Template:MEBF/2021

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Marking and feedback template for the book chapter exercise for the motivation and emotion unit. Designed to be transcluded on a chapter talk page.

Simple example

Simple example[edit source]

See also detailed example

<!-- Official feedback -->
{{MEBF/2021
|1=
<!-- Overall comments... -->
#
|2=
<!-- Overview comments... -->
# 
|3=
<!-- Theory — Depth comments... -->
# 
|4=
<!-- Theory — Breadth comments... -->
# 
|5=
<!-- Research — Key findings comments... -->
# 
|6=
<!-- Research — Critical thinking comments... -->
# 
|7=
<!-- Integration comments... -->
# 
|8=
<!-- Conclusion comments... -->
#
|9=
<!-- Written expression — Style comments... -->
#
|10=
<!-- Written expression — Learning features comments... -->
#
|11=
<!-- Social contribution comments... -->
#
}}
~~~~

gives

Chapter review and feedback[edit source]

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.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit source]

Overview[edit source]

Theory — Breadth[edit source]

Theory — Depth[edit source]

Research — Key findings[edit source]

Research — Critical thinking[edit source]

Integration[edit source]

Conclusion[edit source]

Written expression — Style[edit source]

Written expression — Learning features[edit source]

Social contribution[edit source]

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Detailed example[edit source]

Example use of the template which includes some commonly provided feedback comments:

<!-- Official book chapter feedback -->
{{MEBF/2021
|1=
<!-- Overall comments... -->
# Overall, this is an excellent chapter that successfully uses psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
# Overall, this is a solid chapter that makes good use of psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
# Overall, this is a basic, but sufficient chapter.
# Overall, this is an insufficient chapter. I suspect that the [[Motivation and emotion/Assessment#Assessment items|recommended 5 topic development hours and 45 book chapter hours]] were not invested in preparing this chapter. 
# Insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations. Non-peer reviewed sources are over-used. Move non-peer reviewed links into the external links section.
# Well under the [[Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Chapter#Word_count|maximum word count]], so there is room to expand.
# Well over the [[Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Chapter#Word_count|maximum word count]].
# This chapter "[[wikt:beat around the bush|beats around the bush]]" for ~* words (i.e., too much preamble) before starting to directly tackle the target topic in the section titled "*".
# Addressing the [[#Topic development feedback|topic development feedback]] could have helped to improve this chapter.
# There is feedback about the topic development that has been ignored, so it is not repeated in these book chapter comments.
# For additional feedback, see the following comments and [ these copyedits].
|2=
<!-- Overview comments... -->
# Well developed Overview.
# Solid Overview.
# Basic Overview.
# The Overview is underdeveloped.
# Too long. Move detailed content in subsequent sections. The purpose of the Overview is to briefly explain the topic, engage reader interest, and establish focus questions for the chapter.
# Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon.
# Explain the problem or phenomenon in more detail.
# Engages reader interest by introducing a case study and/or example and/or using an image.
# Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest.
# Clear focus question(s).
# The focus questions could be improved by being more specific to the topic (i.e., the sub-title).
# Ideally, provide [[w:Open-ended question|open-ended]], rather than [[Closed-ended question|closed-ended]] focus questions.
# Add focus questions in a feature box to help guide the reader and structure the chapter.
|3=
<!-- Theory — Breadth comments... -->
# Relevant theories are well selected, described, and explained.
# The chapter doesn't wander off into discussion of irrelevant theory.
# Relevant theory is reasonably well explained.
# Basic but sufficient coverage of relevant theory is provided.
# Insufficient use of psychological theory about this topic.
# Build more strongly on other *-related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters in this category: [[:Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/*]]).
# There is too much general theoretical material. Instead, summarise and link to further information (such as other book chapters or Wikipedia articles), to allow this chapter to focus on the specific topic (i.e., the sub-title question).
|4=
<!-- Theory — Depth comments... -->
# Appropriate depth is provided about the selected theory(ies).
# Basic depth is provided about the selected theory(ies).
# Key citations are well used.
# Tables and/or lists are used effectively to help clearly convey key theoretical information.
# Some useful examples are provided to illustrate theoretical concepts.
# More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts.
# Insufficient use of relevant psychological theory.
# Place more emphasis on explaining the underlying theoretical constructs than methods of measurement.
# Did you consult ? If not, this should be cited as a [https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/citations/secondary-sources secondary source].
# The Reeve (2018) textbook is overused as a citation — instead, utilise primary, peer-reviewed sources.
|5=
<!-- Research — Key findings comments... -->
# Relevant research is well reviewed.
# Basic overview of relevant research.
# More detail about key studies would be ideal.
# Insufficient use of relevant psychological research.
# Greater emphasis on effect sizes, major reviews, and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.
|6=
