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.
Reads likely poorly developed and unacknowledged genAI content. If so, it needs to be acknowledged as such in the edit summaries, otherwise it violates academic integrity.
Strive for an integrated balance of the best psychological theory and research about this topic, with practical examples
It is unclear whether the best available psychological theory and research has been consulted in the preparation of this plan
Conclusion (the most important section):
Hasn't been developed
What might the take-home, practical messages be? (What are the answer(s) to the question(s) in the sub-title and/or focus questions?)
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
None summarised on user page with direct link(s) to evidence (see Tutorial 03). Looking ahead to the book chapter submission, see social contributions.
Latest comment: 22 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 reasonably good
Layout
Include an introductory paragraph before branching into the sub-sections (see [Provide more detail] tags)
Avoid having sections with 1 sub-heading – use 0 or 2+ sub-headings
Use the default heading style (e.g., remove additional italics and/or bold)
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.
Use Australian spelling (e.g., hypothesize vs. hypothesise; behavior vs. behaviour)
Proofreading
More proofreading is needed (e.g., fix punctuation and typographical errors) to bring the quality of written expression closer to a professional standard
Figures
Figures are very well captioned
Refer to each Figure at least once within the main text (e.g., see Figure 1)
Increase image sizes so they are easier to read
Tables
Table captions use APA style or wiki style
Refer to each Table at least once within the main text (e.g., see Table 1)
Citations use basic APA style (7th ed.).
Some citations consist of an embedded hyperlink rather than APA style citation and listing in references
List multiple citations in alphabetical order by first author surname
Reasonably 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.
Basic use of image(s)
Very good use of table(s)
Excellent use of feature box(es)
Excellent use of case studies or examples
Excellent use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s)
Basic use of interwiki links in the "See also" section