Talk:2017 Group Project 2

From Embryology
Student Projects: 1 Cerebral Cortex | 2 Kidney | 3 Heart | 4 Eye | 5 Lung | 6 Cerebellum
Student Page - here is the sample page I demonstrated with in the first labs.I remind all students that you have your own Group Forum on Moodle for your discussions, it is only accessible by members of your group.
Editing Links: Editing Basics | Images | Tables | Referencing | Journal Searches | Copyright | Font Colours | Virtual Slide Permalink | My Preferences | One Page Wiki Card | Printing | Movies | Language Translation | Student Movies | Using OpenOffice | Internet Browsers | Moodle | Navigation/Contribution | Term Link | Short URLs | 2018 Test Student

I have now added a discussion Forum for your group to Moodle. You can add your discussion here (available to everyone) or in your Moodle Group Discussion (available to only your group members).

The collapsible table below shows the assessment criteria that will be used for this group project.

Group Assessment Criteria  
Mark Hill.jpg Science Student Projects
  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.
More Information on Assessment Criteria | Science Student Projects
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

"Plagiarism at UNSW is defined as using the words or ideas of others and passing them off as your own." (extract from UNSW statement on Academic Honesty and Plagiarism)

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.

About the Discussion Page

This should be considered as the "other side" of the project page. It is an area where you can:

  1. Assemble resources.
  2. Add useful links.
  3. Discuss your project with team members. (Please do not use student names on any page on this Wiki)
  4. Paste your Peer Assessments. (Added anonymously, do not identify yourself)



  • 10 assessment criteria demonstrated with some exceptions.
  • Balance of text and media. Video is useful but not accurate in places and does not describe nephron development.
    • Animal Models table - could have been broken into more explanatory columns (peer teaching).
  • Elements of peer teaching.
  • Molecular - Table of identified genes was useful for molecular development and included links to research articles.
    • Would have liked to see a link to database OMIM or other for each factor.
    • Would have liked a categorisation of these factors (transcription, growth factor etc)
    • Would have liked to have a link or figure showing signaling mechanism.
    • These factors are shown later on the project page, emphasising a better description of signaling required for better peer teaching.
  • Glossary - useful, but too brief in listed terms (peer teaching).
  • Referencing - good coverage of literature and sources, some errors in list.
    • Text referencing rather than PMID - this has been used extensively on teh project page. While acceptable, it means that the reference IS NOT directly linked or accessible from the reference list.
    • Ref 11, 14 and 21 - Are all the same reference (PubMed 3063284). This should have appeared as single entry in the list with multiple citations, as shown in the class tutorial and online tutorial.
    • Ref 40 - Why was a textbook used for horseshoe kidney instead of a research ops review article? (Moore KL (1992).Clinically Oriented Anatomy, ed 3: p223)
    • Ref 49 - This appears to be the incorrect reference for Hoxb7/GFP transgenic mice - G A Werther, W Banach, S Joffe, R Artal, M A Sperling Changes in glucagon do not play an essential role in the glucoregulatory responses to mild hyperinsulinemia in dogs. Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract.: 1987, 3(1);55-61 PubMed 2880702
    • Ref 52 - Excellent inclusion of the Brenner Hypothesis and the related section on the project page. This could have been extended to include the DOHAD hypothesis.


Total - 452

  • Z5015446 - 171
  • Z5017644 - 131
  • Z5178407 - 96
  • Z5178275 - 50

  • Z5076039 - 4
  • Z5091101 - 0

Edit History Note

  • Both the Project and Discussion pages are now locked and cannot be edited. Please email me if you have additional comments or edits concerning the project and individual contributions.
  • This edit analysis is not a quantitation of individual student overall contribution, but is used to identify low contribution students and the ongoing contribution component.
  • Group Edit Comparison - Group 1 (855) Group 2 (452) Group 3 (583) Group 4 (399) Group 5 (381) Group 6 (604)
  • This project appeared to have two group members who contributed most, one slightly lower and the forth had lowest contribution by edit. Identified low and edit contributor, analysis of individual edit contributions matched these edit records.


