Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Sporting performance, motivation, and emotion

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Recommendation[edit source]

To look into Self-Determination Theory. U3173886 (discusscontribs) 12:02, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A great chapter, would be great to add a case study here from a professional athlete --Claireebousfield (discusscontribs) 15:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heading casing[edit source]

FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for sentence casing. For example, the wikitext should be:

== Cats and mice ==

rather than

== Cats and Mice ==

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:48, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


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. Missing; have added it

User page[edit source]

  1. Created - minimal, insufficient - obviously haven't implemented skills from Tutorial 1 - Using Wikiversity

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. None summarised with link(s) to evidence.

Section headings[edit source]

  1. Basic, 2-level heading structure - could benefit from further development to limit the focus on background information and expand the focus on the target topic.
  2. See earlier comment about Heading casing.

Key points[edit source]

  1. Minimal to no development

Image[edit source]

  1. None

References[edit source]

  1. References need to be cited
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. alphabetical order
    2. capitalisation
    3. doi formatting

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Use bullet-points
    2. Rename links so that they are more user friendly
    3. Include source in brackets after link
    4. Also link to relevant book chapters
    5. Also link to relevant Wikipedia pages
  2. External links
    1. Use bullet-points
    2. Rename links so that they are more user friendly
    3. Include source in brackets after link
    4. Target an international audience; Australians only represent 0.33% of the world population
    5. Excellent

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:48, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Optimal level of performance[edit source]

There is a theory called the optimal level of performance which explores an athletes level of motivation and arousal in order to perform at their best --Jackson McNee (discusscontribs) 04:44, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Case study recommendation[edit source]

Hey! Your chapter is looking great and very interesting. I think lots of students would find this chapter interesting, particularly as it is quite relatable with many students being involved in sport. My suggestion may be to include a few case studies, whether that be based on a made up athlete, or someone that most people would know and can picture. It could really help draw all the ideas presented in your chapter thus far together, and give each reader something further to relate to. --taramaland (discuss contribs) 10:00, 16 October 2020 (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, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a basic, insufficient chapter.
  2. The main areas for improvement are the quality of written expression and review of research.
  3. The Overview is OK, but quite vague. There was left-over material from the topic development template (now removed).
  4. Similarly, the Conclusion is OK, but general, and lacks specific, take-home messages.
  5. For additional feedback, see the following comments 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).

Research[edit source]

  1. Overall, this chapter makes insufficient use of research.
  2. When describing important research findings, consider including a bit more detail about the methodology and indicating 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.
  4. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags).

Written expression[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. The quality of written expression is problematic. There are lots of weasel words which bulk out the text, but don't enhance meaning.
    2. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead, use section linking.
    3. Use 3rd person perspective rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you")[1].
  2. Layout
    1. 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. No use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text more interactive.
    2. No use of embedded in-text links to related book chapters. Embedding in-text links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project.
    3. Limited (one) use of images.
    4. Good use of table(s).
    5. Limited (one) use of feature box(es).
    6. No use of quiz(zes).
  4. Grammar
    1. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags).
    2. Check and make correct use of commas.
    3. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect.
    4. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[2].
    5. Abbreviations
      1. Check and correct grammatical formatting for abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.).
  5. Spelling
    1. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour).
  6. Proofreading
    1. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard.
    2. Replace double spaces with single spaces.
  7. APA style
    1. In general, do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc..
    2. Figures and tables
      1. Use APA style for Table captions. See example.
      2. Refer to each Table and Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).
      3. Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text.
    3. Citations are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. When using citations in parentheses, a comma should separate author and year (e.g., Smith, 2020).
      2. Multiple citations in parentheses should be listed in alphabetical order by first author surname.
      3. If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either:
        1. in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or
        2. in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020)
      4. A comma is not needed after "et al." when followed by year (e.g., Smith et al. (2020) found XYX effect).
    4. Citations are not in correct APA style
      1. Citations in parentheses should use a comma between the author(s) and year.
      2. Select up to a maximum of three citations per point (i.e., avoid citing four or more citations to support a single point).
    5. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of italicisation.
      2. Include hyperlinked dois.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. No logged social contributions

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 06:23, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Fau[reply]


Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's UCLearn 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 basic presentation.

Structure and content[edit source]

  1. Add and narrate a Title slide, to help the viewer understanding the focus and goal of the presentation.
  2. Consider adding and narrating an Overview slide (e.g., with focus questions), to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered.
  3. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s).
  4. Overall, there is probably too much content, so be more selective.

Communication[edit source]

  1. The presentation makes very basic use of text based slides with narrated audio.
  2. Examples are used.

Production quality[edit source]

  1. Communicate the chapter title and sub-title in both the video title and on the opening slide - this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  2. Audio recording quality was very good.
  3. Visual display quality was very good.
  4. Mute the music during narration to help the viewer concentrate on the combination of visual information and narrated audio.
  5. Image sources and their copyright status are/not provided. Either acknowledge the image sources and their licenses in the video description or remove the presentation.
  6. This presentation has probably violated the copyrights of image owners as images appear to have been used without permission and/or acknowledgement.
  7. A copyright license for the presentation is not provided.
  8. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the video description but not in the meta-data.
  9. A link to the book chapter is provided.
  10. A link from the book chapter is provided.
  11. A written description of the presentation is not provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:36, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]