Transcript Avoids “reinventing the wheel”

MERLOT: Peer Review of
Teaching Materials
Cathy Owens Swift
Georgia Southern University
03/26/03
AMTP
Common Issues
• Institutions invest in developing instructional
software without provisions for:
- Quality Control
- Dissemination
- Sustainability
• Faculty often work in isolation while
developing online courses
• Lack of quality, interactive, web-based learning
materials
03/26/03
AMTP
Assumptions
• Faculty should remain in control of the
teaching/learning process.
•Faculty need mechanisms to document
teaching and learning contributions.
• Peer-reviews will contribute to expanded use
and effectiveness of digital learning materials.
• Sharing of materials will maximize
everyone’s investments.
03/26/03
AMTP
Vision & Mission
• MERLOT’S VISION is to be the place where
faculty from around the world will share teachinglearning materials and pedagogy.
• MERLOT’S MISSION is to improve the
effectiveness of teaching & learning by expanding
the quantity and quality of peer-reviewed online
learning materials that can be easily incorporated
into faculty designed courses.
03/26/03
AMTP
Aspects of MERLOT
• MERLOT is a COOPERATIVE
• Institutional Partners
• Organizational Affiliates
• Individual Members
• MERLOT is a SET OF PROCESSES
• Building, organizing, reviewing, and developing applications
of online teaching-learning materials
• Building and sustaining online academic communities.
• MERLOT is SOFTWARE
• A user-centered, searchable database of online learning
materials, pedagogical support, and people.
03/26/03
AMTP
Parties Involved in MERLOT
• Administration Team
• Institutional Partner (22)
• Faculty Discipline Teams (14)
– Editors/Co-Editors (25)
– Editorial Review Board Members (150)
– Peer Reviewers (?)
• Others – Authors, Submitters, Users
03/26/03
AMTP
Peer Reviews
Faculty Discipline Teams:
• Adopt evaluation standards
– Quality of content
– Potential effectiveness for teaching &
learning
– Ease of use
03/26/03
• Develop peer review process
• Develop roles and responsibilities as
MERLOT reviewers
• Use MERLOT Worksites to sustain
productivity AMTP
MERLOT Partners
• SMETE
• National Science Foundation (NSF) Grant
•$400,000
•Online peer review training module
• NLII of Educause
• AAHE – American Association of
Higher Education
03/26/03
AMTP
Benefits of Submitting
Online Learning Materials to
MERLOT
Theresa B. Flaherty
James Madison University
03/26/03
AMTP
Who contributes materials
to MERLOT?
• MERLOT materials are added by people
who have joined MERLOT (MERLOT
members).
– Anyone may join MERLOT, and there is no cost
or other obligation.
• Materials may be added by:
– the people who created them (author), or
– any member who finds a great resource to
share with others (submitter).
03/26/03
AMTP
How to Contribute Modules
to MERLOT as an Author
Step 1:
Develop your
Module
03/26/03
AMTP
Step 2:
Fill our a short
form to contribute
your material.
Send a note to Cathy
to request peer review.
03/26/03
AMTP
This is the module as it
will appear on MERLOT
03/26/03
AMTP
The Peer Review of this Module
03/26/03
AMTP
Avoids “reinventing the wheel”
03/26/03
AMTP
Documents Teaching Efforts
03/26/03
AMTP
Contributes to Scholarly Research in
Instructional Development
03/26/03
AMTP
Provides
Networking
Opportunities
03/26/03
AMTP
Search for members by
discipline
03/26/03
AMTP
Experience and Reactions
to the Peer Review Process
on MERLOT
Irvine Clarke III
James Madison University
03/26/03
AMTP
MERLOT Peer Review follows
the model of peer review of
scholarship
Individual
Review #1
Composite
Review
Individual
Review #2
03/26/03
AMTP
Reviews can be developed
online through your
workspace
03/26/03
AMTP
The review can be completed
in different time segments
03/26/03
AMTP
Standard Evaluation Criteria
for the Peer Reviews
Potential
Quality
of Content Effectiveness
03/26/03
AMTP
Ease of
Use
To become a peer reviewer,
an individual must:
• be an instructor at an institution of higher
learning
• demonstrate expertise in the discipline
• be recognized for excellence in teaching
• have experience using technology in
teaching, and
• have participated in the activities of the
discipline.
03/26/03
AMTP
After completion
of the review, the
Peer Reviewer is
recognized for
his/her
contribution by a
letter from the
Editor. This letter
can be sent to
two other people
as well.
03/26/03
AMTP
Questions or
Comments?
03/26/03
AMTP