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=
<!-- Theory comments... -->
# 
|3=
<!-- Research comments... -->
#
|4=
<!-- Written expression comments... -->
#
|5=
<!-- 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. 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 UCLearn, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Wikiuutiset logo typewriter.png

Overall[edit source]

Theory[edit source]

Research[edit source]

Written expression[edit source]

Social contribution[edit source]

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:11, 1 November 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 chapter does a reasonably good job of applying psychological theory and research to a real-world 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. 
# Title adjusted to match the [[Motivation and emotion/Book/2021|main book table of contents]].
# The chapter could benefit from further development of the Overview and Conclusion - it should be possible to only read these sections and get a good sense of why the topic is important and what is known/recommended.
# The Overview is underdeveloped. Consider:
## Explaining the problem or phenomenon in more detail.
## Presenting an illustrative case study to help engage reader interest.
## Developing focus questions to help guide the reader and structure the chapter.
# This chapter makes 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.
# This chapter is well under/over the [[Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Chapter#Word_count|maximum word count]].
# Addressing the [[#Topic development feedback|topic development feedback]] could have helped to improve this chapter.
# For additional feedback, see the following comments and [ these copyedits].
|2=
<!-- Theory comments... -->
# Relevant theories are well selected, described, integrated, and explained.
# Relevant theory is reasonably well explained.
# Basic but sufficient coverage of relevant theory is provided.
# 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).
# Overall, this chapter makes insufficient use of relevant psychological theory.
# 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.
|3=
<!-- Research comments... -->
# Relevant research is well reviewed and discussed in relation to theory.
# Overall, this chapter provides a basic overview of relevant research.
# Overall, this chapter makes insufficient use of relevant psychological research.
# When describing important research findings, consider including a bit more detail about the methodology and indicating the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
# Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.
# Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the {{fact}} tags).
|4=
<!-- Written expression 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.
## The chapter benefited from a well developed Overview and Conclusion, with clear focus question(s) and take-home messages.
## The chapter would benefit from a more developed Overview and Conclusion, with clearer focus question(s) (Overview) and take-home self-help message for each focus question (Conclusion).
## 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 [[w:science communication|science communication]].
## Use active rather than passive voice[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, not just a 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 brackets 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"; similarly "participants" is preferred to "subjects".
## 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.
## Headings should use default wiki style (e.g., remove additional bold).
## See earlier comments about [[#Heading casing|heading casing]].
# Learning features
## Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/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/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]] for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.
## 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.
## Format bullet-points and numbered lists, per [[Motivation and emotion/Tutorials/Introduction|Tutorial 1]].
# 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 a [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBx8ooDupXY 1 min. explanatory video].
## 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.., etc.).
### Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., 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 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.
## Replace double spaces with single spaces.
# 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.
## Figures and tables
### Use APA style for Figure captions. [[Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Chapter/Figures|See example]].
### Use APA style for Table captions. [[Motivation and emotion/Assessment/Chapter/Tables|See example]].
### Refer to each Table and Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation).
### Refer to each Table and Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).
### Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text.
## Citations use correct APA style.
## Citations are not in full APA style. 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)
### Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.
### Multiple citations in parentheses should be listed in alphabetical order by first author surname.
### Do not include author initials.
### 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 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 not used for APA style 7th ed.
### Add spaces between author initials.
### Include hyperlinked dois.
### Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section.
|5=
<!-- Social contribution comments... -->
# ~ logged, useful, 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.
# 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. 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 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 chapter does a reasonably good job of applying psychological theory and research to a real-world 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. Title adjusted to match the main book table of contents.
  6. The chapter could benefit from further development of the Overview and Conclusion - it should be possible to only read these sections and get a good sense of why the topic is important and what is known/recommended.
  7. The Overview is underdeveloped. Consider:
    1. Explaining the problem or phenomenon in more detail.
    2. Presenting an illustrative case study to help engage reader interest.
    3. Developing focus questions to help guide the reader and structure the chapter.
  8. This chapter makes 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.
  9. This chapter is well under/over the maximum word count.
    1. Addressing the topic development feedback could have helped to improve this chapter.
  10. For additional feedback, see the following comments and [ these copyedits].