<!-- Research — Critical thinking comments... -->
# Excellent/very good/good/basic/insufficient critical thinking about research is evident.
# Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by:
## describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies
## discussing the direction of relationships
## considering the strength of relationships
## acknowledging limitations
## suggesting ''specific'' directions for future research
# Claims are referenced.
# Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the {{fact}} tags).
|7=
<!-- Integration comments... -->
# Discussion of theory and research is well integrated.
# There is basic integration between theory and research.
# Insufficient integration of theory and research.
# The chapter places more emphasis on theory than research.
# Where research is discussed, it is integrated with theory.
|8=
<!-- Conclusion comments... -->
# Key points are well summarised.
# Basic summary.
# Consider reminding the reader about the importance of the problem or phenomenon of interest.
# Summarise key points.
# Insufficient as a cohesive summary of what the best available psychological theory and research has to say about the topic.
# Address the focus questions.
# Clear take-home message(s).
# Add practical, take-home message(s).
|9=
<!-- Written expression — Style comments... -->
# Written expression
## Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent/very good/good/basic.
## Overall, the quality of written expression is below professional standard. [https://www.canberra.edu.au/current-students/study-skills UC Study Skills] assistance is recommended to help improve writing skills.
## Some of the written expression is quite abstract, which makes this a difficult read for an unfamiliar reader. Consider ways of simplifying the written expression to make it more accessible to a wider audience. This is the essence of [[w:science communication|science communication]].
## Use active (e.g., "this chapter explored") rather than passive voice (e.g., "this chapter has explored") [https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/grammar/active-passive-voice][https://www.grammarly.com/blog/active-vs-passive-voice/].
## Internationalise: Write for an international, rather than domestic, audience. [http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/australia-population/ Australians make up only 0.32% of the world human population].
## Obtaining (earlier) comments on a chapter plan and/or chapter draft could have helped to improve the chapter.
## Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
## Some sentences are unnecessarily wordy — strive for the simplest expression of the point being made.
## Some sentences are overly long; consider splitting them into shorter, separate sentences.
## Some statements could be explained more clearly — see the {{explain}} tags.
## The chapter could be improved by developing some of the bullet-points into full paragraph format.
## Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead:
### it is, most often, not needed at all, or
### use [[w:Help#Section linking|section linking]].
## Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences.
## Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[https://www.grammarly.com/blog/first-second-and-third-person/] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes.
## 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.
## Direct quotes should be embedded within sentences and paragraphs, rather than dumped holus-bolus. Even better, communicate the concept in your own words.
## "People" is often a better term than "individuals".
## Use gender-neutral language (e.g., mankind -> humankind, s/he -> they).
## Reduce use of [[w:weasel word|weasel word]]s which bulk out the text, but don't enhance meaning.
## Use permanent, rather than relative, time references. For example, instead of "20 years ago", refer to something like "at the beginning of the 21st century". In this way, the text will survive better into the future, without needing to be rewritten.
## Avoid overly emotive language (e.g,. *) in science-based communication.
# Layout
## The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
## Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections.
## Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading — use 0 or 2+ sub-headings.
## Use the default heading style (e.g., remove additional bold).
## See earlier comments about [[#Heading casing|heading casing]].
## Provide more descriptive headings (e.g., consider using a brief description of the key point for the section titled "*"?).
# Grammar, spelling, and proofreading are excellent.
# Grammar
## The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the {{grammar}} tags). Grammar-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance.
## Check and make [https://www.grammarly.com/blog/comma/ correct use of commas].
## Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/punctuation/apostrophe-rules.html].
## Use [[w:Serial comma|serial comma]]s[https://www.buzzfeed.com/adamdavis/the-oxford-comma-is-extremely-important-and-everyone-should] — they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by [[wikt:grammaticist|grammaticist]]s. Here's an [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBx8ooDupXY explanatory video] (1 min).
## Check and correct use of [https://www.google.com.au/search?q=grammar+that+vs+who that vs. who].
## Check and correct use of [https://www.google.com.au/search?q=affect+vs.+effect+grammar affect vs. effect].
## Check and correct use of [http://www.colonsemicolon.com/ semi-colons (;) and colons (:)].
## Abbreviations
### Check and correct grammatical formatting for abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e., et al., etc.).
### Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e., et al., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses.