  • Z5178407 - 3 images
  • Z5015446 - 2 images
  • Z5017644 - 1 image (wikipedia)
  • Z3463310 - 1 image (copyright) previous student upload.
  • Unknown contributor - 3 UNSW images

Images General Notes

  • Not able to determine UNSW image contributor to the project page.
  • UNSW image use is allowed, but suggests you have not tried to look for other original sources.
  • There are many additional useful images that could have been incorporated into the project page.
  • File:Renin Angiotensin system.jpeg - student image has no additional information and is a simple drawing of a nephron, where is the Renin Angiotensin content?

Mark Hill (talk) 10:15, 14 August 2017 (AEST) OK Group 2 below are some starting places.

Renal Links: renal | Lecture - Renal | Lecture Movie | urinary bladder | Stage 13 | Stage 22 | Fetal | Renal Movies | Stage 22 Movie | renal histology | renal abnormalities | Molecular | Category:Renal
Historic Embryology - Renal  
1905 Uriniferous Tubule Development | 1907 Urogenital images | 1911 Cloaca | 1921 Urogenital Development | 1915 Renal Artery | 1917 Urogenital System | 1925 Horseshoe Kidney | 1926 Embryo 22 Somites | 1930 Mesonephros 10 to 12 weeks | 1931 Horseshoe Kidney | 1932 Renal Absence | 1939 Ureteric Bud Agenesis | 1943 Renal Position

PubMed Searches: Renal Development | Kidney Development

BMC Dev Biol Search: Renal Development

Recent papers

<pubmed limit=5>Renal+Development</pubmed>


Z5178275 (talk) 16:48, 10 August 2017 (AEST) I'm keen to do anything, but I think the brain is a little to complex for me. It also seems like a lot of other groups want to do that as well.

Cynthia here, I don't want to do the brain lol. I don't mind anything else though

Z5076039 (talk) 17:03, 10 August 2017 (AEST)

Peer Reviews

--- A really well-written and well presented wiki. The information was simplified and therefore was easy to comprehend. The use of images throughout the wiki was highly useful as they provided a visual reference point and enhanced the information presented.

A few things to work on include, take out the links that have been scattered through some of the paragraphs, either reference them with a number (footnote style) or include them in the list at the end. Simplify the section on kidney Blood supply. In the Abnormalities section of the wiki, there is a list of some of the main congenital defects that occur in kidneys, however not all of these dot-points are expanded on. Maybe you could include some more abnormalities that relate to the list or specifically mention that only a selected few are going to be expanded on. The current research section may need some more attention. Overall, the layout is fantastic and well done on a great wiki.


This page is very informative and easy to read. I like the way it begins with the anatomy of the kidney in the developed human, and then progresses through its embryological development. The inclusion of developmental timeline table aids the flow of the page. Images are well integrated into the page with informative descriptions, however are not correctly referenced and do include the suitable Copyright statement or Student Image Template.

The 'stages of nephron development' subheading includes numbered bullet points, but would appear more finished by using the Wiki bullet points. In the "Genes expressed" section it would be beneficial if the terms RET and GDNF were expanded on. The 'Blood Supply' section is clearly unfinished, but will require in text citations and images would help it to read easier. The page references well, but many sections are still unfinished. The page would benefit from a glossary at the end, and the "General info on the renal system" section should be included higher up on the page, or integrated into one of the other sections such as under the "Kidney" heading. This page is very easy to read, but still needs some work. ---

References should be cited correctly, i.e. don’t leave the links in the paragraphs and use proper citation. The images used should include references, copyright statements as well as the Student Image template required. If there are copyright images the team could be innovative and use their own diagrams to display structures. Use references for the ‘Timeline of Kidney Embryology’ to show that a variety of sources were used to complete the table. Current Research and Future Questions subheading is incomplete. Glossary of terms could be used to explain certain words, for example explaining in simple terms what GDNF and RET are.

Subheadings and content that have been used show a good understanding of the topic area. The team has bolded important words in relation to the kidney structure. The team has also placed a description under the images which allows readers to understand what the image is showing. The use of a table of ‘Timeline of Kidney’ allows readers to understand the content of the wikipage easily (maybe add images to the table). The team has shown comprehensive research; however, they need to show more referencing of sources to display the research that they have done.