Theory[edit source]

  1. Relevant theories are well selected, described, integrated, and explained.
  2. Relevant theory is reasonably well explained.
  3. Basic but sufficient coverage of relevant theory is provided.
  4. Overall, this chapter makes insufficient use of relevant psychological theory.
  5. Did you consult ? If not, this should be cited as a secondary source.
  6. The Reeve (2018) textbook is overused as a citation - instead, utilise primary, peer-reviewed sources.

Research[edit source]

  1. Relevant research is well reviewed and discussed in relation to theory.
  2. Overall, this chapter provides a basic overview of relevant research.
  3. Overall, this chapter makes insufficient use of relevant psychological research.
  4. When describing important research findings, consider including a bit more detail about the methodology and indicating the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship.
  5. Greater emphasis on major reviews and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.
  6. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags).

Written expression[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. The chapter benefited from a well developed Overview and Conclusion, with clear focus question(s) and take-home messages.
    4. The chapter would benefit from a more developed Overview and Conclusion, with clearer focus question(s) (Overview) and take-home self-help message for each focus question (Conclusion).
    5. 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.
    6. Use active rather than passive voice[1][2].
    7. Internationalise: Write for an international, not just a domestic audience. Australians make up only 0.32% of the world human population.
    8. Obtaining (earlier) comments on a chapter plan and/or chapter draft could have helped to improve the chapter.
    9. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    10. Some sentences are unnecessarily wordy - strive for the simplest expression of the point being made.
    11. Some sentences are overly long; consider splitting them into shorter, separate sentences.
    12. Some statements could be explained more clearly - see the [explain?] tags.
    13. The chapter could be improved by developing some of the bullet-points into full paragraph format.
    14. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead:
      1. it is, most often, not needed at all, or
      2. use section linking.
    15. Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences.
    16. Use 3rd person perspective rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you")[3] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes.
    17. 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 brackets at the end of the sentence.
    18. Direct quotes should be embedded within sentences and paragraphs, rather than dumped holus-bolus. Even better, communicate the concept in your own words.
    19. "People" is often a better term than "individuals"; similarly "participants" is preferred to "subjects".
    20. Use gender-neutral language (e.g., mankind -> humankind, s/he -> they).
    21. Reduce use of weasel words which bulk out the text, but don't enhance meaning.
    22. 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.
    23. 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. Headings should use default wiki style (e.g., remove additional bold).
    5. See earlier comments about heading casing
  3. Learning features
    1. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/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.
    2. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/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.
    3. Use in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters.
    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. Format bullet-points and numbered lists, per Tutorial 1.
  4. Grammar, spelling, and proofreading are excellent.
  5. 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 a 1 min. explanatory video.
    5. Check and correct use of that vs. who.
    6. Check and correct use of affect vs. effect.
    7. Abbreviations
      1. Check and correct grammatical formatting for abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., etc.).
      2. Abbreviations (such as e.g., i.e.., 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.
  6. 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).
  7. Proofreading
    1. More proofreading is needed to fix typos and bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard.
    2. Remove unnecessary capitalisation.
    3. Replace double spaces with single spaces.
  8. 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.
    5. Figures and tables
      1. Use APA style for Figure captions. See example.
      2. Use APA style for Table captions. See example.
      3. Refer to each Table and Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation).
      4. Refer to each Table and Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1).
      5. Provide more detailed Figure captions to help connect the figure to the text.
    6. Citations use correct APA style.
    7. Citations are not in full APA style. 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. Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets.
      3. Multiple citations in parentheses should be listed in alphabetical order by first author surname.
      4. Do not include author initials.
      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).
    8. References use correct APA style.
    9. References are not in full APA style. For example:
      1. Check and correct use of capitalisation.
      2. Check and correct use of italicisation.
      3. Retrieved from is not used for APA style 7th ed.
      4. Add spaces between author initials.
      5. Include hyperlinked dois.
      6. Move non-peer-reviewed sources to the external links section.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~ logged, useful, social contributions with direct links to evidence.
  2. ~ logged social contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess.
  3. No logged social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:48, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

See also[edit source]