Talk:2014 Group Project 8

From Embryology
Revision as of 21:32, 14 October 2014 by Z3465141 (talk | contribs)

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.

Referencing
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/>

Plagiarism
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.

Peer Reviews

1

Let me start by saying that the “Muscle Gains” section is funny but obviously very irrelevant to the project. Looking at the contents of this page, there seem to be a lot of focus on the development and very little on the other sections. The development section is well-researched and great job on the in-text citations! Some parts look a bit bulky though so maybe try to break some of them down into bulletpoints if possible. A timeline of development is also very helpful in this project.

On abnormalities, very concise and detailed. Try to write about 3-4 abnormalities and find information on how they’re treated or managed presently. As for historic findings, there is a section on the Wikipage that has old books on embryology. It’s under the “Explore” tab and you’ll see “Historic embryo”. Those books have a lot of information regarding that section. Don’t forget to write about current findings as well. Another thing, try to use images since these really help with understanding the content of the page. Overall, a lot of work has to be done before the due date. I do understand why because there are only two people in this group. Goodluck and I wish you the best in finishing this project!

2

Group Project 8 – Musculoskeletal Development

The key points of musculoskeletal development appear as headings however there is still much that needs to be clearly discussed beneath each of these points. The main headings are good and specific but some are way too specific and should be under much larger headings, for example, 1.2-1.9 could be subheadings that come under the heading ‘System Development’. ‘Background embryonic development’ is useful to understand but perhaps it is better to not have so much detail, or summarise it in a table. The ‘Abnormalities’ heading is done well, with one disease listed (Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy). It might be better to have more than one abnormality listed and clearly described as well. I particularly like the use of statistics and genetic references. It seems most of the key points relating to system development have been clearly described, but some tidying up in terms of editing needs to be done.

Also, more work needs to be done on historic findings, current research, models and findings. Once all the research parts are completed, the timeline can be correctly constructed. Also like the idea of putting a timeline and the heading shows that this is intended. More subheadings could be used to make the page look more organised and pleasing to the eye.

There are also no graphs or tables as well as pictures. A table could be used to make the timeline or highlight the differences between the second, third trimesters and neonatal periods of fetal muscular development. Maybe the initial heading of the page should be changed to ‘Muscular Fetal Development’ to indicate that muscular development is actually being covered instead of both muscular and skeletal. There also isn’t much information regarding limb fetal development, so maybe it would be good to go through that on a deeper level.

It could also help to have images loaded onto the page or to draw flow diagrams to assist in the description of how the muscles develop in the fetal period. For example, upload an image showing the difference between slow twitch and fast twitch muscle fibres or draw a flow chart to show better understanding of the molecular and cellular regulation of fetal myogenesis.

References need to be in one larger section at the end under the heading ‘References’, not two and scattered throughout as is seen. The major section of references appears to be referenced correctly and in-cite references are done very well. There are also many references which are good and show that this group has thoroughly researched their topic.

Overall, this group has done very well and just needs to add more information for certain headings, as well as organise the page a bit better in neater headings and subheadings. Pictures should be added, as well as graphs, tables and own student-drawn images.

4

Overall the Group project page seems to be set out quite well with its headings and sub headings. Just needs a bit more info for some of the sub headings particularly from ‘second trimester muscular development’ onwards and a few formatting adjustments. The use of timelines, tables and dot points might help in those sections. The content provided is written well and in a detailed manner, which is still understood. There is a significant amount of research presented and this is seen through the in text citations and then further identified in the reference list. A good use of referencing is seen supporting the content info provided. The content uses examples of past and current research to help develop and establish ideas that are presented well. The abnormalities section on ‘Duchenne muscular dystrophy’ is described really well, maybe other abnormalities could also be added later.

To improve the page some suggestions include the use of diagrams and images, would help to add a bit more vibrancy to the page. Images and drawings are a great way to help in understanding the content. They are also a great way to make the content clearer especially if there are a number of processes involved in the development. Some of the longer paragraphs of content may also be formatted into dot points just to avoid lengthy paragraphs of info. It might also be useful to include some of the headings mentioned on the assessment page (identify current research models and findings, historic findings etc.). Finally, the page so far is done well however it will need a little bit more work to be completely finished. Try to just gather as much info as you can to ensure you have enough content and then add images and any other visual aids later. Keep up the good work and good luck :).

