Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
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.
Messy heading structure – needs work (see Tutorial 2)
Adopt closer alignment between sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings
Aim for 3 to 6 top-level headings between the Overview and Conclusion, with up to a similar number of sub-headings for large sections
Use default heading formatting (i.e., avoid bold, italics, underline, changing the size etc.)
Avoid having sections with only 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings
Usually an "Introduction" section isn't necessary because the Overview should do this job and, if there is additional detail, consider using more more descriptive heading(s)
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)
Excellent use of one or more scenarios/examples/case studies
Excellent use of quiz question(s)
Also consider using one or more tables to summarise key information
Very brief description about self – 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.
A link to the book chapter is provided
Rename the link to the book chapter to make it more user-friendly (see Tutorial 02)
None summarised on user page with direct link(s) to evidence (see Tutorial 03). Looking ahead to the book chapter submission, see social contributions.
I just read through your chapter and your making very good progress on it!
I thought I might suggest going through and including a few quizzes or figures to help break up the text and make it more digestible, possibly at the end of each section with a major heading, similar to what you did with your "positive surprise" (well played btw)
Latest comment: 5 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
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.
The main area for potential improvement is to acknowledge use of genAI, to human rewrite and fact-check content, and to address the topic within the maximum word count
I suspect that a lot of this chapter is based on unacknowledged use of genAI content; if so, it violates academic integrity principles
Basic use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims
Over the maximum word count. The content beyond 4,000 words (i.e., quizzes, conclusion, see also, and references) has been ignored for marking purposes.
There is a lot of repetitive text
For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits
A promising range of ideas are presented but it is far from clear how this material is derived from a first person reading of the best peer-reviewed psychological theory and research about this topic
Build more strongly on related chapters and Wikipedia articles (e.g., by embedding links for key terms)
Basic depth is provided about relevant theory(ies)
Basic use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help convey key theoretical information
Not all of the references are cited (e.g., Kringerlbach, 2004)
Basic use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts
Overall, the quality of written expression is below professional standard. UC Study Skills assistance is recommended to help improve writing skills
Bullet points are overused. Develop more of the bullet point statements into full sentences and paragraphs.
Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[1] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes
Layout
The structure is overly complicated; aim for 3 to 6 top-level headings between the Introduction and Conclusion
Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings
Use the default heading style (e.g., remove additional italics, bold, and/or change in font size)
Remove abbreviations
Abbreviations
Once an abbreviation has been established (e.g., PTSD), use it consistently aftwarwards
Spelling
Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour)
Proofreading
More proofreading is needed to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard
No use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text 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.
Basic use of figure(s)
Basic use of table(s)
Reasonably good use of feature box(es)
Reasonably good use of scenarios, case studies, or examples
Not counted for marking purposes due to being over the maximum word count
Not counted for marking purposes due to being over the maximum word count
Not counted for marking purposes due to being over the maximum word count