Hi Declan -- in text below ...
On May 5, 6:41 pm, Declan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter,
I took a quick look at some of the maturity model pages you linked
to. The approach looks interesting and I agree that framing some
goals in the context of a rubric could have some advantages. I use a
Wayne, Declan, Everyone...
I like where all this discussion is going. The bit that I want to
throw into all this is the use of Maturity Models. I like how they
encourage continuous improvement, which I believe applies well to Wiki
based OER. The rating a page / lesson / resource is based upon a
Opt in for peer review.
How about an opt-in template for peer review. By adding the template
to your page you agree to two things:
1. You want peer review and your page is ready for it.
3. You will review three other templated pages in a timely manner.
This would miss some wonderful pages
Hi Declan,
That's a valuable contribution -- thanks. I've added a new section on
the QA and review page for suggestions and considerations, and
included your contribution with attribution.
Just want to make sure that we don't loose any of the thoughts and
suggestions from the community. See:
Hi to everyone watching the QA and review thread.
We're looking for volunteers to assist with drafting a WE policy on QA
and review.
If you're interested in helping out --- please add your name to the
list on the QA page on WE.
I agree that your idea has merit, Sanjaya, but believe that people
should use such a system only for finished products (like published
books and city centre hotels). For an unfinished product (as, almost
by definition, all wiki pages are), we need an information box with
more detail - to guide
Hi Erik,
Thanks --- that's valuable feedback.
See also In text below ...
On Sat, 2008-05-03 at 03:29 -0700, ericdeeson wrote:
I agree that your idea has merit, Sanjaya, but believe that people
should use such a system only for finished products (like published
books and city centre
Hi Sanjaya,
The discussions and thoughts on quality of WE materials is extremely
important for the future success and sustainability of our our
project.
At a personal level -- I'm very pleased to see these concerns and
thoughts raised by members of our community -- It shows that we care
about
Perhaps organizational tools such as indices by topic, by educational
level, and by different educational standards could serve the purpose
of rating as well as organization.
If, for example I wanted to construct an index or table of contents
linking US biology educational standards to a set of
Of course it would also mean increased
work load for all concerned. One can't expect peers to review unless
one is also willing to serve as reviewer.
I recently heard/read about an automatic methods for determining the
quality of a wikipedia article. An example using wikipedia content is
Hi Rob,
These are powerful tools and we have the benefit of hindsight to learn
from the experiences of a humble giant smile.
That said -- I think WE is pioneering new ground in the sense that
educational materials are different from an encyclopedia article.
Education is culturally bounded and
Hi Sanjaya ---
I'm keen to hear your thoughts how/why you think a start system will
help WE achieve its aims?
Do you see a star system as a mechanism to motivate WikiEducators? or
Is this a mechanism to express a collective view on the quality of a
resource?
Interestingly -- we host our main
I think the idea has merit. One thing I am concious of in our work is the
number of unfinished pages we have let sit. I wish I could nominate (and
elevate) what we have 'finished' for peer review - enter the star rating? If
the people we have working got a poor rating, I think it would put a bee
13 matches
Mail list logo
