Review Criteria

From ComPADRE Wiki

SERC-ComPADRE Activity Review Criteria

<< Back to Workshop Page

Updated Review Criteria Bruce 11:48, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

The following criteria are being developed for use by peers reviewing submitted contributions to the ComPADRE pedagogic collections. Activity authors are welcome to revise materials until they are judged to meet these criteria.

• Does the material present important physics concepts or models?
  • Is the content part of the core curriculum in physics?
  • Is the content a prerequisite for more advanced material?
• Is the material accurate?
  • Does the material present valid (correct) concepts, models, and results?
  • Are there any factual, numerical, or conceptual errors?
  • Are the references appropriate and complete enough to be used?
• Is the activity likely to lead to the desired learning?
  • Does the material help develop conceptual understanding of physics?
  • Does the material build desired skills?
  • Are the learning goals and outcomes clearly stated?
  • Does the material address common problems in learning the concepts and/or skills?
  • Is there good alignment between the stated learning goals and the likely learning outcomes of the activity?
  • Will the assessment strategies in the activity allow the instructor to determine if the learning outcomes have been met?
• Does the pedagogy promote learning? This question looks at whether the activity incorporates effective strategies based on learning theory and research. For example:
  • Does the activity motivate and engage students?
  • Does it build on what they know and address their initial beliefs?
  • Is it appropriate for the variety of students expected in the class?
  • Does it use a variety of ways to present physical concepts?
  • Is there an appropriate balance of guidance vs exploration?
  • Does it include opportunities for reflection, discussion, and synthesis?
  • Does the material provide learners with quality (prompt and positive) feedback?
  • Are there opportunities for students to iterate and improve their understanding incrementally? (NRC, 1999; Edelson, 2001)
• Are the materials provided complete and helpful? This question addresses nuts and bolts issues about whether the materials provided are successful in providing the context, motivations and goals of the activity, and that instructions and questions are clear.
  • Could you quickly make a decision about whether you would like to look further at this activity?
  • Is there sufficient information about the prerequisite knowledge required by students?
  • Are the supporting materials sufficient for you to use the activity effectively? Are the materials provided for students to use complete and clear?
  • Are the teaching tips materials appropriate and sufficient?
  • Is there enough detail provided to implement an assessment of the activity and learning?
• Is the activity a good example of the associated teaching method?
  • Is it clear how the material in the teaching module applies to the activity?