Overall this seems like a very well put together project and is very informative and easy to follow, and enjoyable to read. There is an appropriate balance of both text and visual diagrams, which greatly helped my understanding of the development of the kidneys. Figure 4 appears to be missing a reference. I do think perhaps an animation to explain nephron development may add additional clarity, and would provide another level of interaction for the reader. Perhaps also think about adding a student drawn diagram. The table is a great way to display the developmental stages in an easy to read manner. The ‘blood supply’ section appears to be copy and paste which I assume will be rewritten? The section on current research is simply a list of PubMed links, and should be expanded to display content that is informative to the reader. Likewise, ‘questions for the future’ and ‘general info on the renal system’ remain as headings without any accompanying information. I think the questions for the future could be an interesting section, however general info I would think will have been covered elsewhere in the project. The topic has clearly been researched well, and is well referenced, with most references being from scientific papers. All in all I think this is a high quality project, that will only require a few additional tweaks to take it to the next level. ---

There is a lot of good information on this page and it is easy to read and understand. The table that introduces the developmental timetable of kidney development is a quick, clear way to introduce the topic. Bolding the anatomical structures is a good way to emphasize the key information of the kidney anatomy.

The information on the page is represented relatively clearly, but a couple of fixes could add clarity. In the description of the Mesonephric stage, the embryological feature, the nephrogenic chord is first introduced as the nephrogenic chord, then referred to as the nephrogenic duct in the next paragraph. Using the same words to describe the same feature makes it less confusing for the reader. Adding a picture to the “Blood Supply” section would also help visualize the kidney vasculature. There is some information about signalling factors in “Nephron Development” that seems oddly placed and may function better in the “Genes Expressed” section. In “Genes Expressed” there is an introduction of two genes, RET and GDNF. RET is clearly the focus of the section but more information about GDNF would benefit this section. Also, making clear what type of molecules RET and GDNF are (receptors, ligands, transcription factors, etc.) and explaining the mechanism of their interaction would make this section clearer.

There are a couple of subheadings at the end of the project that need information in them, pictures that need copyright information and summary when you click on them, in-text citations that need to be added, and basic spelling and grammatical mistakes, all of which can be fixed with some simple editing. The information is solid, the abnormalities section is very good, and the discussion of current research “Can kidney disease be associated with nephron number?” is a good way to end the project. Overall good project.


The page flows very well and is easy to read. However, there is incorrect citing or no citing at all for images and texts which can trigger copyright issues, in some sections (mostly the beginning) of the page. The structure and anatomical position is extremely easy to read and comprehend, as well as the use of a table for development. Id advise to insert more images for development and the remaining sections to help the reader visualise the process instead of being overwhelmed by the information. Developmental abnormalities seem to contain information not necessarily needed. Maybe add the 5 paragraphs above "Kidney developmental abnormalities are diverse and they correspond to defects at different stages of kidney development" statement in a separate research topic. Good use of images for abnormalities though. Overall, the page is quite informative and has been researched effectively. It could be improved by slight tweaks in format aforementioned and correct referencing.


Structure and use of headings is clear and very easy to follow with a good flow. There is good implementation of labelled diagrams all throughout in sections where they are needed which is not only visually appealing, but also well balanced in regards to the amount of text included. References are not included with most of the images; also, whereas some areas are well referenced with in-text citations, other sections lack any form of references. The information is easy to read and understand due to its conciseness and use of numbering as well as shortened paragraphs. However, the initial introduction lacks a cohesive essence as the second sentence on the placenta seems out of place and unrelated to the first sentence. Also in the introduction, the references need to be entered in appropriately as the links aren’t in the form of in text references. Good use of questions as subheadings under “Current Research” as it provides an overview of the topic and peaks the curiosity of the reader – also adding to the enjoyment and ease of reading the research. Overall, well-structured page which is easy to read and is well-organised.


