Talk:2014 Group Project 5

From Embryology

This is the discussion page for your project.

  • Use this page to discuss online the project with your group members.
  • Paste useful resources here.
  • Remember to use your signature button to identify who you are when adding content here.
  • The following collapsed tables provide starting points for students during project work, you also have tutorials built into practical classes and practice exercises for individual assessmet items.
Group Assessment Criteria
Mark Hill.jpg
  1. The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described.
  2. The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.
  3. Content is correctly cited and referenced.
  4. The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student's own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations.
  5. Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.
  6. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology.
  7. Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer's wiki.
  8. Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement.
  9. The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning.
  10. Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines.
Uploading Images
Mark Hill.jpg First Read the help page Images

The following describes how to upload an image with all the information that must be associated with it.

The image must first be uploaded to the site.

  1. Open the left hand menu item “Toolbox” and click “Upload file” and a new window will open.
  2. Click the button ”Choose file” and navigate to where the image is located on your computer and double click the file.
  3. The window will now show the file name in the “Source filename” window.
  4. You can then rename the uploaded file in the “Destination filename” window.
    1. Make sure the new name accurately describes the image.
  5. Add a description of the image to the “Summary” window. Note the description must include:
    1. An image name as a section heading.
    2. Any further description of what the image shows.
    3. A subsection labeled “Reference” and under this the original image source, appropriate reference and all copyright information.
    4. Finally a template indicating that this is a student image. {{Template:Student Image}}

Images not including the above information will be deleted by the course coordinator and be considered in the student assessment process.

Students cannot delete uploaded images. Contact the course coordinator with the file address.

Mark Hill.jpg First Read the help page Referencing

All references used in making your project page should be cited where they appear in the text or images.

In page edit mode where XXXX is the PubMed ID number use the following code.

<ref name=”PMIDXXXX”><pubmed>XXXX</pubmed></ref>

For references not listed on PubMed, and text can be inserted between <ref></ref> tags.

Where the reference list will appear make a new section and on a new line the following code. <references/>

Mark Hill.jpg First Read the help page Copyright Tutorial

Currently all students originally assigned to each group are listed as equal authors/contributors to their project. If you have not contributed the content you had originally agreed to, nor participated in the group work process, then you should contact the course coordinator immediately and either discuss your contribution or request removal from the group author list. Remember that all student online contributions are recorded by date, time and the actual contributed content. A similar email reminder of this information was sent to all current students.

Please note the Universities Policy regarding Plagiarism

In particular this example:

"Claiming credit for a proportion of work contributed to a group assessment item that is greater than that actually contributed;"

Academic Misconduct carries penalties. If a student is found guilty of academic misconduct, the penalties include warnings, remedial educative action, being failed in an assignment or excluded from the University for two years.

Please also read Copyright Tutorial with regard to content that can be used in your project.

Project Analysis 24 Sep
Group 2014 project edits 24sep.png

--Mark Hill (talk) 09:57, 24 September 2014 (EST) Individual student data for each group has also been analysed.

Student 2014 project edits 24sep.png

--Mark Hill (talk) 09:57, 24 September 2014 (EST) I have masked student ID.

  • Individual students will know how much work you have been doing to date.
  • I will be contacting those student on 5 edits or below.

2014 Student Projects: Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | Group 7 | Group 8

--Mark Hill (talk) 17:54, 31 October 2014 (EST) These student projects have now been finalised and undergoing final assessment.

Group Assessment Criteria
  1. The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described.
  2. The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.
  3. Content is correctly cited and referenced.
  4. The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student's own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations.
  5. Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.
  6. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology.
  7. Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer's wiki.
  8. Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement.
  9. The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning.
  10. Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines.

Final Assessment


  • While I do appreciate hand drawn student images, several of these could have been replaced with very good and freely available images in the research literature.
  • Student drawn images should not be sourced from your textbook, this shows a lack of topic research. They should also include more descriptive information associated with the file.

Peer Reviews

Group 5, you have a brilliant introduction, introducing the reader to what your page is about. Your introduction contains information for each of the parts involved in the integumentary system such as skin, glands, hair nails and teeth. There is a clear structure to your project with clear headings and sub-headings. This makes the reader find information about a particular part in your project more easily.

There is an extensive list of references, which demonstrates, a great effort towards researching your projects system. Some of the references however, need to be put into in the correct format. There are different reference lists under the different sections of your group project and as I understand why, I'm sure these are just small things that will be fixed before the final submission.

I have to commend you on your table, it is more than sufficient. It not only clear describes a clear transition from week to week changes in development of the integumentary system. The table however, needs to be reformatted to fit the window of the page and likewise, the pictures inside the table as there are too small to be seen without opening up the image. There are other images also on the page were too small such as "The stages of embryonic teeth development". These are just minor changes that need to be made before your groups final submission.

At the start of your project, all descriptions were matched with an image. This provided an appropriate balance between written text and visual representations. However, in the historic findings section, this balance was not seen as there are no images for this section.

Under your section of some recent findings, there are blocks of information in purple; I'm not sure as to the reasoning behind this, as the other parts in your project do not have the same background.

I particularly liked how in the introductory paragraph you mentioned what topics you will be covering; including abnormalities associated with the Integumentary system and delivered this information under the abnormalities section, where treatments and managements of these abnormalities were put forward!

Overall, good work guys! 

