Hi @may23cohort! I was just looking at the calendar and we only have four more sessions in phase one, this has gone by really quickly! The final four sessions will be really helpful for you once you are nearing completion of your projects, but we all think that having all the information about the complete publication process is rewarding while you are creating.
Tomorrow we’ll discuss review and feedback strategies. Here are the Week 9 slides and handout . We’ll cover different kinds of reviews and discuss workflows for these processes.
If you have any particular questions before the session on Review and Feedback, please reply to this thread and we can bring these questions into our discussion tomorrow.
We are particularly interested in getting student feedback. We would like to develop a form/survey to gather student input in a sort of trial period of any new OER. Originally, for this project, we considered implementing pieces of the text and companion workbook into a class to gather feedback before a formal launch. We got delayed a little, but would still like to make projects available to students, in practice, for a review period. Crystals book is written for students specifically, not subject matter experts so-to-speak, as such we value their input highly.
1 & 2: We will need to balance the diversity of our reviewers in terms of both personal identities and scientific expertise, in order to reduce bias and include a broad range of perspectives. Our biggest challenge is that this is not a large field, and so options for each chapter will be limited.
We plan to include student feedback in the review process, from Deep-Sea Bio students at URI and BC, but after more traditional peer review for comprehensiveness and accuracy of the content.
My hope with this text is that it will be useful to pre-service teachers as well as new and seasoned classroom teachers. As such, enlisting non-art (but art-friendly) classroom teachers and teaching artists (artists who work in classroom but are not trained teachers) into the review process would be good. As well, graduate students in art education could provide good insight.
How will your team invite a more diverse range of reviews and value a broad range of perspectives?
The classroom is an obvious place to get feedback from a diverse group of students, but I believe one of the goals of the book content is to include diverse voices from different populations. As part of this collaborative process, perhaps including sharing the publication in advance with these members for review could be a part of that?
About bias, I think using a reviewer rubric and/or checklist would help greatly. I think we could also share some resources, for example, the UCLA’s series on implicit bias, with our reviewers as a refresher to help the intentionality of mitigating bias in the review process.
Ensure content reviewers have identities outside the dominant white, Anglo-European heritage. There are so many art textbooks that only reference the “European masters” and we want to not reproduce that.