I found the introduction to the kidney didn't flow very nicely and each sentence and paragraph were just points added in. Also, the grammar and punctuation in the introduction paragraph needs to be edited. The final thing that needs to be altered in the introduction paragraph is the links that have just been placed in. I'm not sure if they are the references but if so they need to be referenced correctly. The anatomical position and kidney structure are written really well! The only improvement I could make is with figure one and two reference them within the writing e.g. "Their inner structure can be divided into 2 main areas: the outer cortex, and the inner medulla, as illustrated in Figure 2", otherwise this section is really great. The timeline of the kidney embryology is good - basic outline which makes it easy to follow such a complex process. To make the page flow in a more succinct manner I think it would be good to put the kidney timeline under the kidney development heading instead of separating the two as the kidney development information expands on the timeline really well. The kidney development information is really good, and I think the images really complete it. However, the link at the end of nephrogenesis needs to be referenced correctly with intext. Also under blood supply, it says "THIS IS COPY AND PASTE" so I'm not sure if that's copied off another page or your own notes but that needs to be fixed. The abnormality section was really good and current research is a really interesting thing to include, that section just needs some more information which I'm sure you guys are already on top of! Overall its a really great page, good effort.


I believe the headings chosen cover a sufficient amount of points you need in order to describe kidney development! Referencing needs to be changed, its easy to use the code on the wiki cheat sheet and that automatically makes a reference for you! When describing position, explain what retroperitoneal means, its not commonly known and also Thoracic 12 (T12) so people know what T12 refers too. For images, you need to find the copyright information and reference them properly, Mark has step by step instructions on what needs to be included in the image description. There aren’t many references in the first section of the page, it would benefit if you included some. Under nephrogenesis, point 3, you can find the articles pubmed ID and add the reference in that way instead of manually doing it. For developmental abnormalities, I feel like this could be explained better, it gets technical straight away and this can become quite confusing. Current research and questions need to be worked on but I’m sure that’s whats intended. Overall I think the content on this page is very relevant to kidney development and it was interesting to read. The two major things you should fix are image copyright and references and intext referencing.


The introduction was a clear overview of the kidney, its main parts and its role. The connection to embryological development is great because it ties in with the rest of the page. The only note here is that the references need to be properly referenced, not just pasted with the link. The anatomical position and kidney structure parts were good because there wasn’t too much text and it only served to complement the diagrams. This is a good section to put before kidney embryology as we can understand what is developing as the embryo grows. The timeline of kidney embryology was very brief. This is not bad considering you go into kidney development in more detail in the next section. However, I think another column for images would be worthwhile for the reader to visualise each stage or week of development. Again, there are a few referencing errors that I’m sure you’ll rectify soon. There is a good use of references in nephron development. You’ve also clearly noted the copy and paste of the blood supply section. For this part, I would strongly recommend some diagrams because vasculature can be quite complicated to understand with just text. The subheading, “Developmental abnormalities”, had a good chunk of research at the beginning that gave an overview of types of abnormalities before exploring three in detail. There was also a good amount of referencing. Clearly, the current research subheading is underdeveloped but there seems to be many articles that you will explore. The reference list will be more reflective of your research once you fix some of those referencing errors.


Good project page that goes through almost everything required for the page – the Current Research and Future questions section is lacking context though. The project is well written and easy to understand. Some sections have a better layout than others, so maybe you can work on making the same layout for the whole page. Some sections also have the wrong formatting of references, but other sections have perfect formatting. You must be careful with copy-pasting (Blood supply section) text into your project page without giving a reference from where you copy pasted the text from. Some of the pictures on the page also need more information on the image page itself like copyright information. It is good that you have added figure number to your pictures and a little description of it – this helps the reader to understand the context.

  • The introduction to the Kidney is a really good, informative section. You need to change the format of your references in this section though. The layout might be a little bit confusing since there is a title “Kidney Structure” is in the middle of the page due to the pictures on each site.
  • Nephron development and The developmental Abnormalities: These sections have a different layout compared to the earlier sections. It’s a lot of text, so try to make it look a bit more comfortable for the reader to go through. Maybe you can try to make the layout similar to some of the other sections and give the page a better flow.