The introduction covers all the topics of the project, however it does so briefly. Merging the development overview with the introduction will hide the fact that the introduction paragraph is short as this whole section will become one large detailed introduction about the integumentary system. The development overview is detailed and separated in terms of the structures found in the system. This is great, however less dot points should be used as it looks more like notes than presentable information. The creation of this timeline table is amazing and addition of the images according to the weeks is a well generated idea. Not all the images are described, so please do so for the final copy as it is essential that images of histological slides are describes as they can be confusion and difficult to understand. The information about hair and its adjacent image is the scaffold that should be followed throughout the whole section, as it has been written concisely and easily understandable. The hair development stages image is adequately describes and references with the copyright statement. Well done.

I appreciate the uniqueness in the layout of the recent findings, however I find it slightly overwhelming and out of place. Possibly adding a collapse and expand option to each article is beneficial. The summaries of the findings are in-depth and it is obvious that the author of this summary understands the topic.

A great start in historic findings with information present for a wide range of structures in this system. With that said, each section requires more research, however you are on the right path in finding articles greater than 50 years old. Only one image is attempted to be added, it is hard to find copyright granted images or historical drawings, but redrawing those original images is vital in providing solid historical information. In terms of the referencing, if you are unable to find a PMID for a certain article then manually add the reference and the URL link as you have but adhere to correct formatting.

Each abnormality is consistent with detailed information, statistics and a described image. The writing style is consistent and the image uploads with captions are correctly completed. Great work. The information is frequently cited emphasising efficient research ability. On that note, the references are correctly numbered and superscripts used instead of repeating the reference.

The introduction clearly states the content in the website, which is good as this can prepare the readers for understanding. However, it would be better if some information about integumentary system, such as functions, is included in this section.

The development of integument system includes a lot of information. They are presented in good structure by the use of table for skin and nail. It is a great way to put some images in the table for easy understanding of the description in the development of teeth.

The recent findings area is well-researched. I would suggest try to put the content into small paragraph or in several points as the amount of text is a bit too much. Some images should be included as well.

Abnormalities section is great with the help of the images. It would be good if some more abnormalities are included. There is a lot of details under historic findings, try to illustrate them with the help of images.

In-text references should be included in the sections under development, recent findings and historic findings.

The project is well prepared. It would be better if some more images are included and the function of integument system is stated in the introduction.

This group has made an outstanding effort in their efforts. I particularly liked the fact that they summarized the actual purpose of the page and what it would contain within the introduction itself, something the other groups have not really done.

They have structured and organized the page extremely well and it is consistent and flows between each of the headings. I would suggest to tabulate the three types of cells in skin and have a column describing their origin and then their function to make it easier to read. The table for development of dermal layers and the table for teeth development should also ideally have a title and table numbers.

In general the content is very well written and informative, supported with relevant images and diagrams that illustrate the actual development process. The recent findings heading is also well written however there are a few formatting issues with the text box sizes that need to be fixed up. I think it would be a good idea to list the sources of historic findings and then elaborate on what contribution they may have made to our current understanding.

The referencing just seems to be inconsistent in this section. Additionally it would be a good idea to move all the references for the other sections to the end of the page under the actual references heading rather than having them scattered over the wiki page. The abnormalities section is highly commendable and written extremely well. Great job on the excellent and informative wiki page you have produced.

The introduction is a great summary of what the project page will discuss making sure to highlight every aspect. However, the introduction should also mention more about the integumentary system listing all the organs involved, their function, anatomical position and the difference between the embryonic and fetal stages of integumentary development. The content presented on the page is fantastic. All information under the subheadings looks complete and has key information related to the topic. I like how the timeline is divided into each organ making it easy to understand and navigate. The use of the table to format the information is a brilliant idea and has been presented beautifully with images in each textbox. Also the content under current research is relating to the topic and shows extensive research. The use of the purple background is appealing to the viewer highlighting its significance. I do however believe that the information under ‘historic findings’ should be formatted into a table to make it easier to navigate. The content under ‘abnormalities’ has the right amount of information and clearly relates to the key topic of the project.

In terms of images, I believe a satisfactory amount of images have been used which clearly describes the content. However, some images are missing the all the copyright information needed as well as the description, references and student template such as those in the ‘development overview’ table. This should be added right away to ensure these images do not get deleted. The use of captions on these pictures is important to highlight what the image is referring to and this is present in the page. Although, images could be added under current research as this section looks like it could use more images. Great job on the images under abnormalities, they accurately relate to the content mentioned.

There are some incite references missing such as in the development overview. I’m not sure if the references listed below are supposed to the references for it, however all references should be placed under one ‘references’ subheading. The same references have been combined into one number showing that the group knows how to make the references set out. Also a glossary list should be added to help viewers understand the content more instead of just being confused at some sections. Overall, this is a great project and if the group makes edits based on the peer-reviews received, this could enhance their project.

Much more information on introduction is needed maybe. Also in text citations is needed. EXCELLENT job on the overview development section. The table and the images are great especially. Great use to information and the corresponding images. One suggestion though, put in text citations. Try to avoid repetitions as in the overview “this page” is repeated and in the table “a study” is repeated. Try being specific to which study you are referring to. Well balance of text and images in the development overview section. In text citations are needed and all the references would look better in the end of the page in a bulk. For your first research findings maybe obtain an image/s to aid the information. Historic findings section is just a bulk of text. No images can be seen so if possible I suggest you add images to this section. Although it is VERY WELL researched. VERY WELL DONE with the abnormalities section as each abnormality is well explained and has an image to accompany it. Try not to use a lot of pictures and references from the Embryology website. Over all this page is good but a lot of in text citation needs to be done and the references need to be in the end of the page in a bulk.

