We may solicit your feedback for one of the lessons that we are preparing. This is because we value your expertise and we know that you will contribute to the overall quality of our resources. The review process may take the form of either a direct and open exchange between all interested parties (author, reviewer, Ranke.2 editor) or a blind evaluation (at the request of authors or reviewers). This will be decided by all the parties involved.
We do of course appreciate any overall feedback that you may have, but please note that we are especially interested to hear your views on the following aspects that we consider important for a lesson.
Please think of the lesson in terms of relevance and quality.
- Does the lesson focus on a topic that is relevant to (digital) source criticism? In your opinion, are there any particular merits or significant shortcomings?
- Does the lesson focus on a source type that is particularly relevant for teaching historical method and (digital) source criticism? Does it focus on specific cases that might prove difficult to adapt in the classroom?
- Does the lesson fill a gap in the landscape of available open educational resources for teaching (digital) source criticism?
Please think of the lesson in terms of clarity and efficiency.
- Do the different parts of the lesson correspond to clear learning objectives?
- Are the assignments for the lesson organised in a way that makes sense in relation with the learning objectives?
- Is there a logical sequence between the different parts of the lesson (for example, the different parts of a given assignment)?
Please think of the lesson in terms of the extent to which it achieves the learning objectives.
- Are the learning objectives clear and realistic?
- Are the instructions clear?
- Does the learning outcome correspond to the learning objectives for the lesson?
Please evaluate the relevance, pertinence and accessibility of the pedagogical and bibliographical resources the lesson uses (reading and viewing suggestions, hyperlinks, images).
- Are the resources openly accessible?
- Are the resources relevant for the topic and the type of sources addressed by the lesson?
- Can the resources be realistically used for self-learning or in the classroom in terms of their length and clarity?
Please share your thoughts on whether the approach and objective of the lesson, as well as the resources it uses, mean that it could be taught in more than one language.
- Is the scope of the lesson relevant for different cultural environments? Can it fit into different national contexts of history learning and teaching?
- Are the resources (pedagogical and bibliographical) reusable in different languages? Are they too language-specific to be replaced by alternative resources in other languages (if available)? Do they need to be adapted or replaced?
- Is the lesson fit for translation?
Please evaluate whether the lesson has the potential to remain relevant and useful in the longer term.
- Are the resources (bibliographical, data, tools) openly accessible, preferably with persistent identifiers, or located in open infrastructures? If software tools are involved, are they open source?
- Does the lesson embrace a broad – ideally historical – perspective, or does it focus on short-term considerations or presentism? For example, a lesson on audiovisual sources that relies heavily on examples of one specific proprietary platform that is popular at the time the lesson is written would be problematic; on the contrary, a lesson using a variety of examples and offering a contextualised view of different platforms, the impact of their business models and their geographic location, while also exploring issues related to governance and dissemination of resources, etc., could prove more sustainable in the long term.
Thank you for your contribution!