Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Remote work and well-being

Suggestion

Hi there, super interesting topic! I definitely think research and some focus from the COVID - 19 pandemic may be useful for your book chapter, especially in regards to the wellbeing aspect of remote work :) Jacqueline Di Fronzo (discuss • contribs) 03:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Heading casing

Hi ShayveSukhoo. 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 ~~~~

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 Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development and/or refinement Develop closer alignment between sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings Remove trailing colons Spellcheck needed 3. Overview Very good Move the scenario or case study into a feature box (with an image) to the start of this section to help catch reader interest A brief, evocative description of the problem/topic is provided Closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings is recommended Remove question about case study because it is not intrinsic to the topic Present focus questions in a feature box at the end of this section (separate from the case study) 4. Key points Promising development of key points Basic use of citations Promising balance of theory and research Use APA style 7th edition for citations For sections which include sub-sections, include the key points for an overview paragraph prior to branching into the sub-headings Consider using the Studiosity service and/or a service like Grammarly to help improve the quality of written expression such as checking grammatical and spelling errors 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 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 Promising in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to relevant book chapters Consider use of 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 7. References Basic Are there any systematic reviews about this topic? Move non-academic / non-peer reviewed sources to External links Check and correct APA referencing style: remove citations at the end of the references remove apostrophes capitalisation italicisation (e.g., volume number needs to be italicised) Remember that the goal is to identify and use the best academic theory and research about this topic 8. Resources See also Very good Use alphabetical order External links Very good Use bullet-points (see Tutorial 02) Include a space before the source in brackets after link Use alphabetical order 9. User page Not created – see Tutorial 02 10. Social contribution None summarised on user page with direct link(s) to evidence (see Tutorial 03). Looking ahead to the book chapter submission, see social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:23, 2 September 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 insufficient chapter The main area for potential improvement is to review integrate the best psychological research about the topic The quality of written expression can also be improved so that it is closer to a professional standard I suspect that some of this chapter is based on unacknowledged use of genAI content; if so, it violates academic integrity principles Insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations (e.g., see the tags) Under the maximum word count, so there is room to expand For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Underdeveloped No case study was presented. I've moved one up from lower down. Clearly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon No focus questions were presented. I've moved some up from lower down. The focus questions are basic The focus questions could be improved by being: more specific to the topic (i.e., the sub-title) presented in a feature box to help guide the reader (fixed) Theory 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 Builds effectively on other chapters and/or Wikipedia articles Basic depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Basic use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help convey key theoretical information Insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) The Reeve (2018) textbook is overused as a citation – instead, use primary, peer-reviewed sources Insufficient use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Insufficient review of relevant research More detail about key studies would be ideal Any systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? Insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Insufficient 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 Many claims lack sufficient citation (e.g., see the tags) Integration Insufficient integration between theory and research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than on research; strive for an integrated balance Conclusion Basic summary and conclusion Reads like unacknowledged genAI content Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is basic Avoid one sentence paragraphs. Communicate one idea per paragraph using three to five sentences. Bullet points are overused. Develop more of the bullet point statements into full sentences and paragraphs. Layout Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see tags) Grammar The grammar for some/many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Consider using a grammar checking tool Another option is to use a services provided by UC, such as Studiosity Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance Spelling Some words are misspelt (e.g., see the tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour) Proofreading More proofreading is needed (e.g., fix punctuation and typographical errors) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard Figures Reasonably 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 basic 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: in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020) References use basic APA style: Check and correct use of capitalisation[1] Check and correct use of italicisation More proofreading needed Learning features Basic/Insufficient use of learning features Very good use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Only use interwiki links for the first mention of key words. 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) Basic use of feature box(es) Insufficient use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Basic use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) The quiz questions could be improved by being more focused on the key points and/or take-home messages Reasonably good use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Use alphabetical order Basic use of external links in the "External links" section Use alphabetical order Social contribution No logged contributions

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:08, 31 October 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 basic presentation The presentation is over the maximum time limit — content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes Overview The opening conveys the purpose of the presentation in a basic way The opening does not adequately convey the purpose of the presentation The presentation has a basic introduction to engage audience interest Establish a context for the presentation (e.g., use an example or explain importance) 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 There is too much content (goes over time) The presentation makes reasonably good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes no use of citations to support claims The presentation makes no use of one or more examples The presentation provides basic practical advice The presentation provides easy to understand information Conclusion The conclusion provides a reasonably good summary of the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic The conclusion provides reasonably good take-home message(s) The Conclusion only partly fitted within the time limit The Conclusion did not fit within the time limit Audio The presentation makes basic use of narrated audio Audio communication is well-paced Reasonably good intonation The narration is well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was good Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality Probably an on-board microphone was used (e.g., keyboard and/or mouse clicks were audible). Consider using an external microphone. The narrated content is reasonably well matched to the target topic Video Overall, visual display quality is reasonably good The presentation makes reasonably good use of text and image based slides Some of the font size could be larger to make it easier to read The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time The visual communication is supplemented in a basic way by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is basically produced using simple tools The visual content is reasonably 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. A very brief written description of the presentation is provided. Expand.

-- Meta-data - Links --> A link to the book chapter is not provided A link from the book chapter is provided The presentation is incorrectly categorised as being for kids. This creates limitations, such as being unable to add the presentation to a playlist. More info. Licensing Provide clickable links to the image sources (e.g., in the description) A copyright license for the presentation is not clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)