Group Project 5 – Integumentary Development

This page looks very neat and well organised, with an introduction that explains exactly what is going to appear and be discussed on the page. The Development Overview section is very well done, with the appropriate use of subheadings and content. The use of dot points is very effective, making the page look neater. Perhaps it would be good to draw a histological diagram of the skin layers, and uploading it to the skin development section. Specialised cells or important names throughout the page could be highlighted in bold or underlined as well, to highlight important terms and make it easier to learn and remember from. The title ‘Some Recent Findings’ accurately portrays what we as students can only do, which is identify SOME of the recent findings. This section could have more than 2 recent findings however and could be further subdivided by subheadings into the different components of the integumentary system – perhaps have 2-3 research articles for each component of the system. Historic findings are well researched but some more information would be good. The ‘Abnormalities’ section is so far the best looking section as it seems it is almost completed. Perhaps a few more abnormalities would be even better.

The table of the timeline in the ‘Development Overview’ section is superbly done and the use of histological images is fantastic as it provides the anatomical information visually. When I clicked on an image however, there was no proper referencing of the image and the copyright information and student image information was not present. The images are described very well. One image has a problem and is present in red writing, so might need to remove this as something is wrong with the file and it could not be uploaded. There are no student-drawn images and I think if this group did this, it would really benefit their project and emphasise their understanding.

The ‘Some Recent Findings’ section has a purple background, which makes the page look more aesthetically pleasing and less monochrome. I like the ‘More recent papers’ box that can be expanded to reveal any more research papers related to the integumentary fetal development, in case anyone wants to have a further read- very clever.

Journal articles are correctly referenced but website references need to be improved upon- to find how to do this go to the ‘How to reference’ page. References are all over the place and need to be compiled under each heading or one main heading titled ‘References’ at the bottom of the page.

Overall, this page is looking fantastic at this point in time so keep up the great work!

Introduction should be more to do with the content rather than the intention of the page. Introduce the reader to the system and then go into development in the next sections.

Fantastic job on the overview with the table being a highlight of this project

All of the images are very well integrated and presented. good work on the text and also the referencing in abnormalities section.

More references need to be included within text. Low amount thus far. References also need to be reformatted to be listed in one spot. You can always look at other groups page and copy their layout. The abnormalities section on your page has the right idea. Have a chat in group about it.

The main issues with this project are mainly formatting, very well done otherwise

Introduction is short though luckily few words can go a long way, with all sections of the wiki page being properly addressed. Development overview content is good; the use of table integrated with pictures allows viewers to visually grasp the progression in skin and teeth development. The changing between dot-points and paragraph format should be standardized or use paragraphs with dot-point only for list based information. References need to be properly integrated into the page, instead of at the bottom of each section.

In the recent findings section 2 out of the 4 studies presented have any content. To improve cutting some of excess information for the 2 studies already addressed and creating summaries for the other 2 will create better scope of recent findings. The formatting of recent findings is unusual, proper placement of the “Hematoxylin/eosin” image”, removal of dot-point and removal of purple highlighting, will make the section easier for viewers to understand. Historical findings okay, more detail could be added to “skin”, “glands”, “nails”. Use of capital letters like “DEVELOPMENT” show be replaced with subheadings, the image “File:Screen Shot 2014-10-08 at 10.38.04 am.png” has not appeared properly, should be easy to fix.

Straight up the abnormalities section is amazing, no improvement needed. All 4 diseases have in-depth relevant information, sufficient referencing and images to allow viewers to visualise clinical manifestation. To improve use of dot-points or paragraphs should be standard throughout the project, referencing in beginning sections needs to compiled at ending of each Main heading or bottom of page, recent findings need 1-2 more studies, and recent findings need significant reformatting.

Overall I was very impressed with this project page. I loved your use of pictures and diagrams as it provided a great understanding of what was happening- and also, a lot of the images were quite interesting- which is a great thing for a project! I also enjoyed the use of bullet points- it was very to the point and it retained my attention throughout the piece. I did find, however, that the introduction was a bit short. Whilst it did cover most of what was required, I don’t think it hurts to be a bit more exhaustive in what you’re saying, because the introduction sets the mindset of the reader for the rest of the project- and if they have a clear understanding from the start, it makes it much easier when you are explaining more complex things such as the abnormalities later on.

Overall, I thought that the developmental timeline was extremely well done, and a highlight of your project. The rest of the developmental overview was quite well done, however I think in areas it was a bit sloppy, and it would be of great benefit to clear this up so as to improve the clarity of your work. Further, I enjoyed the succinctness of your paragraphs, it made it easy to read and wasn’t too much to take in at once. I think that currently, your use of colour is a bit random in the recent findings. I think that this could really boost your project if you applied it to more areas of the page. As far as the content goes, I think that the recent findings is just too wordy and I began to lose my concentration a bit. I think maybe by forming more succinct dot points- you will be able to convey your message more clearly.

I think the historic findings could do with a bit more beefing up, but what you have so far is well done. The abnormalities is also very well done, and I think that your use of images really grab the readers attention.

I think that overall this project is shaping up to be a great one. I think you need to be careful and consistent with your referencing though as I noticed some sections lacked in-text citations.

This page seems to be done extremely well. It looks very visually appealing as multiple images are used, information is presented in tables, bullet points and very few slabs of text. The introduction is short and to the point. You could possibly add to this area a tiny bit of info concerning the embryonic development of this system, where it first started, then mention how you will expand on the fetal development. Otherwise it just seems way too short.

