Math Content Review
Summary Report - September 2006
Overview
The first round of content review was held from July 2006 – September 2006. The focus was on content for Math 10 – 12. The Content Review Team for Math 10 – 12 comprised 7 teachers from the BC public school system selected through an Expression of Interest process held earlier in the summer. Seven courses were submitted for review along with 23 learning objects and/or online resources.
To kick-start the process a face-to-face one-day workshop was held with the review team. Each reviewer was assigned two or three courses or collection of resources to review. Using a blind review process, courses were examined by a minimum of two reviewers who carried out their work independently. In instances in which agreement could not be reached a third reviewer was assigned to the course.
All deadlines were met and the final decisions on the Math submitted content were provided by September 8, 2006. One full course and 13 learning objects were accepted. Email letters were sent to all those who submitted content and a summary of the reviewer’s feedback was included. All accepted learning object content has been uploaded into the ERC and licensing discussions are underway for the one accepted Math course.
July 25 2006 Workshop Summary:
In late July, the review team was assembled in Vancouver for an intensive one-day preparation workshop developed and delivered by the Virtual School Society’s Director of Professional Learning, Elizabeth Childs, and its Content Review Facilitator, Lisa Read. Attendees were trained in the use of the Virtual School Society Content Review Rubric and the review process.
The purpose of the face-to-face workshop held July 25 2006 was to orient the review team to the Content Review process and to ensure that they held common understandings of the components of the content review rubric and its application. The session agenda is attached (Appendix A).
Online Support Summary:
From July 26 – September 4, 2006 the review team was supported by Lisa Read, the Virtual School Society Content Review Facilitator using the following methods: email, telephone, a content review site in Moodle for discussion and information and two scheduled Elluminate sessions. While the Moodle site experienced some technical issues at times, the Elluminate sessions were well attended and email was the primary form of communication used by the reviewers.
Feedback from Review Team on the Review Process:
Face-to-Face Session: All the reviewers found the face-to-face session to be valuable and effective at helping them to understand their role and the review rubric. A few commented that it was quite a bit of information in one day and perhaps adding a second half day to spend reviewing a sample short course as a group would be helpful.
Review Process: All reviewers found that the pacing of the review process was adequate however several commented that during a school year more time might be required between being assigned the reviews and the deadline for completion. On average, 4 weeks seemed to be an achievable turn around time to review two – three online courses.
Sharing of Information and Support: Very positive feedback from all reviewers on the support offered to them as they worked through the review process. Many commented that any questions they had were answered immediately and two quotations are provided below as evidence of this.
“Posing queries, observations and debating philosophies were valuable intellectual exercises, independent of the influence on the review process. The debriefing opportunity allowed us to share aspects of our experience with the other reviewers as well as give feedback for improvement of the process. This final step (evaluation) completes the experience and lends credence to the entire activity”
“I really appreciate the professional yet human way the information and instructions were conveyed. I felt supported, validated and valued yet comfortable enough to ask any question without being judged or maligned”
Rubric and Online Survey Tool: All reviewers found the rubric to be very useful in assisting in the review process although some commented that the wording may need to be adjusted slightly to help make it clearer in places. All reviewers used the Word document as they worked through the course and then inputted their review into the online survey links provided.
Appropriateness: All reviewers rated the review process as being a meaningful professional opportunity.
“Most definitely one of the best ProD activities I have had”
Compensation: All reviewers found the compensation to be fair in relation to the level and effort of work involved.
Next Steps:
The Call for Content Submissions for Social Studies went out October 24 2006 along with a Call for Expressions of Interest for Reviewers. The content areas being examined include Social Studies 10, 11; History 12; Geography 12; Law 12; Global Education 12 and Comparative Civilizations 12. The submissions are due November 6, 2006 with the face-to-face workshop tentatively scheduled for November 25, 2006 and the review completed by the February 2007.