### Use abbreviations sparingly. Do not use abbreviations for minor terms that aren't used very much in the chapter.
### Once an abbreviation is established (e.g., PTSD), use it consistently. Don't set up an abbreviation and then not use it or only use it sometimes.
# Spelling
## Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the {{spelling}} tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages.
## Use [https://www.abc.net.au/education/learn-english/australian-vs-american-spelling/11244196 Australian spelling] (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour).
# Proofreading
## More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard.
## Remove unnecessary capitalisation.
<!-- APA style -->
# APA style
## [https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/capitalization/diseases-disorders-therapies Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc.].
## Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used as an ironic comment, as slang, or as an invented or coined expression; use quotation marks only for the first occurrence of the word or phrase, not for subsequent occurrences" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159).
## Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numerals (e.g., 10).
## Direct quotes need page numbers — even better, write in your own words.
## Replace double spaces with single spaces.
<!-- Figures -->
## Figures
### Figures are very well captioned.
### Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text.
### Figure captions use the correct format.
### Figure captions should use this format: ''Figure X''. Descriptive caption in sentence casing. [[Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Chapter/Figures|See example]].
### Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text.
### Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).
### Figures are referred to using APA style.
### Refer to each Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation).
<!-- Tables -->
## Tables
### Table captions use APA style.
### Table captions should use APA style. [[Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Chapter/Tables|See example]].
### Tables are referred to using APA style.
### Refer to each Table using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation).
### Each Table is referred to at least once within the main text.
### Refer to each Table at least once within the main text (e.g., see Table 1).
<!-- Citations -->
## Citations use correct APA style.
## Citations are not in full APA style (7th ed.). For example:
### 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)
### Do not include author initials.
### Use ampersand (&) inside parentheses and "and" outside parentheses.
### Multiple citations in parentheses should be listed in alphabetical order by first author surname.
### A full stop is needed after "et al" (i.e., "et al.").
### Citations in parentheses should use a comma between the author(s) and year.
### Select up to a maximum of three citations per point (i.e., avoid citing four or more citations to support a single point).
<!-- References -->
## References use correct APA style.
## References are not in full APA style. For example:
### Check and correct use of capitalisation[https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/capitalization]
### Check and correct use of italicisation
### "Retrieved from" is no longer used (APA style, 7th ed.)
### Add spaces between author initials
### Page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-)
### Include hyperlinked dois
### Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section
|10=
<!-- Written expression — Learning features comments... -->
# Overall, the use of learning features is excellent/very good/good/basic/insufficient.
# Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/One/No use of embedded in-text [[m:Help:Interwiki linking|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 [[Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Nutrition and anxiety|example]].
# Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/One/No use of embedded in-text links to related [[Motivation and emotion/Book|book chapters]]. Embedding in-text links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project.
# Use in-text [[m:Help:Interwiki linking|interwiki links]], rather than external links, per [[Motivation and emotion/Tutorials/Introduction|Tutorial 1]].
# Links to non-peer-reviewed sources should be moved to the external links section.
# Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of image(s).
# Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of table(s).
# Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of feature box(es).
# Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of quiz(zes).
# The quiz questions could be more effective as learning prompts by being embedded as single questions within each corresponding section rather than being presented as a set of questions at the end.
# Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of case studies or examples.
# Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of interwiki links in the "See also" section.
# Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of external links in the "External links" section.
# Format bullet-points and numbered lists, per [[Motivation and emotion/Tutorials/Introduction|Tutorial 1]].
|11=
<!-- Social contribution comments... -->
# ~ logged, useful, minor/moderate/major social contributions with direct links to evidence.
# ~ logged social contributions without [[Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Chapter#Making and summarising social contributions|direct links to evidence]], so unable to easily verify and assess.
# Contributions made across three platforms.
# No logged social contributions.
}}
~~~~

