Goal: Review & summarize existing approaches to review, and tools used.
This group will conduct a scan of the existing peer review market in order to inform the development of the Rebus processes.
This may include:
- Summarising current research in the area
- Reviewing existing tools and resources used by other open textbook/OER publishers
- Looking to open review processes in academic journals and monographs for inspiration
If you would like to be a part of this group, please comment below with a bit about yourself, any specific interests on the subject and any initial thoughts on the group’s purpose.
@zoe said in /404:
comment below with a bit about yourself, any specific interests on the subject and any initial thoughts on the group’s purpose.
My name is Nicholas and I am a PhD student at UCI (California) in Informatics. Primarily, I conduct research on gamification and learning theory. However, I do a fair bit of design and development on the web and in game engines.
I am curious about the culture of use surrounding open textbooks and peer review tools and resources. For example, in what ways do the tools/resources help the community grow and improve making OT/PR? Are certain practices hindering the growth or value seen in OT/PR? How can tools/resources be shaped to solidify and enhance the community of practice?
Perhaps after others have chimed in, we can reach a consensus about initial plans and purposes.
I currently hold the position of OER coordinator at PSU. We are beginning to expand our OER initiative and peer review will be incorporated into our open publishing model.
Thanks @nicholaspersa and @Julie-Lang for getting us started
I would like to join this group! I work as an Instructional Technologist at the University of Guelph. Let me know how best to “jump in”!
Thanks @ccoulter! We’re going to give people a bit more time to sign up then we’ll put together a plan of action. Watch this space!
Hi - OER Librarian. Learned about this system of ‘intelligent crowd’ peer review that a Chemistry publication is putting together.
“Their crowd consists of 100 hand-picked reviewers based on recommendations from the editorial board, as well as researchers who volunteered to take part. These reviewers can access a secure, bespoke online platform and view papers being considered for publication. They can annotate and comment on manuscripts, as well as respond to comments left by others.”
I’m interested in joining this group. I’ve managed fairly traditional PR processes in the past, so looking at ways to make the process more open is really exciting to me.
@allisonbrown Thanks Allison! We’ve been a bit slow taking off with this (it’s a busy time for books coming together for the Fall semester!) but I’ll check in again soon to get things rolling.