Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Breaking bad news

Topic development feedback

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.

1. Title The title and/or sub-title were not correctly worded and/or formatted (fixed) 2. Headings Minimal/insufficient development (see Tutorial 2) Adopt closer alignment between sub-title, focus questions, and top-level headings 3. Overview Minimal/insufficient – Needs scenario, image, evocative description of the problem/topic, and focus questions Present focus questions in a feature box at the end of this section 4. Key points No development There is no evidence that the best available psychological theory and research has been consulted in the preparation of this plan Consider checking out other related book chapter topics such as how to apologise 5. Figure One or more figure(s) presented and captioned The figure caption(s) could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text Cite each figure at least once in the main text using APA style (e.g., see Figure 1) 6. Learning feature 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) Consider 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 7. References Insufficient Are there any systematic reviews about this topic? 8. Resources See also Not developed – needs work (see Tutorial 2) External links Not developed – needs work (see Tutorial 2) 9. User page Good Brief description about self – 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. A link to the book chapter is provided 10. Social contribution One out of three types of contributions made with with direct link(s) to evidence. The other types of contribution are making: direct improvements to other chapters (past or current) comments on the talk pages of other chapters (past or current)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 22:54, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

References

@Stongu: Currently, there is insufficient use of academic peer-reviewed citations and references. How to search for the most relevant sources was covered in Tutorial 5. Sincerely, James. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:05, 6 October 2024 (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 Very good use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims Under the maximum word count, so there is room to expand For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits Overview Well developed Engages reader via a case study or scenario in a feature box with a somewhat relevant image Clearly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon The focus questions are reasonably good It is unclear why some questions focus on health professionals (fixed by removing), although health news can be an useful example. This is a deviation from the original topic (the title and sub-title do not refer to healthcare). The aim is to address the question in the sub-title using the best available psychological theory and research. Theory A reasonably good range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Builds on one previous chapters and/or Wikipedia article Build more strongly on related chapters and Wikipedia articles (e.g., by embedding links to other chapters) Reasonably good depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Some use of tables, figures, and/or lists to help convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Reasonably good use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Reasonably good review of relevant research Reasonably good 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 considering the strength of relationships acknowledging limitations pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Integration Reasonably good integration between theory and research Conclusion Basic summary and conclusion Add practical, take-home message(s) Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is reasonably good Use active (e.g., "this chapter explores") rather than passive voice (e.g., "this chapter has explored" or "this chapter will explore") [1][2] Layout Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see tags) Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings Grammar The grammar for some/many sentences could be improved (e.g., see the tags) Consider using a grammar checking tool 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 make correct use of commas Abbreviations Spell out abbreviations on their first use, to explain them to the reader Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour) Proofreading More proofreading is needed (e.g., fix punctuation and remove double-spaces) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard Remove unnecessary capitalisation – more info APA style Use serial commas[3]. Video (1 min) Express numbers < 10 using words (e.g., two) and >= 10 and over using numerals (e.g., 99) Figures Briefly captioned; provide more detail to help connect the figure to the text Use this format for captions: Figure X. Descriptive caption goes here in sentence casing. See example. Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1) Numbering needs correcting Citations use reasonably good APA style (7th ed.). To improve: Remove italics from citations Move non-peer reviewed citations into the External links section; only cite peer-reviewed work References use very good APA style: Check and correct use of capitalisation[4] Learning features Good use of learning features One 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. 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 figure(s) No use of table(s) Reasonably good use of feature box(es) Reasonably good use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Basic use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) The quiz questions could be improved by being more focused on the key points and/or take-home messages The quiz questions could be more effective as learning prompts by being embedded as single questions within each corresponding section rather than as a set of questions at the end Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Also include links to related Wikipedia articles Use alphabetical order Reasonably good use of external links in the "External links" section Use sentence casing Use alphabetical order Social contribution ~1 logged contributions with direct links to evidence ~2 logged social 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.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:57, 29 October 2024 (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 basic presentation Overview An opening slide with the title and sub-title is displayed (too quickly) and the title is narrated Very engaging introduction to hook audience interest Engaging introduction to hook audience interest The presentation has an opening scenario to hook audience interest The presentation has a basic introduction to engage audience interest Create an engaging introduction to hook audience interest (e.g., by introducing a case study or scenario) The Overview slide is displayed too quickly Establish a context for the presentation (e.g., by using an example or explaining why it is important), to help the viewer understand Focus questions are displayed too quickly Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation somewhat addresses the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes basic use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes specific use of two psychological research studies but doesn't appear to synthesise the body of research on the topic The presentation makes basic use of citations to support claims The presentation makes basic use of one or more examples The presentation provides practical advice The presentation provides easy to understand information Conclusion The conclusion provides a basic summary Audio The audio is easy to follow The presentation makes reasonably good use of narrated audio Audio communication is well paced Reasonably good intonation The narration is reasonably well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was good but note that volume was low Review microphone set-up to achieve higher recording quality The narrated content is well matched to the target topic Video Overall, visual display quality is basic The presentation makes basic use of text and image based slides Some of the font size could be larger to make it easier to read The amount of text presented per slide could be reduced to make it easier to read and listen at the same time Some slides are a bit too busy/fast The visual communication is supplemented in a basic way by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is basically produced using simple tools Hide the audio icon The visual content is reasonably well matched to the target 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 very brief written description of the presentation is provided. Expand. A link to the book chapter is not provided A link from the book chapter is provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are not clearly indicated A copyright license for the presentation is not clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)