Explanation of the organs in this system is well done and concise. In the glands section, I would suggest not using dot points for the function of the vernix caseosa as it looks as though the dot points continue from those of the glands, therefore can be confusing when first looked at. Other than that, I would suggest that you make sure your referencing is correct and is used within the text.

The recent findings area is nicely done, but I still can’t help but feel the amount of text is just too much, even though the section is made better looking by making it purple (keep the colour, it looks awesome). The slab of text is just too much, so you should try and simplify it a bit. Historic findings are few but there is at least one for every organ which is good (more would be better). The abnormalities covered are done well, going into detail and providing a good image to describe what it looks like. I would suggest having at least 5 abnormalities, one for each organ discussed.

Overall, this page is very well done, with lots of images and colour used. The main thing I would suggest would be to make sure correct referencing is used. There were some paragraphs were no references were used at all. Also, all references should be at the bottom of the page, not within individual sections.

This page has great overall structure and presentation. The introduction gives good insight of the overall contents of the page, however it is very brief and should be expanded upon.

The table included in the developmental overview serving, as a timeline is excellent, really well done. It’s easy to follow and looks very neat. I like how there is an image for each of the weeks mentioned, just don’t forget to add in-text citations for its contents. The glands sub-section is very brief and would benefit if there were more contents added. Great job on the images though. The nail section is the same, more contents needs to be added and image would look really good.

The developmental overview and historic findings sections also seems to lack in-text citations. There is also has an image with a broken link. The subsection hair seems to be well researched, however I would also suggest either bolding or underlining the words you want to emphasize such as “structure” for a neater look.

The recent findings section looks superb I love the purple background colour. Its very well researched and the link to more research papers are very helpful for readers. I would suggest you put the image at the bottom of the mentioned content though, just to avoid the big gap on the page, or even if you can manage to wrap the text around the image, it would look much better in terms of presentation.

Although disturbing, the abnormalities section I could not fault. Very well done. It is evident that it has been research well and the images allow for great visualization of the diseases mentioned.

Overall, excellent page just needs a very formatting edits and some expanded contents mentioned above. Good luck!

Integumentary The introduction seems really over formal and non friendly. Maybe try rewording some parts to make it more reader-friendly and welcoming. The developmental time line is absolutely BEAUTIFUL! It shows the week of development, a brief explanation of each, and a picture to visually explain what is happening! I think it’s the best developmental timeline of all the wiki pages! Awesome job :) The references should be put together at the end of the wiki page before final submission. Hair and nail sections are very well done, teeth section are in dot points; this should be converted into paragraphs to match the wiki page format. The section on recent findings seem to be copy pasted? Or not yet converted into the students’ own words. The formatting is very different to the whole of the wiki page as well which should be changed. On the section on historic findings, you should try to find a picture to supplement the information you have. The abnormalities section is very well done, pictures visually supplementing each of the abnormalities. The picture of the infant with harlequin ichthyosis especially helps the reader understand the degree of extremity of the abnormality. Overall, very informative and well done!

This is a really well done project. You have made sure that that you have ticked all the boxes as well that Mark has asked for. The abnormalities section is really good. You have done well with most of your images as when you click on them there is a good description and they are well referenced. The development overview table is exceptional and makes the project easy to understand. For the week 22 maybe include the study in which you got your information from.

Apart from the abnormalities section it appears as though the referencing is a bit all over the place. Need to follow the abnormalities section and put references into the specific parts of the information you are using it for. Because otherwise it becomes difficult to know exactly where you got your information from. The historic findings are really good and well done however there is probably a space for more information to be included as I feel as though some of the findings are a bit hard to follow at times. It may have just been my computer I couldn’t see the picture of ‘fetal hair development’.

I think it would give a nice touch to the project if you were to add some student images because it would give the page a more ‘student’ and also make it easier to understand. Don’t mind the purple background on the ‘some recent findings’ part but it just looks a bit out of the blue. It’s certainly unique and attracts the eye but it puts a lot of emphasis on this section which I’m not entirely sure you want.

Overall though a really good project with excellent information. There needs to be a bit more focus on referencing technique, some minor edits which I have mentioned and maybe introduce some student pictures to make the project more student-like. Great work though and good luck in finishing it off.

The introduction of this page was good as it provided a great overview and insight into what the project would later go on to discuss. Perhaps a little information on defining the integumentary system itself would be valuable though, to let the reader know the constituents.

The sub-sectioning of the page’s content into ‘introduction, ‘development overview’, ‘recent findings’, ‘historic findings’ and ‘abnormalities’ was clever, as the development section then went on to describe each component such as skin, nails etc. This effectively segmented the information into smaller chunks that could easily be navigated to. I especially liked the use of the table in the ‘skin’ section, showing the week of development, description and image corresponding alongside it, as it provided a holistic approach to that section. However, there were no in-text citations in the ‘skin’, ‘hair’, ‘nail’ or ‘teeth’ sections, hence the source of the information is unclear. To do this correctly, Dr Hill’s Wiki help page should be consulted.

The use of various images with labelled captions was a strength of this project, as the pictures were effective in balancing the text components to make the page more visually appealing. Most of the sections under ‘development overview’ have a decent amount of content, however the ‘nails’ part is a bit lacking and also needs to be correctly cited. The use of the table of images alongside the description of developmental stage in the ‘teeth’ section was very good to include, however the image is captioned ‘The stages of embryonic teeth development’. This may be irrelevant as the project’s focus is on fetal development. Further research into this area may uncover more relevant information.

