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.
Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development
A heading about eating disorders isn't necessary. Instead, briefly describe/compare/contrast orthorexia and then provide embedded links to related book chapters and/or Wikipedia articles for more info about EDs more generally and/or other specific EDs
Reasonably good alignment between focus questions and heading structure, but consider closer alignment
Avoid having sections with only 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings
Quizzes don't need headings; concentrate quiz questions on the take-home messages in response to the sub-title/focus questions
Promising development of key points for each section, with relevant citations
Avoid providing too much background information. Aim to briefly summarise general concepts and provide internal links to relevant book chapters and/or Wikipedia pages for further information. Then focus most of the content on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title.
For sections which include sub-sections, include the key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings
Strive for an integrated balance of theory and research, with practical examples
Where "individuals" is used, consider instead referring to "people"
Generally well-written, but I recommend using the Studiosity service and/or a service like Grammarly to help improve the quality of written expression because there are grammatical errors.
Conclusion (the most important section):
Underway
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?)
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.
None summarised on user page with direct link(s) to evidence – this was covered in Tutorial 03. Looking ahead to the book chapter submission, see how to earn marks for social contributions.
Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, reading your chapter so far it looks like it flows really nicely and is very interesting. I think it’s kind of connected to my chapter topic on the gut-brain axis and emotion. I’ve come across an article you might find interesting that explains how starting a specific diet for “digestive issues” due to gut imbalances, can lead to orthorexia. If you’re interested, heres the link for the study https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/nmo.14427U3239091 (discuss • contribs) 23:13, 26 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 17 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.
An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained
Refer to current version of the DSM
Builds somewhat on Wikipedia articles; to improve the chapter, build more strongly on other Wikipedia articles related book chapters by including more embedded links for key terms
Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies)
Basic use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help convey key theoretical information
Key citations are well used
In some places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the [factual?] tags)
Excellent use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts
Overall, the quality of written expression is OK but there are several aspects which are below professional standard
Some sentences could be explained more clearly (e.g., see the [explain?] and [improve clarity] tags)
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 34.5. Aim for 50+.
Avoid starting sentences with a citation unless the author is particularly pertinent. Instead, it is more interesting for the the content/key point to be communicated, with the citation included along the way or, more typically, in parentheses at the end of the sentence.
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
Some words are misspelt (e.g., see the [spelling?] tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages.
Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used ... as slang, or as an invented or coined expression" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159)
Figures
Well captioned
Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1)
Tables
Table captions use APA style or wiki style
Each Table is referred to at least once within the main text using APA style
Citations use good APA style (7th ed.). To improve:
If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either:
Basic 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.
Reasonably good use of image(s)
Basic use of table(s)
Reasonably good use of feature box(es)
Very good use of case studies or examples
Excellent use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s)
Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section
Also include links to related Wikipedia articles
Use alphabetical order
Not counted for marking purposes due to being over the maximum word count
Basic use of external links in the "External links" section
Latest comment: 5 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
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.