Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2022/Task initiation

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comments 2021[edit source]

Hi! Love the topic you chose. Nice!!! Some basic edits and comments to help you continue. 1. Not sure why some of the contents page is in bold...odd! 2. You NEED a title and subtitle. Sort out immediately to make sure you can continue writing. If you don't have a title, you can't really link anything together... 3. I would consider doing a whole section on 'definitions' not just a subheading. You can have pictures and start a case study there as well 4. You seem to randomly go from task initiation as the topic to autism...this is why a title is VITAL and CRITICAL because it helps the reader know what the heck they are going to read! At the moment, you have really gone left field. To help here are some suggestions:

"What is task initiation? Task initiation and its relation with Autism" --> Check with Dr. Neil first

5. If you want to touch on ADHD as well, you might consider a heading that says

"What is task initiation? Tak initiation and its implications among those who are neurodivergent"

That's about it! Happy chapter-ing! (The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) )

16/10/21- U3144808 - Congrats on a great chapter so far, you might be interested in checking out my chapter - Boredom and technology addiction - What is the relationship between boredom and technology addiction and what can be done about it? - U3144808. you might be able to draw some similarities, I have found your page very useful in my development.

Heading casing[edit source]

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 08:37, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@StormSar: This is a reminder about the heading casing. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:30, 15 October 2022 (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 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[edit source]

  1. The title is correctly worded and formatted
  2. The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted

User page[edit source]

  1. Excellent – used effectively
  2. Excellent description about self provided
  3. Link(s) provided to professional profile(s)
  4. Link provided to book chapter

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. At least one contribution has been made and summarised with indirect link(s) to evidence
  2. 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[edit source]

  1. See earlier comment about Heading casing
  2. Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development by expanding the structure

Key points[edit source]

  1. Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations
  2. Make sure to identify and use the best available theory and research about task initiation (i.e., getting started).
  3. For sections which include sub-sections include key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings
  4. Overview - Consider adding:
    1. a brief, evocative description of the problem
    2. an image
    3. an example or case study
  5. Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research
  6. Excellent use of in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters
  7. Consider including more examples/case studies
  8. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. Underway

Figure[edit source]

  1. A relevant figure is presented
  2. Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text
  3. Cite each figure at least once in the main text

References[edit source]

  1. OK
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation
    2. italicisation
    3. doi formatting
    4. page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-)

Resources[edit source]

  1. Remove "big" font; use default
  2. See also
    1. Excellent
    2. Also link to related book chapters
  3. External links
    1. Very good
    2. Use sentence casing
    3. Include source in brackets after link

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:24, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Overview[edit source]

  1. An opening slide with the sub-title is displayed. Also display and narrate the title — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  2. Consider creating an engaging introduction to hook audience interest
  3. A context for the topic is clearly established through an example
  4. Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation.

Content[edit source]

  1. The presentation addresses the topic
  2. An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little
  3. The presentation is well structured (i.e., Overview, Content, Conclusion)
  4. The presentation makes good use of relevant psychological theory
    1. Skip the very general motivation theories (e.g., Maslow's hierarchy and ERG theory)
    2. EGR -> ERG
  5. The presentation makes implied use of relevant psychological research; ideally include research more explicitly
  6. Include citations to support claims
  7. The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A Conclusion slide is presented with some practical take-home message(s)

Audio[edit source]

  1. The presentation makes good use of narrated audio
  2. Very good intonation
  3. The narration is well practiced
  4. Mute the music during narration to help the viewer concentrate on the combination of visual information and narrated audio

Video[edit source]

  1. Overall, visual display quality is good
  2. The presentation makes effective use of text and image based slides
  3. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read
  4. The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time
  5. Check and correct grammar
  6. The presentation is basically produced using simple tools
  7. Hide the audio icon

Meta-data[edit source]

  1. The chapter sub-title but not the chapter title is used in the name of the presentation. The title would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation.
  2. A link to the book chapter is provided but it is broken
  3. A link from the book chapter is provided

Licensing[edit source]

  1. Image sources are communicated, but some links are broken and the copyright licenses aren't acknowledged. The use of at least some of these presentation has probably violated the copyrights of image owners as images appear to have been used without permission.
  2. A copyright license for the presentation is provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:42, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Book 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. Chapter marks will be available via UCLearn along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a promising chapter, with very useful theory, some research, and excellent examples
  2. The main area for improvement is the quality of written expression, particularly grammar
  3. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits

Overview[edit source]

  1. Basic Overview
  2. Explains the problem or phenomenon
  3. Engages reader interest by introducing a case study and/or example and/or using an image
  4. Add focus questions in a feature box to help guide the reader and structure the chapter
  5. Many grammatical and/or spelling errors. Some have been fixed, some have been flagged.

Theory – Breadth[edit source]

  1. An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained
  2. I don't think that Maslow's hierarchy of needs and Alderfer's ERG model provide fundamentally different explanations of task initiation, so combine and summarise these sections
  3. The chapter doesn't wander off into discussion of irrelevant theory
  4. Build more strongly on other goal striving-related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters in this category: Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Goal striving)

Theory – Depth[edit source]

  1. Insightful depth is provided about the selected theory(ies)
  2. Tables and/or lists are used effectively to help clearly convey key theoretical information
  3. Useful examples are provided to illustrate theoretical concepts

Research – Key findings[edit source]

  1. Reasonably good review of relevant research
  2. Basic overview of relevant research
  3. More detail about key studies would be ideal
  4. Greater emphasis on effect sizes, major reviews, and/or meta-analyses would be helpful

Research – Critical thinking[edit source]

  1. Basic critical thinking about relevant research is evident
  2. Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by:
    1. describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies
    2. discussing the direction of relationships
    3. considering the strength of relationships
    4. acknowledging limitations
    5. pointing out critiques/counterarguments
    6. suggesting specific directions for future research
  3. Claims are referenced
  4. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)

Integration[edit source]

  1. There is reasonably good integration between theory and research

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Key points are well summarised, with take-home messages

Written expression – Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is below professional standard. UC Study Skills assistance is recommended to help improve writing skills
    2. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences
    3. "People" is often a better term than "individuals"
  2. Layout
    1. Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see [Provide more detail] tags)
    2. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings
  3. Grammar
    1. The grammar for many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] 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.
    2. Check and correct use of possessive apostrophes (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats')
    3. Use serial commas[1] – they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by grammaticists. See explanatory video (1 min)
  4. Spelling
    1. Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the [spelling?] tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages.
  5. APA style
    1. Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, write in your own words
    2. Figures
      1. Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text
      2. Figure captions use the correct format
      3. Refer to each Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation)
    3. Tables
      1. Table captions should use APA style. See example
      2. Refer to each Table using APA style (e.g., do not use period)
      3. Each Table is referred to at least once within the main text
    4. Citations use correct APA style
    5. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation[2]
      2. Check and correct use of italicisation

Written expression – Learning features[edit source]

  1. Overall, the use of learning features is excellent
  2. Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles
  3. 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.
  4. Excellent use of image(s)
  5. Excellent use of table(s)
  6. Very good use of feature box(es)
  7. No use of quiz(zes)
  8. Excellent use of case studies or examples
  9. Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section
    1. Move external links to the external links section
    2. Use bullet points per Tutorial 02
    3. Also include links to related book chapters
  10. Very good use of external links in the "External links" section

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~1 logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:35, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]