Although the section on ‘recent findings’ contains a lot of information, the use of chunky paragraphs detracts from the readability of the page and the purple boxes could be summarised into dot points to help the reader understand the content more quickly. The section on historic findings seems concise and relevant, however the image included says it has been removed/deleted, so this requires editing. Lastly, the ‘abnormalities’ section was very well-structured and written, as each example had a captioned image accompanying it to help the reader visualise. This section was also well-done in terms of in-text citations, with an extensive reference list provided at the end. Perhaps consider adding some student-drawn images and possibly a relevant video, but otherwise it is very good as it is. Overall, the project has a good layout and a decent amount of content; with some editing and formatting it can be improved further.

Overall this is an impressive and well researched wiki page incorporating lots of pictures and tables to keep the reader engaged and interested. However there are a few areas that have the potential to be tweaked. Firstly there are references scattered throughout the page. A more attractive way of presenting the references is as a long list at the end of the page. The introduction is clear, concise and short. All the organ development section is well presented and has the right amount of information. It is well structured in the sense that the student introduces the organ, it’s embryonic origin, the fetal growth stage and then goes into slightly more depth in a bullet point form. Along with complementary pictures, this is a very effective way of presenting their topic. This page could be improved by adding student-drawn schematic diagrams to summarise the layers of the skin in particular since histological images can be confusing and unclear to a non-expert embryology student.

The skin development section appears to dwell on the content that was covered in lectures. Considering there appears to be only three references associated with the entire integumentary organ development section, the depth of the information is limited. By doing some more research you might be able to find interesting additional information that can be added. The recent findings section is interesting and the images are great. However the dense block of information and slightly odd formatting make it hard to follow. Perhaps using diagrams to explain the differing gene expression and breaking down the information into bullet points would make it more readable.

The historic findings and abnormalities section is particularly well done. The images complement the minimal yet important points made. I was left wanting to read more into it so that suggests there’s room for further development and a deeper explanation of skin abnormalities.

  • Great overview given in the introduction. Maybe look to replacing the words "this page" to something else to avoid repetition
  • I'm really liking how everything has been simplified into dot points and tables where relevant. Don't forget to include relevant references all throughout though, to justify all that you've included in each section
  • I can't express how much I love your first table. Great work!
  • Proofread so that you don't repeat the same things in your table though. You mention "in a study" numerous times but there's no indication to which studies they are
  • I'm sure Mark would be thinking this same thing, but look to getting different references outside of this Embryology website, maybe from textbooks or otherwise for preliminary information on development
  • The "recent findings" section looks nicely formatted but just a bit wordy. Maybe think of dividing the text up with bullet points or images
  • Really liking your "historic findings" section! Great research
  • Maybe think of re-creating some of the simpler pictures by drawing them yourselves. That way you're not using too many pictures from this Embryology website, Mark warned our group about this point
  • Great choices for the "abnormalities" section. Traumatising at first, but very well-researched and presented

The presentation of this page is very well with multiple images being used and text organised into tables and dot points. The introduction is short however includes necessary information regarding what is being included in the project. I recommend adding background information on anatomy of the skin (explaining on different layers) and other structures as well as a brief summary on the embryonic development of the system so that fetal development can be further expanded throughout the project.

The development overview section is done very well and is divided into different sections each explaining the development of a different structure. The use of table, images and bullet points has made the page look very interesting. The table of the timeline in the ‘Development Overview’ is done very well and the use of histological images is excellent as it helps in visualising the anatomy at each stage. There is however no proper referencing, copyright information or student template for any of the images. The table under “teeth” is also a very good summary of events during fetal period. I recommend including self-drawn diagram as well, since this is the only feature missing from your project. You can include a drawing of the different layers of skin (possibly in the introduction section). I also suggest putting all the references under one reference list at the end of the page instead of having references at the end of each section.

The “some research finding” section is presented well with a different background colour to other sections (it is similar to recent findings in mark’s wiki pages). This makes the page look very visually appealing! You have elaborated on two out of four research papers which is very good. However I recommend describing the other two papers as well and even including more papers (It would be perfect if you could provide research papers for different structures). I like how the “more research papers” can be expanded for anyone interested.

Historic findings section is very well researched considering it is difficult to find information for this section. The ‘Abnormalities’ section is also perfect and complete with all four diseases having sufficient information and appropriate references. The images are also relevant and illustrate the clinical manifestations well. Overall this page is very well-organised and only minor issues mentioned above need to be fixed.

The introduction to this page offers a brief insight into the information presented in this wiki and is a good way to start your page. In the ‘Developmental Overview, the use of dot points to break up the text is a great way of presenting the information in conjunction with the table. The table is a really good piece of work and the images make it really interesting addition to the page.

The ‘Recent Findings’ section contains a good selection of articles but I think it could benefit from a brief description of each paper to reveal the relevance of the studies. The ‘Historic Findings’ section is well written but could also be improved by including some historic images to make it more interesting.

Overall this page is really well written with plenty of detailed text. The strong point of this page is the ‘Abnormalities’ section - it has great information and really good images to support it. It could be made even better if some more abnormalities were included. This page also benefits from its neat presentation and plenty of references.

The project page contains a decent amount of information in the introduction section as it introduces what sections of the integumentary system will be covered below, but does not give a brief description of the system. For example, listing of the organs involved as well as function and their changes in position as development progresses in the embryonic period. The content general has been written well as it is clear and concise and readers that are not in the field of embryology are able to understand ideas presented. The use of tables and well-structured images further complements this and hence shows that there is a good project page structure adopted.


