Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Therapeutic recreation

Heading casing

FYI, the recommended Wikiversity heading style uses sentence casing. For example: Self-determination theory rather than Self-Determination Theory Here's an example chapter with correct heading casing: Growth mindset development -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Topic development feedback

The topic development submission 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 for editing changes made whilst reviewing this 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.

Title The title is correctly worded The title not correctly formatted (capitalisation) The sub-title is correctly worded and formatted Headings See earlier comment about Heading casing Promising 2-level heading structure – could benefit from further development by simplifying the structure; there is likely only scope for covering the core focus questions well (in terms of theory, research, and examples) and not additional topics Consider adopting closer alignment between the sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings The Overview and Conclusion should not have sub-headings Avoid having sections with only 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings Overview Good, promising Convert "Case Study Brain Teaser" into a feature box at the top of the Overview and include an image to help attract reader interest. Opening paragraph is very long - split Clear focus questions Key points Haven't been developed Figure A relevant figure is presented, captioned, and cited Citation should be (see Figure 1) Learning feature One use of in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters Consider including more examples/case studies, quiz question(s), table(s) etc. References OK Not cited :( For APA referencing style, check and correct: capitalisation italicisation make doi hyperlinks active (i.e., clickable) Resources Not provided User page Good Description about self provided – consider expanding Consider linking to your eportfolio page and/or any other professional online profile or resume such as LinkedIn. This is not required, but it can be useful to interlink your professional networks. Link provided to book chapter Social contribution One out of three types of contribution have been made and summarised with direct link(s) to evidence – this was covered in Tutorial 03. Looking ahead to the book chapter submission, see how to earn marks for social contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:13, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Book 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. Chapter marks will be available via UCLearn along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall Overall, this is a reasonably good chapter. It makes good use of psychological theory and research to address a real-world phenomenon or problem. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Reasonably good Engages reader interest by introducing a case study and/or scenario with an image in a feature box Briefly explains the problem or phenomenon Basic focus questions Theory The chapter struggles to provide a clear description and examples of therapeutic recreation Consider, for example, what is the relationship between therapeutic recreation and occupational therapy? A basic range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained The chapter wanders off into discussion about irrelevant theory Overly focused on definitions and general theoretical background; instead summarise, link to related resources, and move to the more substantive aspects of theory Builds reasonably well on related chapters Builds somewhat on previous, related chapters Builds on one previous, related chapter Build more strongly on other related chapters (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters) 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). Insightful/Very good/Reasonably good/Basic/Insufficient depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Place more emphasis on explaining the underlying theoretical constructs than methods of measurement Effective/Some/Basic/No use of tables, figures, and/or lists are to help clearly convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Lack of sufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) If you didn't consult an original source (e.g., ?), cite it as a secondary source The Reeve (2018) textbook is overused as a citation – instead, utilise primary, peer-reviewed sources Excellent/Very good/Reasonably good/Some/Basic use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts One good use of an example to illustrate theoretical concepts. Consider using more. Consider using more examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Insufficient use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Discussion about neurotransmitters is insufficiently linked to therapeutic recreation Lack of sufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) Excellent/Very good/Reasonably good/Basic/Insufficient review of relevant research More detail about key studies would be ideal Any systematic reviews or meta-analyses in this area? Greater emphasis on effect sizes could be helpful. Excellent/Very good/Good/Basic/Insufficient critical thinking about relevant 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 pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Claims are referenced Some/Many claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the tags) Integration Excellent/Very good/Reasonably good/Basic/Insufficient integration between theory and research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than on research Where research is discussed, it is integrated with theory Conclusion Reasonably good summary and conclusion Remind the reader about the importance of the problem or phenomenon of interest Key points are summarised Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is good Some sentences could be explained more clearly (e.g., see the and tags) Some sentences are overly long. Strive for the simplest expression. Consider splitting longer sentences into two shorter sentences. 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. Some paragraphs are overly long. Communicate one key idea per paragraph in three to five sentences. Embed direct quotes within sentences and paragraphs, rather than presenting them holus-bolus. Even better, communicate the concept in your own words. Layout Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see tags) Avoid having sub-sections in the Overview (fixed) Grammar The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Proofreading More proofreading is needed (e.g., fix punctuation and typographical errors) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard APA style Direct quotes need page numbers – even better, write in your own words > Figures Figures are briefly captioned - consider making more connection to the point(s) being made in the main text Each figure is referred to at least once within the main text (Note correct formatting: e.g., see Figure 1) 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)### List multiple citations in alphabetical order by first author surname Use ampersand (&) inside parentheses and "and" outside parentheses References are not in full APA style. For example: Remove initial bullet-points Check and correct use of capitalisation[1] Check and correct use of italicisation Include hyperlinked dois Learning features Good use of learning features 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. 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. Good use of image(s) No use of table(s) Excellent use of feature box(es) Excellent use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) Basic use of case studies or examples Excellent use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Very good use of external links in the "External links" section Social contribution ~15 logged, useful, moderate, last minute social contributions with direct links to evidence Use a numbered list per Tutorial 02

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Multimedia presentation 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 good to very good presentation Overview An opening slide with the title and sub-title is displayed and narrated — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation Engaging introduction to hook audience interest A context for the presentation is clearly established through an example Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation addresses the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes reasonably good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes no use of relevant psychological research Ideally, make more explicit use of research Include citations to support claims The presentation makes reasonably good use of one or more examples or case studies or practical advice The presentation provides practical, easy to understand information Conclusion A Conclusion slide is presented with good take-home message(s) Audio The audio is easy to follow The presentation makes effective use of narrated audio Audio communication is well paced Very good intonation The narration is well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was very good. Review microphone set-up - it may be too close (slight distortion). The narrated content is well matched to the target topic (see content) but lacked synthesis of the best psychological research about this topic Video Overall, visual display quality is good The presentation makes basic use of animated slides and text The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read Check and correct spelling e.g., indscriminatory -> indiscriminately; charactersitics -> characteristics The visual communication is supplemented in a basic way by images Also consider using diagrams The presentation is well produced using simple tools The visual content is well matched to the target topic (see content) but lacked synthesis of the best psychological research about this topic Meta-data The chapter title is used, but the sub-title (or a shortened version of it) is not used, as the name of the presentation. The sub-title (or an abbreviation of the sub-title that fits within the 100 character limit) would help to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation. A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Consider expanding. A link to the book chapter is not provided A link from the book chapter is provided The presentation is incorrectly categorised as being for kids. This creates limitations, such as being unable to add the presentation to a playlist. More info. Licensing Probably the images are freely available via the editing package but this is not explicitly stated A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the presentation description but not in the meta-data

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 23:27, 9 November 2023 (UTC)