Thanks for another great session on Thursday, @may21-cohort. Here’s the chat transcript. We briefly talked about the MOST grant deadline (August 31st) and the criteria for meeting it–which, it seems like, many of you are well-positioned to fulfill. We’re not in charge of establishing those criteria, but if would like any support feel free to respond to this thread with troubleshooting questions. As a tip, we were reminded of the Week 2 session on Project Scoping and the Project Summary Template, both of which should help if you feel stuck completing some of the criteria.
We spent most of the session looking at the different kinds of review and feedback. Peer review, accessibility review, and classroom reviews can all play a role in making sure your resource is doing what it’s supposed to and more likely to be adopted by someone else.
A week or two ago @ttomlin1 shared the feedback she had received from her students, which I found really helpful. @emily.frank at LOUIS pointed to this example Review Statement she likes. @tworley1 and others are making excellent progress on getting their content into Pressbooks. @kongmeinj and @Andy are also beginning to embed H5P into their textbook. Amazing work–thanks for sharing your progress.
Links shared during the session
- Studies on OER Satisfaction
- Hypothesis
- Attribution Statements
- H5P Flashcards
- Pressbook Webinars for support
- Review Statement
- Accessibility Statement
Reflective Checklist for Week 9
- Outline the review workflows so you, authors, editors, and reviewers are aware of next steps
- Create a review guide
- Encourage your existing team of editors to review your book outline
- Share your style sheet and review guidelines with the review team
- Discuss best practices for accessibility, collaboration, and review with the review team
- Host regular calls or check-ins with your review team
- Write review and accessibility statements
- Set up a feedback pathway in your project discussion space or book