• Good images are used to further show ideas and improve understanding.

• Bullet points used to great effect in summarising information and making it easier to read.

• Tables are used to great effect as the timeline is easy to read and right to the point

• Recent findings are an ‘eye opener’ for information as it summarises the article quite well as well the images displaying the results.

• In-text citations are used quite well as they are distributed.


• Consistency needs to be ensured regarding references as some references are written after paragraphs. Hence, they should be put in the reference list at the end of the project page.

• Most images have an image name but some lack an image description.

• Structural error such as some bullet points needs to be fixed up.

• Historic finding research article should be mentioned as they are highly relevant to the current knowledge possessed today.

• References from the embryology website should be used scarcely.

This is one of the best pages so far. Introduction clear, concise, however maybe have a little more about the integumentary system in the introduction. Also maybe consider an image or video here, if you can not find a photo perhaps think of getting one of the group members to draw. For the development overview, your table is fantastic as it is informative, concise and also has relevant images to help visually learn and understand. Dot points for format is a great idea, making it less overwhelming for readers. The subheading for glands and hair is small however detailed, clear and effective in being informative. Also the image brightens up your page and is inviting. I could say the same for the section on teeth. Nail seems to be small section maybe consider an image here, and more content- maybe some more research.

Recent findings, very colourful at first glance. Again inviting , once you read very detailed and obvious research has been done. Images are referenced and have a detailed caption leading tot the knowledge behind the image.

Abnormalities has great references throughout the content that has been uploaded. However this is the only section that has done this and if the rest of the group would take note of this referencing format they would better this page. Great images related to the abnormality and content in information.

Overall great page, just need to work on more images in some sections and also referencing within the content of the sections. A fantastic job!

You have covered the main topics. I very much like how you have simply listed the relevant topics. It is very useful how you have put in the introduction what the page is mainly focusing on and that it is focusing on fetal development. This is very useful for readers that may come across your website in the future in giving context. Your page has a particularly good use of tables. The first table with the weeks, description and phase diagrams is very good. It really helps in understanding. And I can say that it is good method of explaining the fetal skin development to peers. It is also innovative and gives the reader a comprehensive understanding of the topic. It shows that the group understands the topic as they can express it so simply and effectively. Again the combination of images and descriptive tables for the teeth section is very useful. There is an image in the historic findings section where it has not worked. As you guys must it can be fixed by referring to the referencing manual on the website ( ). The recent findings sections use of coloured boxes is a good visual change. It is helpful for reading and attracting towards this section.

It is also evident that your group has done a lot of research and I your group has gone past the normal teaching level knowledge. Possibly more information could be added to Historic Findings section. There are a few minor things like spelling of Mammillary as ‘Mamailliary’ in the Historic Findings section. There are a lot of references and in text citations which is good. However there are separate reference lists for each section. This could be modified by putting them all together into a main reference list. This can easily be done before the dead line. Overall this page is awesome!

Good use of table and images to map out the stages of skin development. Try and wrap the text around the diagrams to incorporate them more into the text. Good descriptions of abnormalities associated with integumentary development. You could put all of the references at the end to make the main text flow better. The descriptions about development are detailed and easy to understand which is good.

Group 5

The page is well organised, key points relating to topic is clearly described in the “development overview section”. Not only do they put in dot point keeping it short and to the point there is also table and diagrams appropriately used to enhance understanding of development of skin in fetal stage. It shows they have understood the topic. Particular liked the teeth table as it showed good understanding of the phase in its development and it was clear and to the point. Hair section could be written in dot point just to have consistency with rest of information and the diagram in gland section could be placed on the opposite side, it disorganise the information when placed in the middle. Overall good overview nail section could include picture.

Recent findings although incomplete there is good research provided on skin and hair follicle. There should be 1 or 2 more research findings included for either for nail or gland however with what it written on the page it is relevant and in-depth. Could put it in dot points so that readers don’t lose interest in reading the whole thing and also so it’s easier to understand. Diagram is labelled and relates to the second recent finding information showing sufficient level of research. Although mentioned mouse model there is no other models mentioned for any of the Integumentary development, should make a subheading for it and try including 2-3 models.

In historic findings the hair section is well written shows good understanding and appropriate subheadings have been used (structure, Development). Its in chronological order and key points have been addressed, other structures doesn’t sure enough research being done its basic and incomplete for example Skin. In this section some labelled diagram would make it more engaging to read.

Abnormalities is well written it is clear and they are all defined with real life pictures associated with the abnormalities making it easier to visualise. Thorough research is evident in this section and it is of appropriate length. Overall the project page is well organised and quite engaging having table format, historic pictures as well as real life picture and even adding colour to the page. Could maybe include video onto the page. Reference is in the correct format and it’s good that there is list at the end of the page, maybe for consistency just have reference at the end instead of both (throughout the page and at the end). Recent findings could be simplified further while more information could be added for recent model and for historic findings for some structures.

This page is laid out really well in its organization of each heading and then corresponding subheadings. A well-developed introduction, clearly establishes what will be covered. The development overview is written really well and images are incorporated adequately. The use of a table with images is really good effort, might consider using it on our group page. Try to be more consistent with the formatting in each subsequent component of the overviews, e.g the ‘nails’ are dot points but then the ‘teeth’ section is a paragraph. This is just a minor observation that could be changed later.

