The collections SERC: Science Education Resource Center at Carleton College SERC office and staff helps develop and manage web resources for many projects thru collaboration Many different collections of activities, submitted for different projects On the Cutting Edge: the first of the projects hosted by SERC Most of the activities in the Cutting Edge collections were submitted in connection with workshops.

Cutting Edge Reviewed Collection On the Cutting Edge is conducting a review of activities in the Cutting Edge collections plus activities in other SERC collections (e.g, Starting Point, Margins, Quantitative Skills, etc.) Each activity reviewed only once and ranked: Exemplary (Part of Reviewed Collection) Pass (Part of Reviewed Collection) Keep (Not part of Reviewed Collection) De-accession (only for Cutting Edge items)

Cutting Edge Reviewed Collection

Our process Anything tagged with geophysics vocab in any SERC collection) Each receives 2 reviews Authors receive letters Exemplary: reviewer comments, but no revisions necessary Pass: reviewer comments, including what changes necessary for Exemplary Keep: reviewer comments, including what changes necessary for Reviewed Collection Reconsidered if revisions submitted by deadline; otherwise, ranking remains

Plan for review team meeting Talk about questions, issues Each reviewer reads other review, assigns a tentative ranking, and writes a summary paragraph of advice that Michael can use in the letter to the author Post questions in chat

Some nuts and bolts Review it in the context that it was designed for Not just whether it’s good for a geophysics course – many will be for other courses (e.g., intro geo) Not everything has to be a full lab or major assignment (e.g., a back-of-the-envelope calculation could be Exemplary) Not every activity needs to be usable by all instructors (e.g., a lab requiring specific software/math/expertise background)

More nuts and bolts Exemplary Good science, good pedagogy, all materials are there for someone else to adapt/adopt Can be “local” if it is also a good template Does not need to have answer key or to provide an instructor with background Scoring Exemplary or very good in all categories Exemplary in at least three of the five. 18 or higher. Can still receive advice for enhancement

More nuts and bolts Exemplary minus Could be made Exemplary with only a small amount of work (e.g., fixing a URL, uploading the latest version of the assignment, adding instructor tips, fleshing out the ActivitySheet a bit). These will be ranked as Pass and will be reconsidered for the Exemplary collection if the author makes the necessary fixes.

More nuts and bolts Pass – these become part of the Reviewed Collection Those that aren’t Exemplary but still have value to others Have to be more than just the germ of an idea Have to have all of the components These should have no scientific errors. If you think there are errors, confirm this with someone else on the review team. Those with scientific errors should go into the Keep category.

More nuts and bolts Keep – no designation on ActivitySheet, will come up last in a search Nucleus of a good idea Insufficient info for someone to adapt or adopt or scientific errors Author receives letter with comments on what revisions are necessary for us to reconsider for the Reviewed Collection

More nuts and bolts De-accession Not an activity or very fragmentary Unlikely to be anything like this in the batch to be reviewed Cannot de-accession anything except Cutting Edge collection activities

Summary Four rankings Summary paragraph of advice Exemplary Exemplary minus (technically a Pass) Pass Keep Summary paragraph of advice Remember that these were submitted voluntarily to a community collection Be kind but clear Email spreadsheet to Michael with Review ID #, title, submitter name, and your summary paragraph (do not enter in the online review tool)