Talk:2017 Group Project 3: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
===Peer Review=== | ===Peer Review=== | ||
Some general comments to the project: | |||
- The project contained both developmental origin, timeline, signalling processes, current research and findings, animals model and abnormal development sections. The project therefore has all the sections which were a requirement for the project. | |||
- Overall, I think the project was good. It was well written, easy to understand as a student, the sections correlated well and the context was good. I especially liked the signalling section, even though some context is missing. I think the idea of of addition a treatment part to project is a good but I could not find it in the project. As mentioned some context is missing in the notch pathway, sonic hedgehog and retinoic acid sections. | |||
- The project has a good introduction. You have a clear idea of what you are about the read, which is nice. | |||
- The layout could be a lot better, I think the picture location could be adjusted. In the developmental origin part, the pictures make the section look very confusing. Some of the subheadings, like the abnormal development is pushed to side by the pictures, so when you scroll down the project you miss it. | |||
- In general, the pictures miss their caption, sources and number. Therefore, you do not know which picture there is referred to when you are reading the project. I miss some more pictures in the developmental sections. | |||
- In the developmental origin section I think the last sentence is very long. You get so much information in one sentence that you sometimes forget what you just read. | |||
- The timeline is easy to read and understand. Could contain some key discoveries. | |||
- Thought the glossary of terms is a nice addition to the project. | |||
- Overall the referencing is good, but in some sections like primary heart field and heart tube formation, the referencing is missing. In some parts the articles/or links is at the bottom of the section, which makes it a little confusing. | |||
- I don’t feel like the primary heart field and heart tube formation correlates very well with the secondary heart field and cardiac looping section. When I start reading the latter I feel like om starting on something completely new instead of continuing reading on the heart developing. I get the feeling I am reading two different persons work, and some work should be put into these sections to make it feel more fluent. |
Revision as of 11:48, 9 October 2017
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. |
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.
|
|
|
|
About the Discussion Page
This should be considered as the "other side" of the project page. It is an area where you can:
- Assemble resources.
- Add useful links.
- Discuss your project with team members. (Please do not use student names on any page on this Wiki)
- Paste your Peer Assessments. (Added anonymously, do not identify yourself)
Suggested Starting Places
Mark Hill (talk) 10:15, 14 August 2017 (AEST) OK Group 3 below are some starting places.
PubMed Searches: Heart Development | Cardiac Development
BMC Dev Biol Search: Heart Development
Recent papers
<pubmed limit=5>Heart+Development</pubmed>
Group Topic Intro
Peer Review
Some general comments to the project: - The project contained both developmental origin, timeline, signalling processes, current research and findings, animals model and abnormal development sections. The project therefore has all the sections which were a requirement for the project. - Overall, I think the project was good. It was well written, easy to understand as a student, the sections correlated well and the context was good. I especially liked the signalling section, even though some context is missing. I think the idea of of addition a treatment part to project is a good but I could not find it in the project. As mentioned some context is missing in the notch pathway, sonic hedgehog and retinoic acid sections. - The project has a good introduction. You have a clear idea of what you are about the read, which is nice. - The layout could be a lot better, I think the picture location could be adjusted. In the developmental origin part, the pictures make the section look very confusing. Some of the subheadings, like the abnormal development is pushed to side by the pictures, so when you scroll down the project you miss it. - In general, the pictures miss their caption, sources and number. Therefore, you do not know which picture there is referred to when you are reading the project. I miss some more pictures in the developmental sections. - In the developmental origin section I think the last sentence is very long. You get so much information in one sentence that you sometimes forget what you just read. - The timeline is easy to read and understand. Could contain some key discoveries. - Thought the glossary of terms is a nice addition to the project. - Overall the referencing is good, but in some sections like primary heart field and heart tube formation, the referencing is missing. In some parts the articles/or links is at the bottom of the section, which makes it a little confusing. - I don’t feel like the primary heart field and heart tube formation correlates very well with the secondary heart field and cardiac looping section. When I start reading the latter I feel like om starting on something completely new instead of continuing reading on the heart developing. I get the feeling I am reading two different persons work, and some work should be put into these sections to make it feel more fluent.