In vitro maturation recent article 
GROUP PROJECT REVIEWS
Mark Hill (talk) 10:30, 11 October 2018 (AEDT) You have provided a very balanced feedback for each project peer assessment. I particularly like your choice of language in the feedback brief summaries, except for the overuse of "good". In particular you have identified aspects of each project that could be improved. Hopefully the groups will collate this feedback along with others to improve their own final projects. You should now consider how your own project matches this assessment criteria. Well done.
Group 1 (Adrenal Medulla)-
This project is good because it appears to have a decent number of headings that they are going to address that covers all the aspects of the embryonic adrenal medulla. It has a very detailed history that the reader can easily follow, as well as a simple student drawn image which is good to see on the page. The developmental time course is brief and addresses what it needs to. There is also good information on the tissue structure and function, as well as on its role and the factors involved in its development. The project is also good in including animal model and current research examples. The two chalk diagrams are very detailed and easy to understand.
The introduction has not been written yet, but that’s alright as it can be saved for the end of the project. Embryonic origin still needs to be written about, and should have a lot of information, as well as the abnormalities of development. The referencing is confusing at the bottom of each section and there should be more references in the reference list. There should also be images that aren’t student drawn and there should be more of them. The glossary also needs to be updated.
In terms of improvements, maybe an educational video could be added about the origin of the adrenal medulla or the developmental time course. A list describing what the acronyms mean could also be really helpful to the reader. The arrangement of the images could be neater but that is saved for the end of the project.
Overall. I think this is a really good project that shows a lot of effort and work being done as it is informative but easy to follow.
Group 4 (Cardiac)-
This is a good project because it has a lot of information about cardiac development and looks well researched. There is an appropriate number of subheadings that looks like they will cover all the aspects. The introduction is short and complete which is good to give an overview. The development section at the beginning is well summarised in the table and has a good video explaining the process. The entire development section including early and later development is well articulated with a lot of information the reader is looking for and it easy to follow and interpret. The section is divided into understandable sub-sections. A good image is used to show the process with enough detail to understand. The abnormalities section has a lot of examples with enough information and relevant details.
The headings at the beginning are not consistent with the rest of the website. The ratio between text and images is very large, with too much text and not enough images. The referencing of the articles is not consistent throughout, with some texts being referenced at the bottom of each section. There needs to be more information on animal models and current research in the field. The glossary also doesn’t include any words yet, with the links not going anywhere. There is an alright number of references, but there could be more. And one or two references at the top aren’t referenced correctly.
For improvements, I think that more images could be uploaded, including some student drawn ones. Also, maybe include a list of what all the abbreviations stand for. The reference list needs to be revised as well.
Overall, this project shows a lot of hard work with all the information presented, as well as a deep understanding of the topic, that is extremely useful for a science student trying to learn about cardiac development.
Group 5 (Dorsal Root Ganglion)-
This project shows a good understanding of the topic, with a good number of subheadings that will cover everything that needs to be discussed. The embryonic origin is a solid section with enough information. The developmental process has a lot of information and subheadings that includes all the necessary facts about the topic. There is a well-drawn student image, which shows enough detail. There is a good balance of image to text in the bottom half of the page. There is also a good number of examples for current research of the topic, as well as for the animal models, that really helps the reader’s understanding. There is a good number of references as well, which shows the depth of the research.
The introduction isn’t complete yet but can be left for the end of the project. The history has no information yet, so needs to be started. Sometimes it is difficult to tell whether a section of text is part of an overall section, or is a completely new section in itself. The top of the website does not have enough images in comparison to the amount of text. The images used in the abnormalities and at the beginning of the animal models do not have a description of what they are. The glossary list has not been formed yet either. The list of numbers at the beginning of the reference list is confusing.
For improvements, I think that more images should be added, and that could distinguish between the sections. The glossary also needs to be started. Maybe add a list of the abbreviations so the reader has a reference to go back to if they are confused. A video could also be added, maybe of the development or the molecular mechanisms.
Overall, this is a really good project with a lot of necessary information that the reader can utilise. There is also good images to support understanding and a good number of references that the reader can read themselves to gain more understanding if needed.