Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Trauma-informed care

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Initial suggestions[edit source]

@Nabila.Tursun: Thanks for tackling this topic. Some initial suggestions:

  • Check out other related chapters and see how you can build on, link to, and integrate with that work:
  • What psychological theories can help to understand? What is the main research in this area?

Let me know if I can do anything else as you go along. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:11, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Heading casing[edit source]

Hi Nabila.Tursun. 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 11:28, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply


Topic development feedback[edit source]

The topic development submission 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 for 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.

Title[edit source]

  1. The title is correctly worded
  2. The sub-title is correctly worded
  3. The capitalisation of the title is incorrect. Be consistent with the book table of contents.
  4. Remove user name – authorship is as per the list of topics and the page's editing history

Headings[edit source]

  1. Excellent – Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic
  2. Good alignment between focus questions and heading structure

Overview[edit source]

  1. Move the scenario or case study into a feature box (with the image - make it smaller) to the start of this section to help catch reader interest
  2. Add an image to the case study to help attract reader interest
  3. Add a scenario or case study into a feature box (with an image) at the start of this section to help catch reader interest
  4. A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is provided
  5. Focus questions are aligned with sub-title and top-level headings

Key points[edit source]

  1. Excellent – key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations
  2. The earlier content will likely need to be kept relatively brief to allow for emphasis on the later sections
  3. Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research, with practical examples
  4. Conclusion (the most important section):
    1. Underway

Figure[edit source]

  1. Excellent - A relevant figure is presented, captioned, and cited

Learning feature[edit source]

  1. Promising use of in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters
  2. Promising use of example(s)/case study(ies)

References[edit source]

  1. Good
  2. Are there any systematic reviews about this topic?
  3. 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. See also
    1. Excellent
  2. External links
    1. Very good
    2. Use sentence casing

User page[edit source]

  1. Created – minimal, but sufficient
  2. 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.
  3. Link provided to book chapter

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Excellent – at least three different types of contributions with direct link(s) to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 08:45, 26 September 2023 (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 an excellent chapter. It successfully uses psychological theory and research to address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  2. This is a challenging topic which has been well handled
  3. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits

Overview[edit source]

  1. Well developed
  2. Engages reader interest by presenting a case study and/or scenario with an image in a feature box
  3. Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon
  4. Clear focus questions

Theory[edit source]

  1. An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained
  2. Builds effectively on related Wikipedia articles
  3. Build more strongly on other related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters)
  4. Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies)
  5. Effective use of tables, figures, and/or lists are to help clearly convey key theoretical information
  6. Insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations in some places (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)
  7. Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts

Research[edit source]

  1. Very good review of relevant research
  2. The impacts of trauma could be summarised in order to concentrate on trauma-informed care and research in this area
  3. More detail about key studies would be ideal
  4. Any systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? Greater emphasis on effect sizes could be helpful.
  5. Good critical thinking about relevant research is evident
  6. 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
  7. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)

Integration[edit source]

  1. Very good integration between theory and research

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Excellent summary and conclusion
  2. Key points are well summarised
  3. Clear take-home message(s)

Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent
    2. The target audience is international, rather than domestic. Australians represent 0.32% of the world human population.
    3. Some paragraphs are overly long. Communicate one key idea per paragraph in three to five sentences.
    4. "People" is often a better term than "individuals"
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections
    2. Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see [Provide more detail] tags)
    3. Figures
      1. Figures are very well captioned
      2. Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text
    4. Tables
      1. Use APA style for captions. See example
      2. Refer to each Table using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation)
    5. Citations use correct APA style
    6. References look good but are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation[1]
      2. Check and correct use of italicisation

Learning features[edit source]

  1. Excellent use of learning features
  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. Very good use of image(s)
  5. Very good use of table(s)
  6. Excellent use of feature box(es)
  7. Excellent case studies or examples
  8. Excellent use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s)
  9. The quiz questions could be more effective as learning prompts by being embedded as single questions within each corresponding section rather than as a set of questions at the end
  10. Excellent use of interwiki links in the "See also" section
  11. Very good use of external links in the "External links" section
    1. Add SAHMSA link

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~7 logged, useful, mostly minor social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

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[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is an excellent presentation

Overview[edit source]

  1. An opening slide with the title and sub-title is displayed and narrated — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation
  2. This presentation has a basic introduction to engage audience interest
  3. Establish a context for the presentation (e.g., by using an example or explaining why it is important), to help the viewer understand
  4. Consider asking focus questions that lead to take-away messages. This will help to focus and discipline the presentation.

Content[edit source]

  1. Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section
  2. The presentation addresses the topic
  3. The presentation makes very good use of relevant psychological theory
  4. The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological research
  5. Ideally, make more explicit use of research
  6. The presentation includes citations to support claims
  7. The presentation makes excellent use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice
  8. The presentation provides practical, easy to understand information

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A Conclusion slide is presented with good take-home message(s)
  2. Consider also showing take-home messages on the conclusion slide

Audio[edit source]

  1. The audio is easy to follow and interesting to listen to
  2. The presentation makes effective use of narrated audio
  3. Audio communication is well paced
  4. Very good intonation
  5. The narration is well practiced and/or performed
  6. Audio recording quality was excellent
  7. The narrated content is well matched to the target topic (see content)

Video[edit source]

  1. Overall, visual display quality is excellent
  2. The presentation makes creative use of stock video, text, and images
  3. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read
  4. Check and correct Australian vs. American spelling
  5. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images and/or diagrams
  6. The presentation is very well produced
  7. The visual content is well matched to the target topic (see content)

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 written description of the presentation is provided
  3. Links to and from the book chapter are provided

Licensing[edit source]

  1. Image sources and their copyright status are communicated
  2. A copyright license for the presentation is not provided

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply