Provide documentation for volunteers defining steps review standards

[Ara225]

There's some degree of inconsistency and misunderstanding in the step review process. What can we do to minimise this? For me, some docs for volunteers should be useful

Description: To address inconsistencies and misunderstandings in the step review process, we will create clear and concise documentation for volunteers that outlines the standards and expectations for reviewing each step. This documentation will ensure uniformity in feedback, clarify the criteria for passing or failing a step, and reduce confusion among volunteers, leading to a more efficient and supportive participant experience.

The documentation will include step-specific guidelines, common issues to watch for, and examples of both acceptable and unacceptable submissions. It will also provide instructions on how to give constructive feedback and when to request resubmissions.

• the use of the term 'Document' is very loose- I basically just mean 1 place with all the info.

Acceptance Criteria:

• [ ] Develop a 'document' that clearly defines review standards for each step, including specific criteria for success.
• [ ] Include examples of acceptable and unacceptable submissions for each step.
• [ ] Outline a consistent process for providing feedback, including when to approve a step and when to request changes.
• [ ] Provide guidance on how to handle common issues and questions participants might raise.
• [ ] Share the document with all volunteers and ensure it is easily accessible for future reference.
• [ ] Collect feedback from volunteers after initial implementation to improve and refine the documentation.

Dependencies:

Collaboration with volunteers who have experience reviewing steps to gather insights. Feedback from participants on their review experience to identify areas of confusion.

[SallyMcGrath]

related to #931

[AmyCYF]

Added some more details to this ticket.

[Ara225]

Thank you 😊 I wonder if this could be a dashboard feature in the longer term, but a document sounds like a good start

[kfklein15]

Wait for the next retro of the second round of ITD to review this ticket.