There are two primary ways OER repositories review the quality of the materials in their collections:
These are not mutually exclusive and a repository may use both.
Many repositories created an adapted version of peer review for evaluating submitted OER. It has similar strengths as peer review for academic research, but the differences between OER and academic research can limit its effectiveness.
MERLOT uses a complex peer review system. Each discipline community has an editorial board that sets standards and runs the evaluations for OER in their discipline. Peer reviewers that meet a set of requirements are selected and trained on the reviewing process. OER are assigned two reviewers who each evaluate the OER following their discipline's standards (most use the MERLOT Peer Review Report). Editors create a composite report and post the report with the OER.
The alternative is to allow users of OER to provide provide public reviews after they use them, similar to crowdsourced product or business reviews. The quality of these reviews can vary widely, but if a repository creates a good system for reviews, then they can be a valuable tool for identifying quality.
The Open Textbook Library will accept any OER that meets their basic 4 criteria for inclusion, none of which require a quality review. Instead, quality is done through reviews by faculty who are members of institutions in the Open Education Network who have use the OER. Reviewers follow a 10-criteria rubric for evaluating the OER covering both the quality of the content and the usability of the resource.
This guide was created by Dr. Meredith Heath Boulden on behalf of the University of Memphis Libraries and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License unless otherwise noted. This guide is currently maintained by Carl Hess.