cecp review process cecp on-line modules & courses in order to insure that high quality modules are posted to the cooperative extens

CECP Review Process
CECP ON-LINE MODULES & COURSES
In order to insure that high quality modules are posted to the
Cooperative Extension Curriculum Project (CECP) campus, the CECP
steering committee advocates a peer review process that includes both
content and instructional design. To make best use of time, both the
Content and Instructional Design components of the review should be
conducted simultaneously.
The Content review component is designed to insure that the subject
matter content of the module is of a quality suitable for inclusion in
the CECP campus. The Instructional Design review will insure that
elements of the module other than subject matter content (including,
but not limited to, information technology, communication, and
pedagogical aspects) are acceptable.
Process
The respective PC Chair (or designee) is responsible for facilitating
the Module Development and Review process, including determining
modules to be developed, selecting Module Development Teams (MDT) and
Review Committees (RC). Upon request, assistance can be provided by
the CECP Steering Committee in identifying participation of
individuals from other PCs in the MDT, the RC or both.
MDTs should be composed primarily of subject matter specialists, but
include at least one member with instructional design skills. RCs
should include four content reviewers (including a minimum of one
county educator) and two instructional design specialists, preferably
from universities other than those of the MDT members. The review
process should be a “blind” process, i.e., the reviewers do not know
whose material they are reviewing, to promote objectivity.
A typical content development and review process could be similar to
the following:
1.
A module proposal (including outline, proposed development team
members, intended audience, etc) is submitted to the PC chair who
will publicize the proposal to the entire PC and to Chairs of
other PCs to determine if other specialists within the region are
interested in participating in the MDT.
2.
Unless otherwise noted, the proposal submitter will be designated
as the MDT leader. This person will have the responsibility of
guiding the development of the module.
3.
When the MDT leader feels that the module is ready for review,
s/he will provide the module to the PC Chair and request that it
be reviewed. S/he will also provide a list of potential reviewers
of the module.
4.
The PC chair will recruit reviewers and confirm their willingness
to serve, coordinate review of the module and facilitate
communication of review results to the MDT leader so that
reviewers can remain anonymous. It is expected that the process
from the time the review begins to the time review results are
provided to the MDT will be less than 4 weeks. The PC chair will
have the ultimate responsibility for choosing the reviewers. While
the list of potential reviewers submitted by the MDT leader should
be considered, the PC chair should not feel constrained to this
list.
5.
Reviewers will use the Criteria for Review form, although
additional areas may be addressed at the discretion of the RC.
6.
CECP materials with reviewers’ comments are returned through the
PC chair to the MDT leader for incorporation of the suggested
revisions.
7.
After reviewers’ suggestions and/or concerns have been
sufficiently addressed and the module has been revised, it will be
submitted to the PC chair (or designee) and will be designated
CECP-approved in the CECP campus.
AUGUST 2005 VERSION

  • 57020 MECHANICS OF FLUIDS & TRANSFER PROCESSES EXERCISE NOTES
  • MUNSTER GRADE H TOURNAMENT SINGLES DOUBLES AND MIXED DATE
  • CURRICULUM VITAE PERSONAL DETAILS NAME SARBAST AHMAD MAHMUD DATE
  • BUTTERFLY HOUSE DOCENT MANUAL SPRING 2018 SEVENTH EDITION TABLE
  • MCA GROWTH INTERPRETATION PROTOCOL RUBY LEVEL ANALYSIS – DISTRICT
  • 28 DE ABRIL DE 2015 MÉXICO DF PÁGINA 1111
  • ROCAS HORIZONTALES 29 ROCA FORMADA POR FRAGMENTOS DE ARENA
  • 4 ALTERSTEILZEITVERTRAG A VEREINBARUNG ÜBER UNVERBLOCKTE ALTERSTEILZEIT SEHR GEEHRTER
  • HOVEDAVTALEN FOR ARBEIDSTAKERE I STATEN MED TILPASNINGSAVTALE FOR FORSVARET
  • NORMAS PARA EL CURSO ECOLOGÍA SECCIÓN 3 AGOSTO DE
  • OKSİJEN TÜPÜ KULLANIM TALİMATI SAYFA DOKÜMAN NO YAYIN TARIHI
  • 2 HARMONISATION OF EMISSIONS WE HARMONISE YEAR2000 EMISSIONS OF
  • DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL SCIENCES THE DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL SCIENCES
  • UC IRVINE – HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTIONSINSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD DETERMINING
  • STAFF RESOURCES FOR CHERRY POINT AND CAMP LEJEUNE MENTAL
  • COMMENTS ON THE REPORT OF THE STATE OF UZBEKISTAN
  • PROYECTO “VIAJE DE ESTUDIO DE 9° AÑO” DESTINO SIERRA
  • SOLICITUD Y AUTORIZACIÓN PARA LA EDICIÓN DE TESIS DOCTORALES
  • DIPENDENTI RETRIBUZIONI E CONTRIBUTI DIPENDENTI ARTT 62 TUIR
  • NAME KEY HOUR DATE CHEMISTRY ARTICLES ON
  • 4 INFORMATIVNI PROTOKOL ZEOLIT I BOLESTI KOŽE I SLUZNICE
  • CONSEJO SUPERIOR UNIVERSITARIO CENTROAMERICANO (CSUCA) SISTEMA CENTROAMERICANO DE EVALUACIÓN
  • AAC2652005INF1 AD HOC COMMITTEE ON A COMPREHENSIVE AND INTEGRAL
  • 20 NR SPRAWY IDZP2316 3 2020MW PAŃSTWA WYŻSZA SZKOŁA
  • GRADATION LIST OF EXCISE CONSTABLE (AS ON 01072013)
  • COMPUTER SCIENCE & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT SECOND SEMESTER 2007
  • CATÀLEG DE RECURSOS NADAL I ALTRES FESTES POPULARS NOVEMBRE
  • D4 – GUIDELINES 2015 GUIDELINES ON THE LAYOUT
  • ASOCIACION NACIONAL DE FUNCIONARIOS DEL TRABAJO DE CHILE “ANFUNTCH”
  • DOKUMENTTITEL FARMAKOLOGISK BEHANDLING MED ANTABUS FORMÅL AT BORGERE