Ruiz Jorge G, Candler Chris, Teasdale Thomas A
Division of Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA.
Acad Med. 2007 May;82(5):503-7. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31803ead94.
Peer review is the foundation of academic publication and a necessary step in the scrutiny of any scholarly work. Simply defined, peer review is the attentive, unbiased assessment of any scholarly work that is submitted for formal scrutiny. Although medical school faculty increasingly use technology in clinical teaching, e-learning materials are often not subjected to a rigorous peer review process. The authors contrast peer review of e-learning materials with that of print materials, describe peer review issues regarding e-learning materials, propose approaches to address the challenges of peer review of e-learning materials, and outline directions for refinement of the e-learning peer review process. At its core, the peer review of e-learning materials should not differ substantially from that of traditional manuscripts. However, e-learning introduces new demands that impel reviewers to consider aspects that are unique to educational technology, including pedagogy, format, usability, navigation, interactivity, delivery, ease of updating, distribution, and access. Four approaches are offered to ease the burden and improve the quality of e-learning peer review: develop peer review training, embrace multidisciplinary peer review, develop guidelines, and provide incentives and compensation. The authors conclude with suggestions about peer review research.
同行评审是学术出版的基础,也是对任何学术作品进行审查的必要步骤。简单来说,同行评审是对提交进行正式审查的任何学术作品进行细致、公正的评估。尽管医学院教师在临床教学中越来越多地使用技术,但电子学习材料往往没有经过严格的同行评审过程。作者将电子学习材料的同行评审与印刷材料的同行评审进行了对比,描述了电子学习材料的同行评审问题,提出了解决电子学习材料同行评审挑战的方法,并概述了完善电子学习同行评审过程的方向。从本质上讲,电子学习材料的同行评审与传统手稿的同行评审不应有太大差异。然而,电子学习带来了新的要求,促使评审人员考虑教育技术特有的方面,包括教学法、格式、可用性、导航、交互性、交付、更新便利性、分发和获取。提供了四种方法来减轻负担并提高电子学习同行评审的质量:开展同行评审培训、采用多学科同行评审、制定指南以及提供激励和报酬。作者最后对同行评审研究提出了建议。