How might we create and sustain a process and/or network for the blinded peer review of OER, increasing the buy-in and support of colleagues and administrators when it comes to embracing OER as a valid form of scholarship?

[elrodgen]

[//]: # "======================= Even if you know Github well, we suggest you read this. Anything between these lines you can leave or delete, as they won't display anyway when you post (you can check this via Preview changes). They're here to help you complete issues quickly and in a way that will help other participants. If you're posting a new project, or challenge. We suggest you fill out the Google Forms first. ============================"

At a glance

[//]: # "======================= Please paste the metadata you received after submitting your project or challenge in your Google Form exactly as we sent it to you. You can delete what's there now, it's just there ============================"

• Submission Name: How might we create and sustain a process and/or network for the blinded peer review of OER, increasing the buy-in and support of colleagues and administrators when it comes to embracing OER as a valid form of scholarly work?
• Contact Lead: elrodgen@gvsu.edu
• Region:#NorthernAmerica, #Global
• Issue Area: #OpenEducation
• Issue Type: #Challenge

Description

Working on OER is a passion of mine, and I would love for it to count as my scholarship when it comes to tenure review. However, it's on shaky ground in my institution. There's enthusiasm for it across the university, but perhaps not enough to have it pass as scholarship. The biggest hurdle is that it's not peer-reviewed. Peer-validated, sure...but not peer-reviewed.

How can others contribute?

Let's discuss here! We can start with design thinking tools and go from there!

[//]: # "======================= You're ready to post!!! After posting your issue, the real work begins. Next, you might want to: Tweet a link to this issue with #opencon so others can join in Make another issue to involve people in your work - remember to use your metadata Come back from time to time and update the community on your project. You'll get an email update whenever someone interacts with your issue. ============================"

This post is part of the OpenCon Do-A-Thon. Not sure what's going on? Head here.

[alazear]

Great questions! Would be interested in discussing this in person at the do-a-thon. Perhaps we can expand to talk about quality control of OER's in general.

[elrodgen]

Table 8 in the Collaboratory!

[alazear]

in another group now, but hopefully I can join you after or this afternoon if you are still working on it!

[elrodgen]

Have been reviewing fantastic resources provided by Zoe. Heading to lunch now!

[elrodgen]

https://press.rebus.community/the-rebus-guide-to-publishing-open-textbooks/

The most amazing resource! Great guidance and templates regarding recruiting reviewers, choosing a mechanism for peer review, managing the review process, etc.

[alazear]

CanLII example of a call to action for authors to submit content https://www.canlii.org/en/info/authors.html

[elrodgen]

Update:

Have been using the Rebus Guide to Publishing Open Textbooks (link posted above) as a starting point for recruiting peer reviewers for my own personal work; and it is really stellar guidance. As for progress on the bigger question - how do we create/sustain a process/network of peer reviewers - I am planning to soon tap into a particular QSEN (quality and safety education for nurses) group to explore this. The immediate drawback for others is that this would only be a discipline-specific network; however, I'm very happy to share progress and lessons learned so that it may benefit the broader community!