Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2014/Running and flow

Heading casing

FYI, the convention on Wikiversity is for lower-cased headings. For example, use: ==Cats and dogs== rather than ==Cats and Dogs== -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:19, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

title

Hi there,

I just noticed that you haven't added your title and subtitle yet so i just put a possible title and subtitle in for you. Hope the rest of your chapter is going well :)Soneill90 (discuss • contribs) 03:27, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

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 This is a promising chapter which could be improved by providing a more depth review of research studies of flow in running. For more feedback, see these copyedits and comments below. Theory Define/describe flow. There is little mention of neurophysiological dimensions of flow (e.g., endorphins). The Conclusion should offer more concrete, take-home messages. A wider range of runner's high exercises could be suggested. Research Research coverage in this chapter about running and flow is somewhat limited; ideally, add more information about relevant studies. Integrate key research findings into the chapter earlier. The methodological introduction to the research section could be truncated. Some statements were unreferenced (e.g., see the tags) 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 Avoid one sentence paragraphs. A paragraph should typically consist of three to five sentences. Layout See earlier comments about heading casing Some Figures were used. Learning features The text could become more interactive by including interwiki links. Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize -> hypothesise) Grammar and proofreading The grammar of some sentences need to be improved (e.g., see the tags) Check and correct the use of ownership apostrophes (e.g., individuals vs. individual's vs. individuals') Check formatting of abbreviations such as "e.g." and "i.e." et al -> et al. APA style Check/correct APA style for direct quotes Apply APA style captions to figures and tables. Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numbers (e.g., 10) Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets. The reference list is not in full APA style.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:18, 2 December 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 an effective, basic presentation. The presentation could be improved by explaining some focus questions Structure and content The types of runners is philosophical - has there been any psychological work? Define flow earlier Does flow have to involve strenuous physical effort e.g., what about walking and flow? There was little mention of research Communication Check correct pronunciation for Csikentmihalyi Increase tonal variation to aid listener interest The voice-overs sounds like it is being read from a script (understandable); ideally with more practice this feel more like a conversation than being read to Production quality Some text in boxes was too small There is an "audio jump" between slides The audio quality is good, but a bit tinny/echoey

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:31, 2 December 2014 (UTC)