Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2019/Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feel free to contribute to my page by leaving a comment below:



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 and sub-title[edit source]

  1. Excellent

User page[edit source]

  1. Created, with description about self and link to book chapter
  2. Used effectively

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Excellent

Section headings[edit source]

  1. Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic.
  2. However, avoid providing too much background information. Instead, briefly summarise generic concepts and provide internal wiki links to further information. Then the focus of most of the content can be on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title.

Key points[edit source]

  1. Overall, appears to be sound/solid plan.
  2. Remove all: "Here I will" etc. (redundant)
  3. Some sections are blank
  4. A stronger plan would provide dot points summarising actual content
  5. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles.
  6. Consider including more examples/case studies.
  7. Consider embedding one quiz question per major section.

Image[edit source]

  1. Provided, with an APA style caption
  2. Cite each figure at least once in the main text.

References[edit source]

  1. Excellent

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Excellent

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:00, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions[edit source]

Have a look at work by Christopher Ball et al., (2015). These researchers talk about how EVT can be applied in a high school/college setting to improve students academic motivations to graduate. --U3158296 (discusscontribs) 11:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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 UCLearn Canvas, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a promising, incomplete chapter.
  2. Reduce the amount of background material and focus more directly on the topic (sub-title).
  3. For additional feedback, see comments below and these copyedits.

Theory[edit source]

  1. There is too much general theoretical material. Instead, summarise and link to further information (such as other book chapters or Wikipedia articles), to allow this chapter to focus on the specific topic (i.e., the sub-title question). The chapter starts to address the topic about half-way through.
  2. Expand on the theoretical explanation of EVT and AM.

Research[edit source]

  1. General background research is reviewed and discussed, however the chapter needs to narrow in on, and discuss in more detail, research about EVT and AM.
  2. When describing important research findings, consider including a bit more detail about the methodology and indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
  3. Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is reasonably good.
    2. Use third person perspective rather than first person (e.g., "we") or second person (e.g., "you") perspective.
    3. Some paragraphs are overly long (e.g., the last paragraph). Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
  3. Learning features
    1. Excellent use of interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words would make the text more interactive.
    2. No use of embedded links to related book chapters. Embedding interwiki links links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project.
    3. Very good use of images.
    4. Good use of tables.
    5. Excellent use of feature boxes.
    6. Very good use of quizzes.
    7. Basic use of case studies. The studies should relate more directly to EVT and AM.
  4. Grammar
    1. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[1].
  5. APA style
      1. Use APA style for Figure captions. See example.
      2. Use APA style for Table captions. See example. Expand table caption.
    1. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of italicisation.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~10 logged, useful, social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:09, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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 promising presentation that could have been improved by slowing down and covering the topic in less detail.
  2. The presentation is over the maximum time limit - content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking purposes.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. The presentation is well structured (Title, Overview, Body, Conclusion).
  2. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s).
  3. There is too much content, in too much detail, presented within the allocated time frame. Zoom out and provide a higher-level presentation at a slower pace. It is best to do a small amount well than a large amount poorly.

Communication[edit source]

  1. Consider slowing down and leaving longer pauses between sentences. This can help the viewer to cognitively digest the information that has just been presented before moving on to the next point.
  2. The presentation makes effective use of text and image based slides with narrated audio.
  3. Some of the font size and diagrams should be larger to make them easier to read.
  4. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. Start of audio was cut off.
  2. Hide the recording bar from the screen.
  3. The chapter title and sub-title are used in the video title - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  4. The chapter title and sub-title are used on the opening slide - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  5. Audio recording quality was OK, but background noise is evident (e.g,. key board clicks) probably because an on-board microphone was used - review microphone set-up (i.e., used a plug-in mic).
  6. Image sources and their copyright status are provided.
  7. A copyright license for the presentation is/not provided.
  8. A link to the book chapter is provided.
  9. A link from the book chapter is provided.
  10. A brief written description of the presentation is provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:06, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]