--- This page presents nicely and very easy to read. In the introduction section, instead of pasting those references, put them in pubmed reference properly so they can be put automatically into the references. They have introduced good and enough information on the anatomy of the kidney. It was not fully referenced in the kidney development section but it was well written in this section with informative pictures and figures. It could be easier to direct the text to its picture accordingly. The timeline would be more beneficial if pictures were included. Nice and shot subheadings. In the abnormalities section, brief paragraphs with well-referenced starting off nicely. Pictures and texts are presented fairly good and are easy to see without a mess, but some of the terms were hard to understand e.g."when the left and right kidneys fuse at their lower poles by a parenchymal isthmus located ventral to the abdominal aorta, forming a "U" shape", maybe have a glossary section at the end of the page. A lot of references in this section is a bonus indicating it was researched well. In the current research section, majority is a list of article links which I assume they are not yet touched on at this state, which is ok. But make sure to have 2-3 journal articles in this section. A few of future question along the way if you have any would be great. Overall, it is a nice written page, looking forward to see this as a whole!


This wikipage is easy to read and the details provided was informative. The amount of text in each section was just nice and wasnt too overwhelming or insufficient, which was good. Overall, I noticed that the references could be improved. Instead of adding the link at the bottom, the team should use the code to reference such as in the section "Nephron development". Although the use of photos were really helpful and the choice of photos were great in the context they were added in, they were generally inconsistent in either description, reference or copyright information, which should be added to all photos. The anatomical position and kidney structure had clear and concise information and was easily understandable. The timeline of kidney embryology was really nice and I like how it was all 1-2 sentences long, making it really readable. In the section of developmental abnormalities, there is a large amount of text in the beginning that doesnt belong to any abnormality. Perhaps a subheading "Congenital Abnormalities of the Kidney and Urinary Tract" could be added to make it clearer as to what the text is about. Good use of image in each abnormalities though. The article appears to be unfinished but I'm assuming the team will be completing it after this peer review. To sum up, I like the readability of this wikipage and the images chosen, however, referencing and image descriptions could be further looked at for an even better page!


Overall, this project page is easy to read. Most of the information provided is very concise and specific. For the anatomical position and kidney structure, do remember to add in the references in the text. Before using the short form, do include the full name. For example Thoracic 12 (T12) instead of T12. I really appreciate the timeline of development table as it provides a brief overview before moving onto the details. The section of kidney development is well done with good subheadings to help with the flow of the content. However, more images or videos can be included for better understanding. Again, for the “nephrogenesis” and “ascension” and “genes expressed” section, its lacking references. For the developmental abnormalities, maybe a subheading could be used to categorise the first few paragraphs of information as it was hard to understand the flow of the content. Since it was mentioned that “there are defects in different stages of kidney development”, the team could use this as a basis in arranging the information. Perhaps, the team could assign one abnormality for each stage of the kidney development. I think that would help the section have a better flow. The team have also stated that the information for blood supply and current research is still ongoing. For the images, some images are lacking referencing, the copyright statement and also a brief description explaining the image. This team has kept their page simple and easy to understand. With a few more added information and slight tweaks, It would be a really good page.


This page is really impressive for its organisation and balanced ratio of texts to images. There is a nice structure and flow in each different sections, this caught my attention and I read through most of the sections without any problems. All of the images were also labelled appropriately, the key words were formatted in bold and certain definitions were stated. These all helped in keeping the page really interesting and organised. A list of abnormalities and its causes were also stated in a very neat and informative matter with bullet points and images. It was nice to see that the research question was relevant and thought provoking.

Some paragraphs were not referenced especially the first paragraphs in each section. In-text citations should be changed into superscripts in some sections. This page contained really visually appealing images however, some images were not referenced and/or it didn't state the copyright message that states it can be reused with no issues. Some of the headings (e.g. 'Stages in nephron formation' and 'Common congenital kidney defects') were in an italics format, this could be changed into another sub-sub heading or maybe increase its font size. Blood supply section should be reviewed, summarised and referenced appropriately.

