Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! I think you have a great topic and can't wait to read more when its done.
I noticed you added a link to analysis paralysis which had an irrelevant redirect so I removed that for you, however I would also recommend changing your headings and sub-headings to sentence casing. U3173387 (discuss • contribs) 14:03, 15 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The topic development submission has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is below, plus see the general feedback page. Please also check the page history for 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. Marks are available via UCLearn. Marks are based on the latest version before the due date.
Include in-text interwiki links for the first mention of key terms to relevant Wikipedia articles and/or to other relevant book chapters (see Tutorial 2)
Promising use of one or more scenarios/examples/case studies
Consider including one or more quiz question(s) about the take-home messages
Also consider using one or more tables to summarise key information
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.
To add direct links to evidence: view the page history, select the version of the page before and after your contributions, click "compare selected revisions", and paste the comparison URL on your user page. For more info, see Making and summarising social contributions.
Latest comment: 11 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
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.
Provide a conclusion slide which summarises the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic, with take-home messages for each focus question
The correct title is used, but the sub-title (or a shortened version of it) is not used, as the name of the presentation. This would help to convey the purpose of the presentation and be consistent.
A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Expand.
An inactive hyperlink to the book chapter is provided (maybe because the YouTube user account doesn't have advanced features)
Latest comment: 3 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
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, the quality of written expression is basic
Bold is overused
Some sentences could be explained more clearly
Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[1] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes
Layout
Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see [Provide more detail] tags)
Grammar
The grammar for some/many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags)
Another option is to use a services provided by UC, such as Studiosity
Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance
Check and correct use of possessive apostrophes (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats')[2]
Spelling
Some words are misspelt (e.g., see the [spelling?] tags). Spell-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages.
Proofreading
More proofreading is needed (e.g., fix punctuation and typographical errors) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard
Very good 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 even more interactive. See example.
Only link the first mention of key words, not subsequent mentions
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.
Basic use of figure(s)
No use of table(s)
Basic use of feature box(es)
Basic use of scenarios, case studies, or examples
No use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s)
Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section
~2 logged contributions with direct links to evidence
~1 logged contributions without direct links to evidence, so unable to easily verify and assess. See tutorials for guidance about how to get direct links to evidence.