Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2020/Constructive nonconformism cultivation

minor grammar fixes in title

Hi there! really interesting topic and it looks like you have some great articles in there! I added a colon and question mark to your title, I hope this helps! :) U3169316 (discuss • contribs) 02:54, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Topic development feedback

The topic development 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 the chapter plan. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Topic development marks are available via UCLearn. Note that marks are based on what was available before the due date, whereas the comments may also be based on all material available at time of providing this feedback.

Title and sub-title Excellent User page Created Used effectively About me Description about self provided Consider linking to your eportfolio Link provided to book chapter Social contribution Summarised with direct link(s) to evidence. Use a numbered list. Section headings Promising 2-level heading structure - clearly addresses the topic Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading - use 0 or 2+ sub-headings. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an overview paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings. Key points Overall, well developed Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters. Promising use of examples/case studies. Image An image (figure) is presented. Caption uses APA style. explains how the image connects to key points being made in the main text. Cite each figure at least once in the main text. References Good. For full APA style, use: correct capitalisation the new recommended format for dois Resources Use bullet-points See also Excellent External links Include source in brackets after link

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:30, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Revision notes

Hi User:3190499, I fixed some grammar, added inline comments, restructured sentence in “How these motivation styles cultivate constructive nonconformism” with Hung, Durcikova, Lai & Lin (2011) reference. The last paragraph of conclusion regarding directions for future research and shortcomings could benefit from rewording to read in a less colloquial manner. Here's a link to review the changes I made :) --U3186080 (discuss • contribs) 14:46, 13 October 2020 (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 UCLearn, along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall Overall, this is a very good chapter on a challenging topic that successfully uses psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem. The main area for improvement is the quality of written expression (e.g., avoiding weasel words and overly long sentences and improving the grammar). This chapter is over the maximum word count. For additional feedback, see following comments and these copyedits. Theory Relevant theories are well selected, described, integrated, and applied. Practical examples are provided. Research Relevant research is well reviewed and discussed in relation to theory. 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. Written expression Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent in many places, but also problematic in several places. Concepts are well explained in an independent, approachable voice. Avoid directional referencing (e.g., "As previously mentioned"). Instead, use section linking. 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. Use third person perspective rather than first person (e.g., "we") or second person (e.g., "you") perspective[1]. The chapter benefited from a well developed Overview and Conclusion, with clear focus question(s) and take-home messages. Layout The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections. Sections which include sub-sections should also include an introductory paragraph (which doesn't need a separate heading) before branching into the sub-headings. Learning features See also - Use bullet-points and numbered lists, per Tutorial 1. Basic use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding more interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text more interactive. No use of embedded in-text links to related book chapters. Embedding links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project. Basic use of image(s). No use of table(s). Basic use of feature box(es). Very good use of quiz(zes). Good/interesting use of case studies. Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags). Check and correct use of that vs. who. Use serial commas[2] - it is part of APA style and generally recommended by grammaticists. Spelling Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour; fulfillment vs. fulfilment). APA style Use double- rather than single-quote marks for emphasis. 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 (e.g., Smith et al., 2020) Use ampersand (&) inside brackets and "and" outside brackets. References are not in full APA style. For example: Check and correct use of capitalisation. Include hyperlinked dois. Social contribution ~5 logged social contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 13:02, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Multimedia feedback

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

Overall Overall, this is a basic presentation. The presentation is over the maximum time limit - content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes. Structure and content There is too much content, in too much detail, presented within the allocated time frame. Zoom out and provide a higher-level presentation at a slower pace. It is best to do a small amount well than a large amount poorly. Consider adding and narrating an Overview slide (e.g., with focus questions), to help orientate the viewer about what will be covered. The presentation makes good use of theory. The presentation makes little to no use of research. The presentation could be improved by making more use of examples or case studies. A Conclusion slide is presented with a take-home message(s). The Conclusion only partly fitted within the time limit. Communication The presentation makes basic use of text based slides with narrated audio. Consider slowing down and leaving longer pauses between sentences. This can help the viewer to cognitively digest the information that has just been presented before moving on to the next point. Some of the font size should be larger to make it easier to read. The visual communication could be improved by including some relevant images. Production quality The video is basically produced using simple tools. The wording and/or formatting/grammar of the title/sub-title is inconsistent between the name of the video, the opening slide, and/or the book chapter. Audio recording quality was good. Visual display quality was basic. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the video description but not in the meta-data. A link to the book chapter is provided. A link from the book chapter is provided. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:37, 24 November 2020 (UTC)