Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Ecopsychological approaches to trauma

Heading casing

Hi Beabosborne. 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 02:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Topic development feedback

The topic development submission has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is below, plus see the general feedback page. Please also check the page history for 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. Marks are available via UCLearn. Marks are based on the latest version before the due date.

1. Title The title and sub-title are correctly worded and formatted 2. Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Revise heading structure to place less emphasis on background concepts and more emphasis on the target topic. The draft headings place too much emphasis on background concepts and too little on the relationship between the concepts. Adopt closer alignment between sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings 3. Overview Move the scenario or case study into a feature box (with an image) to the start of this section to help catch reader interest Simplify/abbreviate the description of the problem/topic. Move detail into subsequent sections. Use 3rd person perspective (except 1st/2nd person can work for feature boxes/scenarios) Closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings is recommended 4. Key points Insufficient development Basic use of citations Strive for an integrated balance of the best psychological theory and research about this topic, with practical examples It is unclear whether the best available psychological theory and research has been consulted in the preparation of this plan Conclusion (the most important section) hasn't been developed What might the take-home, practical messages be? (What are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title and/or focus questions?) 5. Figure One or more relevant figure(s) presented and captioned The figure caption(s) provide(s) a clear, appropriately detailed description that is meaningfully connected with the main text Figure(s) are cited at least once in the main text Cite each figure at least once in the main text using APA style (e.g., see Figure 1) Consider increasing image size from to make it easier to view 6. Learning feature Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters (see Tutorial 2) Promising use of one or more scenarios/examples/case studies Consider including one or more quiz question(s) about the take-home messages Also consider using one or more tables to summarise key information Consider including more examples/case studies, quiz question(s), table(s) etc. 7. References Very good Are there any systematic reviews about this topic? Check and correct APA referencing style: capitalisation make doi hyperlinks active (i.e., clickable) use dois where available instead of other links 8. Resources See also Excellent Use alphabetical order External links Not developed (see Tutorial 2) 9. User page Used effectively Excellent 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. A link to the book chapter is provided 10. Social contribution At least three different types of contributions with direct link(s) to evidence If you fix a page, also remove the tag (e.g., [https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Motivation_and_emotion%2FBook%2F2021%2FNature_and_psychological_distress&diff=2650224&oldid=2645903 I followed up after your edit)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

social contribution

hey, you have done a fantastic job so far. the case study is very engaging. the chapter is organised which keeps it engaging. it would be interesting to include demographic aspects expanding on how ecopsychology approaches may differ across various population.

I enjoyed the Focus on Practical Healing especially. it might be helpful to add in clarity on complex terms ie nonduality to accommodate for a broader audience.

you have done a wonderful job so far. well, done :) U3236683 (discuss • contribs) 07:09, 3 October 2024 (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 an excellent chapter. It successfully uses psychological theory and research to address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem. Excellent use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Reasonably good Engages reader via a case study or scenario in a feature box; also include a relevant image The scenario is not sufficiently tailored to the topic Explains the psychological problem or phenomenon reasonably well The focus questions are clear and relevant Theory An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Builds somewhat on other chapters and/or Wikipedia articles Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Excellent use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help clearly convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Very good review of relevant research More detail about key studies would be ideal Very good 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 considering the strength of relationships acknowledging limitations pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Claims are well referenced Integration Excellent integration between theory and research Conclusion Excellent summary and conclusion Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is very good Use active (e.g., "this chapter explores") rather than passive voice (e.g., "this chapter has explored" or "this chapter will explore") [1][2] Some sentences are overly long. Strive for the simplest expression. Consider splitting longer sentences into two shorter sentences. Shorter words and sentences are more readable. Try conducting a readability analysis such as via https://www.webfx.com/tools/read-able/. This chapter gets a score of . Aim for 50+. Some paragraphs are overly long. Communicate one key idea per paragraph in three to five sentences. Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[3] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead: it is, most often, not needed at all, or use section linking Embed direct quotes within sentences and paragraphs, rather than presenting them holus-bolus Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections Use the default heading style (e.g., remove additional italics, bold, and/or change in font size) See earlier comments about heading casing Spelling Some words are misspelt (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Proofreading More proofreading is needed (e.g., fix punctuation and typographical errors) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard Remove unnecessary capitalisation – more info APA style Use sentence casing for the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc. Use serial commas[4]. Video (1 min) Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used ... as slang, or as an invented or coined expression" (APA Style 7th ed., 2020, p. 159) Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, communicate about concepts in your own words Figures Very well captioned Use this format for captions: Figure X. Descriptive caption goes here in sentence casing. See example. Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., "(see Figure 1)") Tables Use APA style for captions (see example) Each Table is referred to at least once within the main text Citations use excellent APA style (7th ed.) References use good APA style: Check and correct use of capitalisation[5] Include hyperlinked dois (fixed) Move non-peer reviewed links into the External links section Learning features Excellent use of learning features Reasonably good 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 even 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. Very good use of figure(s) Very good use of table(s) Excellent use of feature box(es) Excellent use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Basic use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Excellent use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Use sentence casing Excellent use of external links in the "External links" section Use sentence casing Social contribution ~19 logged, useful, mostly minor to moderate/major contributions with mostly direct links to evidence There were no direct links to X posts

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:23, 2 November 2024 (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 very good presentation Overview The opening conveys the purpose of the presentation in a very good way The title/sub-title on the opening slide doesn't match the book chapter The presentation has a basic introduction to engage audience interest A context for the presentation is established A basic context for the presentation is established Consider asking focus questions to help focus and discipline the presentation Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation addresses the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes excellent use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes insufficient use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes insufficient use of citations to support claims The presentation makes reasonably good use of one or more examples The presentation provides practical advice Provide easy to understand information Conclusion The conclusion provides an very good summary of the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic The conclusion provides very good take-home message(s) Audio The audio is easy to follow Mute or quieten the music to make it easier to follow the narration The presentation makes very good use of narrated audio Audio communication is well-paced Very good/ intonation The narration could benefit from further scripting and/or practice Audio recording quality was good The narrated content is well matched to the target topic Video Overall, visual display quality is excellent The presentation makes creative use of animation, video, image, and text The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read Check spelling (e.g., biophilia, Stephen) The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time The visual communication is supplemented in an excellent way by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is very well produced The visual content is well matched to the target topic Meta-data The video title does not match the chapter title and sub-title. This would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation and be consistent. Provide a written description of the presentation to help potential viewers A link to the book chapter is not provided A link from the book chapter is provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are communicated A copyright license for the presentation is not clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)