gives

Chapter review and feedback[edit source]

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.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is an excellent chapter that successfully uses psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  2. Overall, this is a solid chapter that makes good use of psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  3. Overall, this is a basic, but sufficient chapter.
  4. Overall, this is an insufficient chapter. I suspect that the recommended 5 topic development hours and 45 book chapter hours were not invested in preparing this chapter.
  5. Insufficient use of primary, peer-reviewed sources as citations. Non-peer reviewed sources are over-used. Move non-peer reviewed links into the external links section.
  6. Well under the maximum word count, so there is room to expand.
  7. Well over the maximum word count.
  8. This chapter "beats around the bush" for ~* words (i.e., too much preamble) before starting to directly tackle the target topic in the section titled "*".
  9. Addressing the topic development feedback could have helped to improve this chapter.
  10. There is feedback about the topic development that has been ignored, so it is not repeated in these book chapter comments.
  11. For additional feedback, see the following comments and [ these copyedits].

Overview[edit source]

  1. Well developed Overview.
  2. Solid Overview.
  3. Basic Overview.
  4. The Overview is underdeveloped.
  5. Too long. Move detailed content in subsequent sections. The purpose of the Overview is to briefly explain the topic, engage reader interest, and establish focus questions for the chapter.
  6. Clearly explains the problem or phenomenon.
  7. Explain the problem or phenomenon in more detail.
  8. Engages reader interest by introducing a case study and/or example and/or using an image.
  9. Consider introducing a case study or example or using an image to help engage reader interest.
  10. Clear focus question(s).
  11. The focus questions could be improved by being more specific to the topic (i.e., the sub-title).
  12. Ideally, provide open-ended, rather than closed-ended focus questions.
  13. Add focus questions in a feature box to help guide the reader and structure the chapter.

Theory — Breadth[edit source]

  1. Relevant theories are well selected, described, and explained.
  2. The chapter doesn't wander off into discussion of irrelevant theory.
  3. Relevant theory is reasonably well explained.
  4. Basic but sufficient coverage of relevant theory is provided.
  5. Insufficient use of psychological theory about this topic.
  6. Build more strongly on other *-related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters in this category: Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/*).
  7. There is too much general theoretical material. Instead, summarise and link to further information (such as other book chapters or Wikipedia articles), to allow this chapter to focus on the specific topic (i.e., the sub-title question).

Theory — Depth[edit source]

  1. Appropriate depth is provided about the selected theory(ies).
  2. Basic depth is provided about the selected theory(ies).
  3. Key citations are well used.
  4. Tables and/or lists are used effectively to help clearly convey key theoretical information.
  5. Some useful examples are provided to illustrate theoretical concepts.
  6. More examples could be useful to illustrate key concepts.
  7. Insufficient use of relevant psychological theory.
  8. Place more emphasis on explaining the underlying theoretical constructs than methods of measurement.
  9. Did you consult ? If not, this should be cited as a secondary source.
  10. The Reeve (2018) textbook is overused as a citation — instead, utilise primary, peer-reviewed sources.

Research — Key findings[edit source]

  1. Relevant research is well reviewed.
  2. Basic overview of relevant research.
  3. More detail about key studies would be ideal.
  4. Insufficient use of relevant psychological research.
  5. Greater emphasis on effect sizes, major reviews, and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.

Research — Critical thinking[edit source]

  1. Excellent/very good/good/basic/insufficient critical thinking about research is evident.
  2. Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by:
    1. describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies
    2. discussing the direction of relationships
    3. considering the strength of relationships
    4. acknowledging limitations
    5. suggesting specific directions for future research
  3. Claims are referenced.
  4. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags).

Integration[edit source]

  1. Discussion of theory and research is well integrated.
  2. There is basic integration between theory and research.
  3. Insufficient integration of theory and research.
  4. The chapter places more emphasis on theory than research.
  5. Where research is discussed, it is integrated with theory.

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Key points are well summarised.
  2. Basic summary.
  3. Consider reminding the reader about the importance of the problem or phenomenon of interest.
  4. Summarise key points.
  5. Insufficient as a cohesive summary of what the best available psychological theory and research has to say about the topic.
  6. Address the focus questions.
  7. Clear take-home message(s).
  8. Add practical, take-home message(s).