Information about the kidney development were mostly sourced from reputable journals articles that was published quite recently. However, the reference list section should be reviewed to keep the referencing format consistent. At the moment, it has APA format and some have different format I am not familiar with.


The layout of this webpage is extremely clear and engaging. The use of diagrams and tables makes the page more appealing to read. I like how the diagrams are split between the left and right sides of the page, the symmetry makes the project aesthetically pleasing. I also think the use of headings and subheadings makes the page well structured and easy to follow. All the material seems to be relevant and informative. The information and diagrams seem to be well referenced. I think that some paragraphs such as bloody supply and developmental abnormalities need to be broken up as the one large paragraph of text is not appealing to read, however this is understandable as the project is not completed yet. Incorporating diagrams, YouTube videos or perhaps collapsible windows in these sections could be beneficial. Another suggestion for this page would be to make the overall title of ‘Kidney’ larger and clearer, perhaps include a diagram of the kidney with the title to make it more attractive.


Organization of the page is done really well, especially for Nephrogenesis and the different stages involved. There is a lot of good detail in each section, specifically the abnormalities section (it may help to break down the introduction of the abnormalities with an image however). The subheadings included show a good knowledge of the topic and guide the reader through kidney development. Good support of ideas using helpful images and timeline table of kidney development. I think the page would be more complete if the current research, questions for the future, and general info on the renal system were complete. Also, it may make more sense to put general information at the beginning to orient the reader (depending on what the “general info” entails). Some animal models and examples of signals involved in the “Genes Expressed” section would also help complete the page. For the images, there should be copyright information added, a description of the image, and the proper reference.


The introduction is clear and well-thought-out; simple enough that the layman can understand but comprehensive enough to lead logically into the more extensive information on the page. Perhaps a discussion of the kidney's function ought to be included with the description of kidney structure. Kidney development; the choice of that particular style of formatting runs a risk of not tying the development with the timeline but the small table at the top serves well to stop that, even if it is a little of a hassle moving back and forth to keep up. The content was well-written and appropriate in voice and depth of knowledge. Visually well-presented with figures appropriately explained. Developmental abnormalities were covered well, and although bullet points may not be the best way to present the information, it allowed for the key points to be understood very quickly and effectively. The transition from topic to topic was logical and flowed appropriately. Some aspects of the page must of course be filled out but overall a well-rounded, well-structured and informative page.

This peer review is based on the relevant dot points of the ‘Group Assessment Criteria’, as well as subheadings suggested by Mark. This information can be found on the student page.

Criteria Strengths Weaknesses
1. The choice of content shows a good understanding of the topic area The embryology timeline is well written and very informative. It gives the reader a general understanding of the process of kidney development before each stage of development is covered in detail.

The topic of ‘kidney development’ is described clearly and in detail. The well-structured subheadings make this section of the wiki page easier to follow. The chosen figures also enhance the information presented, and facilitate the readers understanding.

The brief introduction to the anatomy of the kidney provides a nice introduction to the topic, and helps the reader understand the basics.

The wiki page is missing several important areas of information:
  • There is no section covering key historical discoveries relevant development of the kidneys.
  • There is no section on animal models that have been used to advance scientific understanding of kidney development
  • The page lacks a glossary of terms

Even though some information regarding signalling processes has been integrated into the 'kidney development’ section, the wiki page may benefit from a section entirely dedicated to signalling processes (this is one of Mark’s recommended sub-headings)

There is currently very little information regarding current research on the wiki page – this section needs some work.

Although the heading “future questions” has been added to the wiki page, there is no information associated with it.

2. Content is correctly cited and referenced There have been attempts at referencing throughout the assignment. A reference list has been produced and appears mostly correct. References have not been repeated throughout the list.

The reference list is comprised mainly of peer-reviewed primary research articles.

Some images have been referenced correctly – see ‘figure 3’.

Overall, referencing throughout the wiki page is poor. Some sections completely lack referencing (see ‘kidney structure’, ‘genes expressed’). Other sections have only 1 link attached to them (see ‘nephrogenesis’). Any information that is not original (in idea or structure) needs proper sentence-by-sentence citations. The most well-referenced section is the introduction to ‘developmental abnormalities’, and that still contains some uncited material.

