Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Remote work and stress

Heading casing

Hi U3236405. 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 21:43, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

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 sub-title are correctly worded and formatted 2. Headings Excellent – Well developed 2-level heading structure. Meaningful headings clearly relate directly to the core topic. Good alignment between focus questions and heading structure Quiz doesn't need a separate heading; instead embed quiz questions within relevant sections 3. Overview Excellent - Scenario, image, evocative description of the problem/topic, relevant psychological theory/research, and focus questions 4. Key points Excellent – key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations Strive for an integrated balance of the best psychological theory and research about this topic, with practical examples Use Australian spelling (e.g., analyze -> analyse; behavior -> behaviour) Conclusion (the most important section): 5. Figure Excellent - A relevant figure is presented, captioned, and cited Caption could better explain how the image connects to key points being made in the main text Figure(s) are cited at least once in the main text. Figure should be capitalised (fixed). 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 Promising use of example(s)/case study(ies) Focus the quiz question(s) on the take-home messages for each focus question Also consider using one or more tables to summarise key information 7. References Very good At least one relevant systematic review and/or meta-analysis has been identified Check and correct APA referencing style: italicisation 8. Resources See also Excellent External links Excellent 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: comments on chapters (past or current) posts about the unit or project on other platforms Use a numbered list (see Tutorial 02)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:29, 19 August 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 an excellent chapter. It successfully uses psychological theory and research to address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem. Excellent use of academic, peer-reviewed citations to support claims In some places, better use could be made of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) 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 relevant image Clearly explains the psychological problem or phenomenon Clear focus questions Theory An excellent range of relevant theories are selected, described, and explained Builds effectively on related chapters and Wikipedia articles Insightful depth is provided about relevant theory(ies) Use tables, figures, and/or lists to help convey key theoretical information Key citations are well used Very good use of examples to illustrate theoretical concepts Research Basic review of relevant research In some places, there is insufficient use of academic, peer-reviewed citations (e.g., see the tags) e.g., what is the evidence for the claim that remote work has increased? 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 considering the strength of relationships acknowledging limitations pointing out critiques/counterarguments suggesting specific directions for future research Integration Basic integration between theory and research The chapter places more emphasis on theory than on research; strive for an integrated balance Conclusion Excellent summary and conclusion Style Written expression Overall, the quality of written expression is excellent 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, spelling, and proofreading are excellent Citations use very good APA style (7th ed.). To improve: List multiple citations in alphabetical order by first author surname A full stop is needed after "et al" (i.e., "et al.") because it is an abbreviation of et alii Use a comma between the author(s) and year for citations in parentheses References use excellent APA style: Separate page numbers using an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) Learning features Very good use of learning features Excellent use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles 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) Reasonably good use of scenarios, case studies, or examples Reasonably good use of quiz(zes) and/or reflection question(s) 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 Excellent use of interwiki links in the "See also" section Basic use of external links in the "External links" section Social contribution ~10 logged, useful, minor to major contributions with direct links to evidence

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 20:59, 28 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 reasonably good presentation The presentation is under the maximum time limit (3 mins), so there was room for further development The presentation is over the maximum time limit — content beyond 3 mins is ignored for marking and feedback purposes Overview The opening slide(s) clearly conveys the purpose of the presentation but the the title and sub-title are not narrated Create an engaging introduction to hook audience interest A basic context for the presentation is established Focus questions and/or an outline of topics are presented Content Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section The presentation addresses address the topic An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little The presentation makes good use of relevant psychological theory The presentation makes no use of relevant psychological research The presentation makes no use of citations to support claims; the references are not cited during the presentation The presentation makes good use of one or more examples The presentation provides useful practical advice The presentation provides easy to understand information Conclusion The conclusion provides a basic summary of the most relevant psychological theory and research about this topic The conclusion provides reasonably good take-home message(s) 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 well practiced and/or performed Audio recording quality was good The narrated content is well matched to the target topic but # The narrated content lacked synthesis of the best psychological research about this topic Video Overall, visual display quality is reasonably good/ The presentation makes reasonably good use of text and image based slides The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read Consider using a sans-serif typeface to make the text easier to read The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time The visual communication is supplemented in a reasonably good way by relevant images and/or diagrams The presentation is well produced using simple tools The visual content is reasonably well/poorly matched to the target topic but lacked synthesis of the best research about this topic Meta-data The correct title and sub-title (or an abbreviation to fit within the 100 character limit) are used in the name of the presentation — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation A brief written description of the presentation is provided. Expand. Very good use of time codes Links to and from the book chapter are provided Licensing Image sources and their copyright status are communicated A copyright license for the presentation is clearly indicated

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)