4

This page needs a lot of work; there are sections with little to no information, while others have just slabs of text, some of which have no references. Of those that have info presented, the topic is well covered with the large amount of content. You should use some dot points for some areas where you have a lot of info. You also need to use some images!! They will help to alleviate the slabs of content you have and add some colour to the page. Make sure you caption and reference them correctly, and add the correct copyright info.

Overall, there isn’t much I can say except add content, reference is correctly both in text and at the bottom of the page, and images and use some dot points and/or tables; don’t write everything in large slabs of text. Also, maybe get rid of that 'Muscle Gains' section, unless you actually plan to write something relevant in there haha. Otherwise, Good luck!

5

Let me start by saying, for only having two people in the group, well done. The page should have an introduction though, and this is missing. Just by simply summarizing all the information that will be covered in the page and adding it to the introduction, will improve the overall presentation significantly, you may wish to leave this to last, or edit as you go along.

The section “Making gains” is amusing, but inappropriate and should be omitted from the final submission. The timeline for the page I believe should be put into a table to save time and add to the presentation of the page, it can be easily done if you follow the steps outlined in the ‘editing basics’ page

The background information is comprehensive, however, the page is in desperate need of some images as there are just slabs of text. Images will really help break up the contents of the page and make it visually appealing.

The abnormalities section also seems to be coming along quite well. Keep up the good work.

Week 5

--Z3418989 (talk) 22:34, 26 August 2014 (EST) Hi guys After discussing in lab last week we tried to divide the categories and work as following;

  • skeletal and cartilaginous development - Joel
  • muscular development - Gowtem
  • overall skeletal and muscular arrangement macroscopically - Danny

What do you guys think about addressing these topics as well

  • Historical findings
  • Abnormalities
  • New findings

--Z3418779 (talk) 12:44, 27 August 2014 (EST) Great idea m8 Danny can probably also do abnormalities, remember to post any articles of particular relevance to New/historical findings. To complete after main content assembled

--Z3418779 (talk) 01:02, 28 August 2014 (EST) I would suggest that we narrow down the topic to focusing on the appendicular musculoskeletal system, so that;

  • To make work load more managable
  • To avoid the multiple highly specialised and irregular muscles/bones of the head
  • The muscles I would suggest to include in are all muscles which have attachments to the appendicular skeleton including axioappendicular muscles (petoralis major, pectoralis minor, subclavious, serratus anterior, Latissimus Dorsi, Traps, levator scap, rhomboid major and minor.
  • Joints and tendons are included in the musculoskeletal system, we should about wether we want to have a section for them.

--Z3418779 (talk) 09:05, 31 August 2014 (EST)

Hi guys just posted the topics of abnormalities of muscle and skeletal system im gonna talk bout and references of relevant articles to the topics. Sorry for being late btw

--Z3418779 (talk) 14:57, 9 September 2014 (EST) Disregard the rest of the stuff I said in earlier discussions, I believe that to make it significantly easier we just do muscular system. I will Reformat everything to make it make sense.

--Z3418989 (talk) 01:51, 10 September 2014 (EST) Yeah completely agree, I think focusing on the muscular system would be much easier than doing both. Appendicular muscles sounds good - so muscles of limbs. Could divide it into upper and lower limbs. May have to talk about bone/cartilage a bit to describe how the muscle forms around it. Maybe how developing of muscles in embryonic development is important and eventually affects origin and insertions and actions of muscles when fully developed.

--Z3418779 (talk) 12:56, 17 September 2014 (EST) This link shows a very good description of myogenesis; http://books.google.com.au/books?id=1ZRCMRXbbwoC&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=primary+secondary+myofibers&source=bl&ots=RSRcVVe5xr&sig=eDJBF_3qkYzA8WSin1tnbzT2xYY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OegYVL_UHpOB8gWMxoDYAw&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false

--Z3418989 (talk) 12:27, 20 September 2014 (EST) Ill add a bit more on embryonic muscle development guys

--Z3418779 (talk) 22:30, 6 October 2014 (EST) Here are some article which would probably be helpful Nrk2b-mediated NAD+ production regulates cell adhesion and is required for muscle morphogenesis in vivo: Nrk2b and NAD+ in muscle morphogenesis Coexpression of two distinct muscle acetylcholine receptor a-subunits during development

At the moment I have a general structure for tendon development and abnormalities will add to wiki tommorrow.

the good indepth morphogenesis studies focus on gluteus maxximus, extrenal urethra spincter, tensor veli palatini very little are done of the other muscles, so will try to apply the conclusions from these studies to related skeltal muscles