Try not to rely on only one source of information per section (see ‘nephrogenesis’). Try to find a variety of research articles to source your material from. This will increase the quality and reliability of the information in the wiki page.

Many of the images have been cited incorrectly and used without permission (see ‘figure 1’ and ‘figure 2’) Remember to include the full reference, the original summary and the copyright license information for each image.

3. The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level The information presented is mostly at a level appropriate for peers. Some background information has been provided to aid in the reader’s understanding.

The chosen visual aids make some of the more complex ideas easier to comprehend (see ‘figure 3’). Some of the images also contain helpful descriptions that aid in understanding of the material (see ‘figure 3’ and ‘figure 8’)

Many of the acronyms and terms used in this assignment are either poorly explained, or not explained at all. By including a glossary, the reader will be able to understand some of the more difficult subject areas.

No student-drawn diagrams have been included in the wiki page. Try to include some hand-drawn images, as well as other devices (e.g. tables, analogies) to aid the reader.

4. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology The ‘Kidney development’ section was well-structured and was covered in great detail.

Developmental signaling processes were addressed, which is another important learning aim of embryology.

Current research regarding kidney development has been mentioned.

There has been no discussion of key discoveries regarding kidney development.

Although a thorough understanding of certain topics areas has been demonstrated, certain areas (such as current research) still need improvement.

5. The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic Certain aspects have been well researched such as anatomy of the kidney, kidney development and developmental abnormalities. No links to other pages on the UNSW embryology wiki have been included. Try linking this wiki page to other aspects of the embryology wiki.

The small number of sources cited in the reference list demonstrates a poor and narrow approach to researching this topic. A greater library of sources should be used to develop this page (mainly primary research articles).



• The wiki page appears to explore a variety of topics regarding the development of the kidney, ranging from topics such as nephrogenesis, ascension of the kidneys, the importance of gene expression in kidney development and also abnormalities associated with development. Furthermore, all topics are relevant to kidney development (criteria 1). In addition a variety of images and tables have been utilized alongside the written-text (criteria 2). This helps present information to students who prefer to learn visually.

• Within the wiki page, a broad variety of references have been included, all of which appear to be recent. All sources included appear to be correctly cited and referenced in-text, thus the authors of the page have clearly satisfied criteria 3.

• It was also great how the authors have not only discussed abnormalities associated with development, but have also investigated current research being conducted into this particular area of embryonic development. Thus, the authors are on track to fulfilling criteria 5 of the assessment. A possible area to investigate may be to examine whether certain abnormalities may be treated through the application of stem cell therapy for example.

Areas of improvement:

• The authors may wish to include videos which may help reinforce information presented within the wiki page. Videos may revolve around the stages of development of the kidney and may appeal to peers who prefer a learning style focused on visual explanation of concepts (criteria 4).

• The authors may also explore research previously conducted into this field which has allowed our understanding of renal development to grow. Thus authors may include a timeline showing discoveries over the years which have contributed to our understanding.

• The topic labelled “blood supply” should also include images to perhaps show the vascular map of arteries and veins which branch out towards the kidney.

• Authors may also wish to create a subheading titled “signaling” in order to describe the signaling processes involved in renal development. Another key improvement would be for the authors to provide a more detailed description of the genes involved in renal development, very few genes have been listed under this subheading.


General Comment: Most of the sections on the page have been done well, but some areas still need improvement.

This page had a good general introduction to the kidneys and their function; the referencing needs to be fixed though. The pictures are helpful but do not have any copyright information or journal referencing which needs to be fixed ASAP. 'Timeline of Kidney Embryology' was very brief. 'Kidney Development' covered it in much more detail. Pictures used were well captioned and useful. Figure 4 in this section needs copyright information and proper citation. Figure 5 needs copyright information. 'Blood Supply' subheading has a 'THIS IS COPY AND PASTE' statement as the paragraph has been copied from a journal article but no reference has been made to said journal article.. I think this needs to be removed ASAP. 'Developmental abnormalities' is well written, referenced and has some bolded words which make it easier to interpret. Subheadings are clear and the pictures are informative. 'Current Research' has not yet been completed but several research articles are shown which is promising. 'Questions for the future' and 'General info on renal system' subheadings also need to be added to. Overall, good start but would benefit from more content. Also each group page needs to have at least one hand-drawn diagram so this should be added.

