Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2022/Psychological trauma

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 see editing changes made whilst reviewing this 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 below may also be about all material on the page at the time of providing this feedback.

Title The title is missing. The sub-title is missing. User page Created – minimal, but sufficient Brief description about self provided – consider expanding 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 At least one contribution has been made and 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. Use a numbered list (as per Tutorial 02) Headings No development Key points No development Figure A relevant figure appears on the user page. Move this to the chapter page and cite it at least once in the main text. References 3 citations appear on the user page. Move them to the chapter page and cite them at least once in the main text. For APA style, check and correct the capitalisation. Resources Not developed

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 20:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Multimedia presentation 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 a basic presentation The main areas for potential improvement are: The presentation only partially addresses the topic (i.e., the sub-title) The audio quality is poor Overview First word is spelt incorrectly! (psyhchological -> psychological) An opening slide with the title is displayed. Also display and narrate the sub-title — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. Consider creating an engaging introduction to hook audience interest A context for the topic is briefly established Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation. Content The presentation somewhat addresses the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation is reasonably well structured (i.e., Overview, Content, Conclusion) The presentation makes good use of relevant psychological theory, but is overly focused on the causes of PT to the detriment of other aspects of the topic The presentation makes some implied use of relevant psychological research; ideally make more explicit use of research Include citations to support claims The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples or case studies Conclusion A Conclusion slide is presented with a basic summary, but this fails to provide an adequate take-away message in relation to each focus question Audio The audio quality is problematic The audio is hard to follow because so much content is presented so quickly 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 Consider using greater intonation to enhance listener interest and engagement Consider improving articulation to enhance the clarity of speech The presentation lacks the polish that comes with practice Audio recording quality was poor. Volume varies. Background noise. Sometimes audio is cut-off at start of slides. Sometimes the audio is inaudible. Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality. Probably an on-board microphone was used (e.g., keyboard and/or mouse clicks were audible). Consider using an external microphone. Mute the music during narration to help the viewer concentrate on the combination of visual information and narrated audio Video Overall, visual display quality is basic The presentation makes basic use of animated slides The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read Consider using a sans-serif typeface to make the text easier to read The amount of text presented per slide could be reduced to make it easier to read and listen at the same time Consider using bullet-points to help break text up and make it easier to read and listen at the same time The presentation is basically produced using simple tools Meta-data The chapter title and sub-title partially matches the video title A written description of the presentation is provided Links to and from the book chapter are provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are communicated A copyright license for the presentation is provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:20, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

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 04:28, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Book 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 good chapter that makes very good use of psychological theory and research to help address a real-world phenomenon or problem Well over the maximum word count. The content beyond 4000 words has been ignored for marking purposes. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Basic Overview Briefly explains the problem or phenomenon Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest Basic focus question(s) Theory – Breadth A very good range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Perhaps greater emphasis could be placed on the neuroscience of trauma The chapter doesn't wander off into discussion of irrelevant theory Build more strongly on other trauma-related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters in this category: Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Trauma). Ideally, this would be a gateway chapter that has embedded links to many of these other chapters. More emphasis on how people can recover would be helpful; what non-clinical treatment approaches are helpful? What is trauma-informed care? etc. Theory – Depth Insightful depth is provided about the selected theory(ies) Tables and/or lists are used effectively to help clearly convey key theoretical information More examples could be helpful Research – Key findings Reasonably good review of relevant research Greater emphasis on effect sizes, major reviews, and/or meta-analyses would be helpful Research – Critical thinking Basic critical thinking about relevant research is evident 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 pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Claims are referenced Integration There is reasonably good integration between theory and research Conclusion Basic summary Add practical, take-home message(s) Written expression – Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is good "People" is often a better term than "individuals" Layout Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see tags) See earlier comments about heading casing Grammar The grammar for some 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. Spelling Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. APA style Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numerals (e.g., 10) Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, write in your own words Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Replace double spaces with single spaces Figures Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text Tables Table captions should use APA style. See example Refer to each Table at least once within the main text (e.g., see Table 1) Citations use correct APA style References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation[1] Check and correct use of italicisation Page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Include hyperlinked dois "Retrieved from" is no longer used (APA style, 7th ed.) Written expression – Learning features Overall, the use of learning features is very good 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. Basic/No use of image(s) Very good use of table(s) Basic use of feature box(es) Basic use of quiz(zes) No use of case studies or examples Good use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Use sentence casing Also include links to related book chapters Also include links to related Wikipedia articles External links not counted for marking purposes (over maximum word count) Social contribution ~2 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:28, 16 November 2022 (UTC)