MPG Activity Review: Advice for Associate Editors (AEs)

Thanks to all our AEs for volunteering to help with the MPG review process. As we approach the review activity, here are a few thoughts to help guide us through the process:

AE Responsibilities

Help keep the process moving ahead. Encourage your review group to keep sending in reviews so we don't get totally jammed before the workshop. And this will be an ongoing process as new activities are contributed.
As the review process progresses, you may need to reassign activities to different reviewers (e.g. conflicts of interest, being assigned your own activity, etc.). The video below will help explain how to reassign activities to reviewers. And, as the review of one set of activities is completed for a sub-discipline, we hope to redeploy some reviewers to help with other areas that may need extra help.
When the two reviews are submitted, you will a) tally the numerical scores, b) compile the written review recommendations, and c) forward these to the Managing Editor with your recommendations
The review ratings are:

Exemplary: a score of at least 3 in all categories, and at least 3 scores of 4 (total of 18); this represents our highest rating, and we expect that 10-20% of the activities will meet this standard of excellence.
Pass: this is a solid activity that can be readily used in classes, but would benefit through revision or addition of some items; we expect that most of the teaching activities will stay included in this general collection of activities.
Keep: this activity is not entirely complete, but there is a nucleus of a good idea here that could inspire someone to apply the concept in class, and perhaps further develop it; these resources will be retagged as activity ideas rather than fully developed activities ready for use.
Deaccession: the activity is either not complete enough to be useful, or has serious flaws in the science or teaching methods and should be considered to be removed from the collections.

If any resource receives a 1 or 2 rating in any category it may be considered for deaccessioning--but this recommendation will be based on the judgment of the AE.
NOTE: MANY OF THE ACTIVITIES WE HAVE IN THE COLLECTIONS DATE BACK TO 2003, LONG BEFORE WE UPGRADED OUR STANDARDS TO HAVE MORE EMPHASIS ON E.G. LEARNING GOALS AND ASSESSMENTS. OUR INTENT HERE IS TO TRY TO BRING ALL OUR TEACHING ACTIVITIES UP TO OUR CURRENT HIGHER STANDARDS.
We are hoping to have the bulk of the review process completed by mid Juneso that we can have the best possible collection of teaching activities to showcase at the workshop. Anything you can do to help us achieve that goal will be greatly appreciated.

Managing the Review Process

Please watch the following video for a tutorial on how to manage the review process using the online Review Tool. Questions can be addressed to Dave Mogk or Sean Fox. This screencast is beautifully done and will show you the full functioning of the Review Tool, and all the management functions you will need. The screencast takes about 20 minutes to watch.