- Introduction covered anatomical position and structure which was done well and good use of pictures for kidney structure especially. Incorrect use of referencing in this section (don’t copy and paste the URL in the text and place it in the references)

- Short brief timeline that helped gave quick summary of the development of kidney was done well. Putting pictures or videos of this process would help a lot

- Out of all subheadings, development was done the best and had a lot of info and some limited proper use of referencing

- Including ascensions and genes expressed was good in development and I thought they covered development in a lot of detail. However, one of the subheadings on blood supply was incomplete and was taken straight off from an article. It did mention that this was copied and pasted, but some effort to reword it would be nice to see

- A very detailed explanation of the overview of developmental abnormalities but not many examples of the abnormalities were explained. Including at least 5 more abnormalities would be good to see

- Overall, what was written was good information but more work and detail is needed and probably more subheadings as well. Referencing was poor throughout the page and should be updated as soon as possible

- The references used were from big and trustworthy journals which is good. Glossary included would have been useful

  • Introduction
    • Solid with nice exploration on anatomy and function
  • Genes expressed
    • Should include some citations to support statements made e.g. in "current literature highlights..."
  • Blood supply
    • Be wary of plagiarism
  • Developmental abnormalities
    • Extensive but suitably brief
    • Some efforts made to explore complications of the abnormalities discussed but could be expanded on further
  • Current research
    • If papers are going to be listed for viewer's further reading, brief summaries of their abstracts of content should be included
  • Overall, solid effort and well-structured page. However:
    • Minor grammatical errors present throughout page
    • Intext citations should be checked thoroughly before final submission
    • Remember to clear zIDs before final submission


Kidney: I would restructure this section to give a clearer introduction and description of the anatomy (and clearer heading) - this could occur just by switching around the order of some of the content. Images are well captioned. Timeline of Kidney Embryology/Kidney development: This section is great. I like the very concise timeline as an introduction to this section. The stages are well written and contain good detail (just watch out with that last section of blood supply which I am sure you will fix) Developmental abnormalities: I would give the first few paragraphs a bit more context through a heading - or going into greater detail with an example. Lots of good detail and good visual examples Current Research/Questions for the future/General info on the renal system: obviously this section will be completed more over the coming weeks

Overall: I would try and style the other sections of the page in a similar light to Kidney Development section which has a great format. I like the use of imaged throughout which add good value to the text. A bit more detail to be added to some sections but definitely on the right track

Group 2- Kidney
Regarding content:
The content is written in simple language, making it easy to understand. The development stages were put in the form of a timetable which enabled its clear and easy understanding. Furthermore, in order for the reader to smoothly follow, there were clear headings and subheadings given. Having too many or too less can both hinder the flow and this project had a good balance between the two. Furthermore, the choice of subheadings are all relevant. Development abnormalities has been addressed well.
It is noticeable however that two headings have been inserted “Questions for the future” and “General info on the renal system” though there is no information written under that. They are both relevant to the topic, yet information has not been added. Furthermore, the information below “Current Research” does not just do justice to that research area. Only one point has been mentioned. Another weakness was that the terms were not always explained, with the assumption that the reader knows their meanings.

Referencing and Research:
The references that have been provided at the end of the project have been referenced correctly. The research effort is fair evident by the number of sources used. The articles used are also primarily from journals, thus being mostly authentic and reliable. Under the subheadings also, in various places, the citing has been done. However, there are some images in the project which have not been cited properly; these include figures 1, 2, 4 and 5. Kidney structure is also missing the correct referencing. The research effort could have been more rigorous to further enrich the information.

Other Comments:
Images and diagrams have been used which help the reader get a better understanding. It needs to be noted however that there are no hand-drawn diagrams.