Talk:Motivation and emotion/Textbook/Motivation/Social inhibition

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Chapter feedback

This textbook chapter 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. Please also check the chapter's page history to see what editing changes I have made whilst reading through the chapter. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below or continuing to improve the chapter if you wish. 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.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit]

  1. Overall, this is a borderline Pass. The key problem is that the textbook chapter has so little referencing and several of the cited references I doubt were even consulted given their publication date. The general structure and argument was good, but the language was somewhat colloquial and presented in very long paragraphs. There was little in the way of additional learning features.

Theory[edit]

  1. A strength of the chapter was its focus on three theories which can be used to help explain and understand why people might socially inhibited.
  2. A further focus on motivation, to help frame and contextualise this topic within the rest of the chapters would be helpful.

Research[edit]

  1. Several claims are made (e.g., about superiority of one theory over another), but these don't seem to be based on reading and citation of much peer-reviewed literature.

Written expression[edit]

  1. Written expression
    1. Some paragraphs were overly long (e.g., first paragraph of The Drive Theory). Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    2. Avoid colloquialism e.g., "Now according to drive theory" -> "According to drive theory" and "So evaluation apprehension theory" -> "Evaluation apprehension theory"
    3. Several sections lacked sufficient referencing e.g., Natural Means
    4. The chapter could have benefited from development of some clear focus questions. Getting comments on a chapter plan and/or chapter draft could have helped with this aspect.
  2. Learning features
    1. Add relevant wiki-links e.g., to animals
    2. No images?
  3. Spelling, grammar and proofreading
    1. Questions should end with question marks (e.g. first paragraph).
    2. Check mixed tense - e.g., first sentence (second person, then third person).
    3. and colleagues -> et al.
    4. Check use of ownership apostrophes e.g., individuals -> individual's
    5. Better spell-checking needed e.g., mite -> might
  4. APA style
    1. Did you directly consult Allport (1920)? If not, this should be a secondary citation.
    2. Numbers under 10 should be written in words e.g. five

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:20, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


Multimedia feedback

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's Canvas 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.

Multimedia.png

Overall[edit]

Structure and content[edit]

  1. Overall, this presentation provides a basic, clear explanation of theory and some research about social inhibition. A key strength is the well developed script which has a disciplined focus on comparing and contrasting three theories about social inhibition.
  2. Explain why this topic is important - and how it connects to motivation.
  3. The script and argument was clear and well developed.
  4. Slides
  5. Font size - make it slightly larger (fill the blank space)
  6. Narrative voice is clear, but could use greater variation in tone
  7. Clear focus on theoretical explanations
  8. Examples?
  9. Images?
  10. Animation of bullet points?
  11. Copyright of presentation?

Communication[edit]

Production quality[edit]

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:52, 14 December 2010 (UTC)