Written expression — Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent/very good/good/basic.
    2. Overall, the quality of written expression is below professional standard. UC Study Skills assistance is recommended to help improve writing skills.
    3. Some of the written expression is quite abstract, which makes this chapter a difficult read for an unfamiliar reader. Consider ways of simplifying the written expression to make it more accessible to a wider audience. This is the essence of science communication.
    4. Use active (e.g., "this chapter explored") rather than passive voice (e.g., "this chapter has explored") [1][2].
    5. Internationalise: Write for an international, rather than domestic, audience. Australians make up only 0.32% of the world human population.
    6. Obtaining (earlier) comments on a chapter plan and/or chapter draft could have helped to improve the chapter.
    7. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    8. Some sentences are unnecessarily wordy — strive for the simplest expression of the point being made.
    9. Some sentences are overly long; consider splitting them into shorter, separate sentences.
    10. Some statements could be explained more clearly — see the [explain?] tags.
    11. The chapter could be improved by developing some of the bullet-points into full paragraph format.
    12. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead:
      1. it is, most often, not needed at all, or
      2. use section linking.
    13. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences.
    14. Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[3] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes.
    15. 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.
    16. Direct quotes should be embedded within sentences and paragraphs, rather than dumped holus-bolus. Even better, communicate the concept in your own words.
    17. "People" is often a better term than "individuals".
    18. Use gender-neutral language (e.g., mankind -> humankind, s/he -> they).
    19. Reduce use of weasel words which bulk out the text, but don't enhance meaning.
    20. Use permanent, rather than relative, time references. For example, instead of "20 years ago", refer to something like "at the beginning of the 21st century". In this way, the text will survive better into the future, without needing to be rewritten.
    21. Avoid overly emotive language (e.g,. *) in science-based communication.
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
    2. Sections which branch into sub-sections should include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections.
    3. Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading — use 0 or 2+ sub-headings.
    4. Use the default heading style (e.g., remove additional bold).
    5. See earlier comments about heading casing.
    6. Provide more descriptive headings (e.g., consider using a brief description of the key point for the section titled "*"?).
  3. Grammar, spelling, and proofreading are excellent.
  4. Grammar
    1. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags). Grammar-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance.
    2. Check and make correct use of commas.
    3. Check and correct use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs individuals').[4].
    4. Use serial commas[5] — they are part of APA style and are generally recommended by grammaticists. Here's an explanatory video (1 min).
    5. Check and correct use of that vs. who.
    6. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect.
    7. Check and correct use of semi-colons (;) and colons (:).
    8. Abbreviations
      1. Check and correct grammatical formatting for abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e., et al., etc.).
      2. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e., et al., etc.) should only be used inside parentheses.
      3. Use abbreviations sparingly. Do not use abbreviations for minor terms that aren't used very much in the chapter.
      4. Once an abbreviation is established (e.g., PTSD), use it consistently. Don't set up an abbreviation and then not use it or only use it sometimes.
  5. Spelling
    1. Spelling can be improved (e.g., see the [spelling?] tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages.
    2. Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour).# Proofreading
    3. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard.
    4. Remove unnecessary capitalisation.
  6. APA style
    1. Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc..
    2. Use double (not single) quotation marks "to introduce a word or phrase used as an ironic comment, as slang, or as an invented or coined expression; use quotation marks only for the first occurrence of the word or phrase, not for subsequent occurrences" (APA 7th ed., 2020, p. 159).
    3. Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numerals (e.g., 10).
    4. Direct quotes need page numbers — even better, write in your own words.
    5. Replace double spaces with single spaces.
    6. Figures
      1. Figures are very well captioned.
      2. Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text.
      3. Figure captions use the correct format.
      4. Figure captions should use this format: Figure X. Descriptive caption in sentence casing. See example.
      5. Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text.
      6. Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).
      7. Figures are referred to using APA style.
      8. Refer to each Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation).
    7. Tables
      1. Table captions use APA style.
      2. Table captions should use APA style. See example.
      3. Tables are referred to using APA style.
      4. Refer to each Table using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation).
      5. Each Table is referred to at least once within the main text.
      6. Refer to each Table at least once within the main text (e.g., see Table 1).
    8. Citations use correct APA style.
    9. Citations are not in full APA style (7th ed.). For example:
      1. If there are three or more authors, cite the first author followed by et al., then year. For example, either:
        1. in-text, Smith et al. (2020), or
        2. in parentheses (Smith et al., 2020)
      2. Do not include author initials.
      3. Use ampersand (&) inside parentheses and "and" outside parentheses.
      4. Multiple citations in parentheses should be listed in alphabetical order by first author surname.
      5. A full stop is needed after "et al" (i.e., "et al.").
      6. Citations in parentheses should use a comma between the author(s) and year.
      7. Select up to a maximum of three citations per point (i.e., avoid citing four or more citations to support a single point).
    10. References use correct APA style.
    11. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation[6]
      2. Check and correct use of italicisation
      3. "Retrieved from" is no longer used (APA style, 7th ed.)
      4. Add spaces between author initials
      5. Page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-)
      6. Include hyperlinked dois
      7. Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section

Written expression — Learning features[edit source]

  1. Overall, the use of learning features is excellent/very good/good/basic/insufficient.
  2. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/One/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.
  3. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/One/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.
  4. Use in-text interwiki links, rather than external links, per Tutorial 1.
  5. Links to non-peer-reviewed sources should be moved to the external links section.
  6. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of image(s).
  7. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of table(s).
  8. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of feature box(es).
  9. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of quiz(zes).
  10. The quiz questions could be more effective as learning prompts by being embedded as single questions within each corresponding section rather than being presented as a set of questions at the end.
  11. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of case studies or examples.
  12. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of interwiki links in the "See also" section.
  13. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/No use of external links in the "External links" section.
  14. Format bullet-points and numbered lists, per Tutorial 1.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~ logged, useful, minor/moderate/major social contributions with direct links to evidence.
  2. ~ logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess.
  3. Contributions made across three platforms.
  4. No logged social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

See also[edit source]