5.3: Review Guide Template
Rebus Community Review Guide
Welcome to the guide for Rebus open textbook reviewers. This guide is meant to help you give great, useful feedback on the open textbooks we are helping to develop. You are welcome to print this Google doc, make a copy for yourself, or share with others.
Please read through sections below, and use this as a reference as you complete your review. If you have any questions, email the project lead.
Before We Begin
As we strive to work openly, all contributions made to this textbook will be licensed under a CC BY 4.0 International License. Your name will be mentioned in the published version of the book as reviewer.
No OER can serve all learners, so it is important to be aware of the context the book is meant to live in. Take a moment to read through the project summary to familiarise yourself with the book’s purpose and audience before beginning your review.
About This OER
Include a quick summary and description of your project and book here. You should also link to project info page, so interested readers can learn more.
Audience
Insert a few sentences about the OER’s intended audience here. For example: “This OER is meant for use in first-year introductory courses. The audience will primarily consist of undergraduates pursuing the major, however can also include some mixed-major undergraduates.” You can include as much detail as you think is necessary, such as technical requirements, reading levels, etc.
Core Components
If there were one single question your review should seek to answer, it should probably be:
“To what extent is the book successful in meeting the needs of its primary market?”
When reviewing drafts, also consider the following. (Note: the second item of each criterion asks the review to rate it on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = very poor and 5 = excellent)):
- Comprehensiveness: The text covers all areas and ideas of the subject appropriately and provides an effective index and/or glossary. How do you rate the book’s overall comprehensiveness?
- Content Accuracy: Content is accurate, error-free and unbiased. Overall, how do you rate the accuracy of the content?
- Relevance Longevity: Content is up-to-date, but not in a way that will quickly make the text obsolete within a short period of time. The text is written and/or arranged in such a way that necessary updates will be relatively easy and straightforward to implement. Overall, how do you rate the relevance/longevity of the resource?
- Clarity: The text is written in lucid, accessible prose, and provides adequate context for any jargon/technical terminology used. Overall, how do you rate the clarity of the book?
- Consistency: The text is internally consistent in terms of terminology and framework. How do you rate the overall consistency of the resource?
- Modularity: The text is easily and readily divisible into smaller reading sections that can be assigned at different points within the course (i.e., enormous blocks of text witho