Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Fresh start effect

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.

Overall Overall, this is valuable book chapter which makes effective use of the wiki environment. See my copyedits and comments below for additional feedback. Theory Theory is well explained and used, along with helpful examples. Research Research is well integrated, with useful studies highlighted. When describing important research findings, indicate the size of effects in addition to whether or not there was an effect or relationship. Written expression Written expression is generally clear and well cited. The chapter could have benefited from a more developed Overview with case studies in a separate section. The conclusion/summary was helpful. Learning features Some interwiki links were added; more would help to make the text more interactive. APA style is very good.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Multimedia feedback

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

Overall Overall, this is a basic but well researched presentation. Structure and content The multimedia presentation is sufficient as a basic recorded presentation of the main ideas and research covered. The structure of the presentation is good, but as there is quite a lot of content covered. An overview slide or initial explanation of the presentation's structure would be helpful to the viewer. The presentation comprehensively addresses the relevant research and theory, however it is difficult to take it all in when presented on a single slide. The content appears to be presented and read aloud like an essay rather than key points broken down and summarised from the book chapter. A concluding slide and basic take home message was provided. Communication Communication of ideas using voice is good, however, communication of ideas using image and production tools is not. The voice over is reasonably well-paced but more expression could also be used to make the presentation more engaging. No images are used to re-enforce the information being provided verbally or to engage the audience. Only a single slide is used to communicate with the viewer and it contains too much information - try to keep content on slides brief, highlighting the important points only, and have more than one slide to display information on. The presentation was also over the time limit. Production quality The basic production tool (screencast) is not put to use very well in communicating ideas. The single visual (slide) is clear, however, the font is too small and difficult to read. The audio recording is clear and easy to understand. A small reference list is provided, but should have been included on a separate slide. No links to and from the book chapter and presentation are provided. No copyright license information is provided.

RenaeLN (discuss • contribs) 06:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)