Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/Self-efficacy

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comment[edit]

Great plan alicia :) I like what youve included and looks to be a very interesting chapter that everyone can relate too. cant wait to read more! Courtney.reis 07:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

This chapter has great potential. I think you've done a great job in covering the important questions that relate to the topic. I dont know much about self-efficacy, so i am looking forward to what you write! Atice 01 03:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey Alicia made some minor spelling edits on ur page, feel free to undo if I am wrong! I like the new bits youve put on, should be great once you expand! Courtney.reis 04:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Alicia. Your outline looks really comprehensive. Looking like it's going to be a good chapter. I like how you have main points in the boxes on the side, these are a great (and helpful!) addition.

Hi Alicia, Looking good. This article may be of use for the section 'Self efficacy and motivation' http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy1.canberra.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=89530e19-7a30-411e-9ec5-5c9756487980%40sessionmgr114&vid=4&hid=108

I have a copy if that link does not work AlexMC 05:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey Alicia, great planning and execution :) Do you need any feedback or help in particular for your chapter? --Jaybay 08:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - yours look really fab. Think I stole the shape of one of your little boxes - they were good. Just wish mine was finished just now though. :) Jeanette 12:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Alicia. I know it's late - I just thought I would drop through and congratulate you! The page looks great, well done :) (Psych 125 21:47, 6 November 2011 (UTC))

Hi - this would make an excellent topic to adapt for school children - very well researched - well done - Magnolia


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. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Chapter marks will be available later via Moodle, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit]

  1. Overall, this chapter provides a solid overview of the motivation role of self-efficacy, with good coverage of key theoretical principles, reference to some relevant illustrative research studies, and use of some additional learning features, particularly highlight boxes and a quiz. The main area for improvement is the quality of written expression and perhaps in providing more examples.

Theory[edit]

  1. Self-efficacy theory is well covered.
  2. Perhaps a stronger introduction overviewing the range of theory, would be helpful.
  3. A key point that is made, but could be strengthened, is that Bandura argues against general self-efficacy and for domain-specific self-efficacies.

Research[edit]

  1. The research component could be strengthened. A limited range of research studies (out of the vast amount available) are cited.
  2. Consider citing meta-analyses and relevant effect sizes.
  3. Narrow in on self-efficacy research related to motivation.
  4. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.

Written expression[edit]

  1. Written expression
    1. The chapter would benefit from further drafting. For example, see the [Rewrite to improve clarity] and [grammar?] tags for suggestions where the quality of written expression could be improved. Also see my edits for further examples.
    2. Avoid directional referencing e.g., "As previously mentioned"
    3. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences.
    4. The chapter could have benefited from a more developed Introduction and Summary in terms of focusing on clear focus questions (Introduction) and a clear take-home self-help message for each focus question (Summary). Development of focus questions was discussed in Tutorial 1.
    5. Getting comments on an early chapter draft could have helped to improve the chapter.
  2. Learning features
    1. More [iInterwiki links]] could be added.
    2. Four images used; more could be added
    3. Quiz worked well
  3. Spelling, grammar and proofreading
    1. Many, basic errors noted; Room for improvement.
    2. Check use of ownership apostrophes e.g., individuals -> individual's
    3. Use Australian spelling e.g., hypothesize -> hypothesise
    4. Many proofreading errors noted; worth further checking/correcting
    5. The grammar for some sentences could be improved - see the [grammar?] tags
  4. APA style
    1. In-text citations were well used.
    2. In-text citations should be in alphabetical order e.g., (Neissaar & Raudsepp, 2011; Tschannen-Moran & McMaster, 2009; Maddux, 1995)
    3. Reference list APA style was OK; one key improvement would be correct use of capitalistion.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via login to the unit's Moodle site. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a 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. If you wish to dispute the marks, see the suggested marking dispute process.

Multimedia.png

Overall[edit]

  1. Overall, this is a very effective presentation, making excellent use of self-created images and simple (well-selected) text. Audio is well-paced and articulated, helping to make for an entertaining and educative viewing experience.

Structure and content[edit]

  1. General introduction example with Timmy works well to set the scene and focus the topic
  2. Perhaps also establish some focus questions
  3. Much content is covered in an efficient manner. Perhaps slightly less content could be covered e.g., to allow for a more substantial summary/wrap-up.
  4. Last couple of slides were too fast/small to read

Communication[edit]

  1. Audio is clear and well-paced
  2. Intonation adds interest and gains attention
  3. Slide text is clear and information; not too much text is presented in each slide
  4. Self-created pictures are simple and very effective

Production quality[edit]

  1. Production quality is high.
  2. Audio is very clear.
  3. Thanks for licensing the presentation under a Creative Commons license.
  4. Provide a link to the book chapter in the multimedia description.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:26, 10 December 2011 (UTC)