Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Endurance sport motivation

Definitions suggestion

Hi there I have a suggestion for when you get up to adding the definitions (I saw this was something you were planning on including as a subheading). I have seen in previous chapters some people have included a table of definitions and I found this can be very helpful for ease of layout and understanding for the reader. If you have multiple definitions you plan on including this could be something to consider? --Ashley Sanders01 (discuss • contribs) 12:29, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Heading casing

Hi U3194909. FYI, the recommended Wikiversity heading style uses sentence casing. For example: Self-determination theory rather than Self-Determination Theory Here's an example chapter with correct heading casing: Growth mindset development -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:39, 4 September 2021 (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.

Title Excellent User page Created - minimal, but sufficient Description about self provided Consider linking to your eportfolio page and/or any other professional online profile or resume such as LinkedIn. This is not required, but it can be useful to interlink your professional networks. Add link to book chapter Social contribution Summarised with indirect link(s) to evidence. Add direct links to evidence. To do this: View the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click "compare selected revisions", and then use this website address as a direct link to evidence for listing on your user page. For more info, see Making and summarising social contributions. Headings The Overview and Conclusion should not have sub-headings. Use default heading formatting (e.g., avoid bold, italics, underline etc.). Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic. See earlier comment about Heading casing. Key points Basic development of key points for each section, with relevant citations. Use bullet points (see Tutorial 1 - Using Wikiversity) For sections which include sub-section include key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings. Overview - Consider adding: a description of the problem and what will be covered focus questions an image an example or case study Avoid providing too much background information. Briefly summarise general concepts and provide internal wiki links to other book chapters and/or Wikipedia pages for further information. Then focus most of the content of this chapter on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title. Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters. Do this instead of having sections with key words. Consider including more examples/case studies. Move referenes to References section and cite each reference at least once in the main text. Conclusion (the most important section): under developed what might the take-home, practical messages be? in a nutshell, what are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title? Figure A figure is presented. Caption should use italics for: Figure X. ... Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text. Figure(s) are cited at least once in the main text. Consider decreasing image sizes. References Very good For APA referencing style, check and correct: doi formatting Resources Excellent

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:39, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Comment

Hey, I found an interesting Ted Talk "Intrinsic motivation in sport and in life" which is related to your topic and that you might want to include in your book chapter (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvpZaz4Fjp4). All the best writing --U3196787 (discuss • contribs) 09:47, 12 October 2021 (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. Chapter marks will be available via UCLearn along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall Overall, this is an insufficient chapter. The main areas for potential improvement are: Focus more on motivational theory than personality theory Provide a more indepth review of academic psychological theory and research about the topic. There is insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations. Grammar and spelling is poor. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits. Overview Insufficient focus on endurance sport/athletes. Out of scope focus on personality, rather than motivation. Consider developing focus questions to help guide the reader and structure the chapter. Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest. Theory — Breadth Insufficient coverage of relevant theory. Focus on motivational theory rather than personality theory. If personality is to be used, this needs to be more closely based on psychological theory and research that applies it sport, preferably endurance sport. A lot of the content is repetitive (e.g., definitional material) - redraft to streamline. 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). Theory — Depth Insufficient depth of use of relevant psychological theory. Research — Key findings Insufficient use of relevant psychological research. Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful. Research — Critical thinking Insufficient critical thinking about research is evident. Many claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags). Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by: describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies discussing the direction of relationships considering the strength of relationships acknowledging limitations suggesting specific directions for future research Integration Insufficient integration of theory and research. Conclusion Basic summary. Add practical, take-home messages. Written expression — Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is below professional standard. UC Study Skills and/or Studiosity assistance is recommended to help improve writing skills. Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[1] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences. Use gender-neutral language (e.g., man -> human). Layout Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections. Headings should use default wiki style (e.g., remove additional bold). See earlier comments about heading casing. Grammar The grammar for many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags). Grammar-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance. Check and make correct use of commas. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[2]. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect. Spelling Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Check consistency of extravert vs extrovert Proofreading Remove unnecessary capitalisation (e.g., Endurance -> endurance). APA style Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc.. Figures and tables Use APA style for Figure captions. See example. Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text. Refer to each Table and Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation). Citations are not in full APA style (7th ed.). For example: If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either: in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020) References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation[3] Check and correct use of italicisation Page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Check doi formatting Written expression — Learning features Overall, the use of learning features is basic. Basic use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding more interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text more interactive. See example. 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. Format bullet-points and numbered lists, per Tutorial 1. Basic use of image(s). No use of table(s). Good use of feature box(es). Promising use of quiz(zes). Reduce the number of questions, especially the repetitive questions. Limited use of case studies or examples. Social contribution ~1 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:51, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