The in text citations seem to be only in some parts of the page, this could be due to the reference not being a pubmed site. Here are some tips that may be helpful with referencing; for the pubmed sites it’s the following format [1] and then for all others its [2]. Then after those are inserted, add an additional referencing heading and under it write

  1. <pubmed>pubmedIDnumber</pubmed>
  2. “insertsource”


The ‘recent findings’ section is written well, with in depth detail, might want to consider using a few dot points to avoid lengthy paragraphs. Once this section is completely filled with info, it will prove to be really great as it seems a lot of research has been carried out here. There seem to be more referencing issues and the lack of in text citations, try to fix these with the use of the formatting mentioned above. A well written section on ‘historic findings’, again the use of formatting would complete this part. The abnormalities section is done exceptionally well as the cause, risk and management has all been covered. The in text citations are used well as well as the structure of the paragraphs. Some confronting images but well done for finding them for each abnormality, consider adding a few more abnormalities and this will be a really great section.

Finally the work that has been conducted so far is really well done, there are minor adjustments in regards to formatting, referencing and the in text citations. Once these are completed it will look really great. Also some of the sections seems to have info missing, however once this is all filled out it will be sufficient. Good work so far everyone , keep it up and good luck completing the rest of it ☺.

A clear and concise introduction to the group project allows us to know what to expect to see throughout the group project. It clearly outlines what will be covered.

The development overview section is really well laid out, with information split up by breaks to allow for easier reading and for readers to recognize the different stages of development. The tabulated data, timeline and diagrams are extremely well put out! The information in the table description is adequate and explains what needs to be explained about the diagram (week 18 just says example?)

Recent findings section is nice a purple :) Informative and well broken down, however some more uses of paragraphing would help with the overall structure of this section. great use of diagrams with the recent findings. Last 2 Recent finding articles have yet to be explained right?

Historical findings have been covered with lots of good information, use some use of text formatting (bolding words) to help with the different sub-subheadings in this section :) Some in-text citations would be helpful in understanding where the information came from.

Abnormalities have been extensively covered with some interesting information and nice use of diagrams as well as the descriptive text which accompany them. Adding a few more abnormalities and diagrams would help with the project :)

Overall great work on your group project! Looking very good so far! Fix up some citation errors and place all your references at the bottom of the page and you should be all set to go

Week 5

Hey guys!! I found some research material that we can use to construct our time line!

Historic information is hard to find! I might go look at some text books in the library --Z3418340 (talk) 12:50, 27 August 2014 (EST) How is everyone else going?

--Z3417843 (talk) 12:52, 27 August 2014 (EST) Hey!! That's great! I also found some material for abnormalities. There seem to be a lot about septal defects. I'm gonna try to look up for more defects.

--Z3417843 (talk) 22:53, 30 August 2014 (EST)Woo!! Nice to see more links in the page! Rehmina and I also thought that it would be easier for marking if one of the two people in current research do timeline instead because that would make marking easier and less confusing. But that's not final, it's only a suggestion. Also, Dr. Hill gave us some tips on what to focus/include in our research such as:

  • Remodelling during the fetal period
  • Changes during ossification - haematopoietic elocution from liver to bone marrow
  • Early development of WBCs — hot topic right now!!

Hey everyone, yeah that sounds good with me..  :) so rather each person focuses on 1 of the 4 topics right? --Z3417796 (talk) 12:35, 31 August 2014 (EST)

--Z3417843 (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2014 (EST)Yep, exactly! I'm really glad that's alright with you but we can still talk about more in the lab.

--Z3417843 (talk) 12:14, 2 September 2014 (EST)Hey everyone! I just asked Dr. Hill about using review articles. He said it's alright to use review articles as long as you say that the information came from a review article when citing. We can also use images from review articles and there is no need to say that it came from a review article.

Week 6

--Z3418488 (talk) 20:19, 3 September 2014 (EST)Hey guys, I had a good talk with Mark today after the lab. Since we're doing the Cardiovascular system, it incorporates the (i) development of the heart, (ii) development of the blood vessels and (iii) the formation of red blood cells/white blood cells. But Mark said that as a group, we would be able to create and produce this web-site in a manner that we thought was appropriate. We could focus on one of the specific areas or more broadly on each area, if we chose to. But, MOST IMPORTANTLY, our project should be cohesive. What we talk about should be introduced well at the start and should be cohesive through out all of the subsections that we're working on. He really stressed the importance of us having a single, unified vision of our end product and that it should be succinct throughout it all. Im proposing that we actually decide what to focus on very soon.

--Z3418488 (talk) 20:19, 3 September 2014 (EST) I'd particularly like to just focus on the development of the heart? Maybe incorporate the formation of blood cells if the research in the other areas is interesting and notable?

--Z3418488 (talk) 20:24, 3 September 2014 (EST)In regards to the use of the textbook, we are allowed to use the information from it if we cite it properly, but he really want us to be using articles (and even Review articles) to discuss our information.

I agree, the heart should remain our focus, but of course other aspects such as blood vessel formation/ blood cells would naturally fall into it as well- maybe just a brief mention wherever appropriate? --Z3417796 (talk) 21:22, 3 September 2014 (EST)

Week 7

--Z3417843 (talk) 21:05, 8 September 2014 (EST) Hmm. I agree. Let's try and focus on the heart for now and see how we go? And if time permits, maybe we will be able to include the development of blood vessels and blood cells. Sorry I didn't reply so soon, kinda busy week for me haha!

--Z3418488 (talk) 00:24, 10 September 2014 (EST)Ok that sounds really good and reasonable! I'd be happy to follow that plan. And yeah, same! Very busy week for me as well! But yeah, I think lets just focus and refine our research to just the development of the heart at the moment

--Z3418488 (talk) 00:40, 10 September 2014 (EST)Hey guys, Im having difficulty knowing whether the use of an article is fine or not?! If it says "Full-free-text" does that mean we're allowed to incoporate it? Because a lot of the copyright information, is very brief. Thanks heaps, if you guys know an answer haha

--Z3418488 (talk) 00:55, 10 September 2014 (EST)Ok, never mind.. I find out the answer haha. If it says "Open-Access" or "Full-free-text" it is only free to read online and may/may not be allowed for re-use. You'; have to read carefully or apply for permission lol. I guess i'll just be sticking to mainly the Public Library of Science (PLoS), Biomed central (BMC) and Springer Open... which we are pretty much able to use, with the right referencing and acknowledgement. I read this on the 'Copy rights' page on this wiki. Can someone verify or correct me if i'm wrong haha?

--Z3417843 (talk) 11:56, 10 September 2014 (EST) I thought copyright only applied on images and not on content. It would be really difficult to write a report when the most papers have copyright. We can ask Dr. Hill in the lab just to confirm.

Week 8

--Z3417796 (talk) 12:56, 17 September 2014 (EST) Hey guys, so Carl and I had a talk with Dr. Hill and he has agreed to allow us to change topics from Cardio to Integumentary. To finalise the change all members have to personally email him saying we all agree to the topic change. Carl and I have started thinking about our approach to the topic and we think we should have a main focus on skin and smaller sub-topics on hair, nails, glands and teeth. Each members role just remains the same and any problems we will all still help eachother :)

Week 9

--Z3417796 (talk) 12:46, 22 September 2014 (EST)Hey guys, I've added some headings for our new page just to get a start, we've got alot to catch up on, I guess we still have to talk about it as a group for the overall layout, we should all start adding some content soon.

--Z3417843 (talk) 12:41, 23 September 2014 (EST) Thank you for fixing it! Yeah, we have a lot to do but that's okay. Midsem break is next week and hopefully we can get most of the bulk done before week 10.

Midsem Break

--Z3417843 (talk) 23:24, 29 September 2014 (EST) Just wanted to let you guys know that Dr. Hill gave us some tips on what to look at a few weeks back. He mentioned "vernix caseosa and fetal hair." Here's a wikipedia link to vernix caseosa ( just to give you guys an idea on what it is. I'm aiming to finish before the end of the week so that I could help anyone with their parts. Anyway, I hope everyone's having a good break!

Week 11

--Z3417843 (talk) 15:02, 15 October 2014 (EST) So the review is done and we're getting lots of good feedback! Yay to us! Here's the list of things we need to get done before handing in the project:

  • student drawn images have to be referenced and add student copyright
  • more info on skin, glands, nails
  • table for glands
  • timeline of ALL organ development (drawing)
  • reorganise development section (from most content - least content)
  • find more articles on historic findings (before 1950s)
  • add 1 more abnormality
  • get references organised/unified
  • fix links in development and recent findings
  • fix introduction - list the outcomes of what the page wants to achieve e.g. “understand the development of the integumentary organs…, etc.”
  • add a video
  • make usage of dot point and/or paragraphs consistent (recent findings)
  • Add external links

We do have quite a bit to get done but that's okay! I'm pretty much done with my section, I just need to add one more. Lastly, since Dr. Hill extended the deadline to Friday next week (5:00pm), we'll aim to finish the content by Sunday 12:00pm. Then we can spend the rest of the week make it pretty/neat.

--Z3418488 (talk) 17:04, 18 October 2014 (EST)Hey Carl, could I get your help in finding information for gland and nail development? Could help beeef up that section? Haha only if possible please! Thanks heaps!

--Z3418488 (talk) 17:04, 18 October 2014 (EST)And yeah just a reminder guys, that Rehmina needed help with dot-point 6 above! Just remember to try find good historic articles and just post them here. We'll try to get a good collapsable table like in the recent findings section!

--Z3418340 (talk) 19:20, 19 October 2014 (EST) Thanks Cart, if you feel that your section is almost done, I would really appreciate a few suggestions on how to improve my section. Barbra, Im going to change the name of your section from "Some Recent Findings" --> "Current Research" I hope thats okay, if you have any other suggestions then thats cool too.

--Z3417843 (talk) 19:33, 19 October 2014 (EST)Sure thing, I'll see if I can find some information on both development and historic findings now. And to Rehmina, yeah sure, happy to give you suggestions. :) I've also found a few articles for the presentation. I'll post them on the Facebook page since I don't know how to post the PDFs here.

Week 12

--Z3418488 (talk) 18:18, 22 October 2014 (EST)

  • Add outcomes to introduction (similar style to Mark in lectures)- Carl
  • Everyone fix overall intext referencing- everyone do it for themselves
  • Create general timeline- Carl
  • Rehmina to tell Jerome about Hair follicle stages
  • Barbara to complete and fix references in her section and nail development
  • Carl to add a collapsable table to other abnormalities
  • Jerome to add a table to Gland development
  • Jerome change nail-development code
  • Rehmina and Jerome to upload images

--Z3417843 (talk) 19:09, 22 October 2014 (EST) Great! I'll get those done as soon as I can. Jerome, I found this article about hair development. I haven't read it yet but I figured it might help you with the hair section.

- --Z3418340 (talk) 15:51, 23 October 2014 (EST)Hey, on the basis of the feedback, Im removing this image that we got from the UNSW Embryology page. I'm in the process of uploading the images now, Thanks for the checklist Carl!

The stages of hair development