figure caption now and really appreciate you pointing that out to me, I also found the article you suggested very helpful and will include it.

Hi, Great choice of topic, it is very interesting. My main suggestion would be to back up the motivational component of surrogacy with theories. What I mean by this is I think it would be beneficial to use theories that explain why some women choose to become surrogates. I am looking forward to reading your finished chapter, I really enjoyed reading what you have so far! --BB7897 (discusscontribs) 22:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @BB7897 - Thank you so much for your positive comments and very helpful suggestions! I definitely agree with you that more motivational theories need to be outlined and discussed.

Hi, very interesting topic and very well and thoroughly explained . Just a link which tells about the figures and more about surrogates : (discusscontribs) 12:49, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

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.

Autoroute icone.svg

Title, sub-title, TOC[edit source]

  1. Excellent

User page[edit source]

  1. Doesn't exist

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. None summarised

Section headings[edit source]

  1. Look clear, appropriate
  2. Perhaps consider a third category of motivations - a combination of the first two?

Key points[edit source]

  1. Overview
    1. Simplify - perhaps some content can move into subsequent sections
    2. Consider including a case study or two (e.g., to illustrate each of the major motivations)
    3. Consider establishing some focus questions for the chapter
  2. Perhaps the "What is surrogacy?" could be expanded (e.g., to something like "Why is surrogacy increasingly sought?" - which could cover the social, genetic, etc. reasons, then deal with the psychological motivations in a subsequent section)
  3. The single most important section is "Surrogacy motivations", but this seems to be underdeveloped at this stage - expand (e.g., there are no citations at this stage)
  4. Perhaps consider (although it is not central to the question/topic) what the psychological impacts of surrogacy are? (e.g., set up linkage to another chapter that could be written in future about "What are the emotional impacts of surrogacy?"

Image[edit source]

  1. OK
  2. Develop image captions to have more connection with the message(s) contained in the main text

References[edit source]

  1. OK
  2. Use APA style

Resources[edit source]

  1. OK
  2. See also - Try to identify more specifically related Wikiversity and/or Wikipedia content

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hyperlinks[edit source]

Wow, this is such an important and interesting topic. I did see that you may have tried to hyperlink a Wikipedia page and it has not worked: 'Individuals who have encountered barriers in being able to conceive a child regard it as being a great personal tragedy, involving significant emotional pain and impacting their overall psychological wellbeing ('. If you are having trouble hyperlinking on Wikiversity this may help: Good luck TaylorMal (discusscontribs) 01:42, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Referencing[edit source]


Your book chapter looks awesome, great work!

I fixed a few formatting issues on your reference list to comply with APA 6th edition (e.g., italicised journal volume number, removed the "pp" for page numbers, found and added the doi's for your articles).

Also, issue numbers only need to be included if the journal is paginated by issue (which is usually not the case). Here's a link that explains it further:

Hope this helps and good luck!

--Ju3141393 (discusscontribs) 11:01, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Chapter review and feedback[edit source]

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 an excellent chapter that successfully uses psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world problem.
  2. For additional feedback, see these copyedits.

Theory[edit source]

  1. Great Overview, with a scenario and clear and relevant focus questions.
  2. The Reeve (2015) textbook is overused as a citation - instead, utilise primary, peer-reviewed sources.
  3. Theories are selected, described, and applied.

Research[edit source]

  1. Excellent coverage is provided of the limited research in this area.
  2. A critical perspective is evident, with recommendations for future research.
  3. Discussion of research is well-integrated with theory.

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, this is a very well-written and developed chapter.
    2. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences.
    3. The chapter benefited from a well developed Overview and Conclusion, with clear focus question(s) and take-home messages.
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter was well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
    2. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings.
  3. Learning features
    1. Interwiki links are well used.
    2. Good use of images, tables, highlight boxes etc.
    3. Citations
      1. In-text citations should be in alphabetical order.
    4. References
      1. Do not include issue numbers for journals which are continuously numbered within volumes.

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[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a very good presentation that makes effective use of simple tools.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. Well selected and structured content, however it focuses too much on theory and not enough on research.
  2. The presentation is well structured (Title, Overview, Body, Conclusion).

Communication[edit source]

  1. The presentation is fun, easy to follow, and interesting to watch and listen to.
  2. The presentation makes effective use of narrated text and image based slides with narrated audio.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. The presentation is over the maximum time limit.
  2. Audio and video recording quality was excellent.
  3. Images sources and copyright is well acknowledged.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)