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 Overall, this is an insufficient presentation. The presentation is over the maximum time limit - content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes. Overview The opening slide does not have the correct title and sub-title. This would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. "several variables" - vague Briefly explain why this topic is important. Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. Content The presentation addresses the topic. Comments about the book chapter also apply to this section. Check and correct grammar. An appropriate amount of content is presented. The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological theory. The presentation makes no use of relevant psychological research. The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples or case studies. Conclusion A Conclusion slide is presented with vague take-home message(s). The presentation could be strengthened by expanding on the take-home message (e.g., answers to more than one focus question). What are the practical take-home message(s) that we can use to help improve our everyday lives based on the best available psychological theory and research about this topic? Audio The audio is easy to follow. The presentation makes basic use of narrated audio. Audio communication is clear and well paced. Basic intonation. Increasing intonation could help to enhance listener interest and engagement. Audio recording quality was very good. Video Overall, visual display quality is basic. The presentation makes basic use of text-based slides. The font size should be larger to make it easier to read. The amount of text presented per slide should be reduced to make it easier to read. The visual communication could be improved by including some relevant images. The presentation is basically produced using simple tools. Meta-data The chapter title and sub-title are missing from the name of the presentation - this would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. A written description of the presentation is not provided. A link to the book chapter is not provided. A link from the book chapter is provided. The presentation is incorrectly categorised as being for kids. Licensing A copyright license for the presentation is not provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:12, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Chapter resubmission feedback

These changes have been reviewed. Comments:

1. Overall, minor improvements have been made to this chapter. Whilst the chapter has improved, it remains well below a professional standard.
2. There are minor improvements to the Overview. There are still no focus questions or examples etc.
3. Some of the changes have introduced new grammatical errors (e.g., the sentence "Which poses the question 'what are the motivational factors that drive humans to push the envelope of the impossible?'" is incomplete"), style errors (e.g., Headings using incorrect heading casing, and APA style errors (e.g., First author surname et al. should be used for citations with three of more authors). Many such original submission errors also remain (e.g., overcapitalisation (e.g., Endurance -> endurance)). Thus, overall, the presentation and quality of written expression remains below professional standard.
4. Tagged grammatical errors were fixed, but many untagged errors remain.
5. The order of some of the content has been changed.
6. There is some minor rewriting.
7. A small number of citations have been added.
8. A small number of embedded links to relevant Wikiversity pages have been added.
9. The theoretical focus has shifted from the relationship between personality and endurance sport motivation to the relationship between ERG theory, McClelland's learned needs, and endurance sport motivation. This is the main improvement. However, only basic descriptions are provided, with minimal relevant citation, and no discussion of relevant research evidence.
10. Overuse of non-academic sources remains (e.g., Trainingpeaks.com).
11. The Conclusion has been lightly rewritten to reduce the number of grammatical errors and to include ERG theory and McClelland's theory.

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

(Lewis.Kusk (discuss • contribs) = U3203414) - Suggestions

Hello, I have read your chapter and I think you have some good parts to it which I liked, especially your ongoing quizzes, but I wanted to make a couple suggestions in case you wanted to improve this.

My first suggestion would be to add a "focus questions" section just after the overview. This could include maybe three questions such as "What is endurance and motivation", "What theories surround motivation", "How does motivation relate to endurance sport".

Another suggestion would be to include some more "see also" links, perhaps wikipedia pages for "Endurance" and "Motivation" as a starting point since these two concepts are important to your chapter.

Lewis.Kusk (discuss • contribs) 03:58, 15 October 2022 (UTC)