Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/Holistic care needs of the imminently dying

Heading casing

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 09:51, 31 August 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 name was incorrect in list of book chapters - now corrected User page Used effectively 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. Link provided to book chapter Social contribution Excellent - summarised with direct link(s) to evidence. Headings Very good Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading - use 0 or 2+ sub-headings. See earlier comment about Heading casing. Key points Overview: Excellent content But long opening paragraph - consider making the start more accessible e.g., consider adding focus questions an image an example or case study Excellent use of in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms. Use APA style 7th ed for citations e.g., for 3 or more authors go straight to Firstauthor et al. (year). For sections which include sub-section include key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings. Avoid overcapitalisation (APA style) - more info Refer to figure No bullet-points for most sections. Expand theory and research. Conclusion (the most important section): hasn't been developed what might the take-home, practical messages be? in a nutshell, what are the answer(s) to the question in the sub-title? Figure A figure is presented Expand caption Reduce image size Figure 1 should be in italics References OK For APA referencing style, check and correct: alphabetical order doi formatting - should be a working hyperlink Resources See also Excellent External links Use bullet-points The link is very general - replace with more specific links

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:51, 31 August 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 a valuable chapter that successfully explains the holistic are needs of the imminmently dying. It could be improved by summarising the content about physical (and linking to other related resources), so that the content about psychological care related to managing emotions about palliative living and emotions about mortality could be expanded. The coverage of COVID is interesting, but perhaps not as important as providing greater depth about the core topic. This chapter is over the maximum word count. Addressing the topic development feedback could have helped to improve this chapter. For additional feedback, see the following comments and [ these copyedits]. Overview Well developed Overview. Clear focus question(s). Excellent case study example. Theory — Breadth Relevant theories about holistic care are well selected, described, and explained. Psychology theory was very good, but quite general and mostly drawn from the textbook. Theory — Depth The Reeve (2018) textbook is overused as a citation - instead, utilise primary, peer-reviewed sources. Greater depth about managing the emotions of the imminently dying would be ideal. Tables and/or lists are used effectively to help clearly convey key theoretical information. More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts. Research — Key findings Overall, this chapter provides a basic overview of relevant research. Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful. Research — Critical thinking Critical thinking about research is basic. Critical thinking about research could be evidenced by: describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies discussing the direction of relationships considering the strength of relationships suggesting specific directions for future research Integration Discussion of theory and research is reasonably well integrated. Conclusion Well developed. Clear take-home messages. Written expression — Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is very good. Proofreading is generally very good. Remove unnecessary capitalisation (why are so many words capitalised?). APA style Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used as an ironic comment, as slang, or as an invented or coined expression; use quotation marks only for the first occurrence of the word or phrase, not for subsequent occurrences" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159). Figures and tables Use APA style for Table captions. See example. Refer to each Table and Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation, no need for attribution - this is available via clicking on the image). Refer to each Table and Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1). 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[1] Written expression — Learning features Overall, the use of learning features is very good. Format numbered lists, per Tutorial 1. Use bullet points (e.g., for the External links section). Move academic sources in the external links section into the References (and cite them) - or don't include them. External links is for other, non-academic sources. Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. 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. Excellent creation and use of image(s). Very good use of table(s). Very good use of feature box(es). No use of quiz(zes). Excellent use of case studies or examples. Social contribution ~4 logged, useful, minor, social contributions with direct links to evidence.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:48, 2 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. Thus, the presentation consists almost entirely of audio narration of a case study, with very little psychological theory and no psychological research. Overview The sub-title is incorrect on the opening slide - this would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. Briefly explain why this topic is important. Content The case study should be abbreviated to help bring the presentation within the time limit. This presentation doesn't adequately address the topic. The selection of content is poor because it doesn't adequately use the most relevant psychological theory and/or research to address the topic. The presentation makes little use of relevant psychological theory. The presentation makes no use of relevant psychological research. The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice. Conclusion The Conclusion did not fit within the time limit. Audio The presentation makes basic use of narrated audio. Audio recording quality was excellent. Video Overall, visual display quality is poor. The presentation makes basic use of text and image based slides. The amount of text presented per slide should be reduced to make it easier to read. The font size should be larger to make it easier to read. The visual communication is basically supplemented by images. The video is basically produced using simple tools. Meta-data The chapter title and sub-title are missing from the video title - this would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding. Links to and from the book chapter are provided. Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are not provided. Either provide details about the image sources and their copyright licenses in the video description or remove the presentation. A copyright license for the presentation is not provided.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:44, 14 November 2021 (UTC)