We encourage you to contribute your own reviews of educational resources you have used or looked at which, in a broad sense, address the teaching of social research methods. We would like reviews of any kind of resource that is openly available. These might include: videos, web pages or web sites, PowerPoint presentations, texts of various kinds, data sets, interactive reusable learning objects (RLOs) and images or image banks. We have a particular focus on open educational resources – those which have a Creative Commons (CC) licence that allows for reuse and repurposing of the material in educational settings. But we recognise that many good resources do not have a CC licence but are nevertheless free for educationalists to reuse. So please include these too.
You can submit a review in one of two ways. Our preferred approach is that you register as an Author on this site and just post your review. See the details below. Alternatively, send an e-mail with your review to email@example.com and we will put it up for you.
Register as an Author
Recommended content for reviews of educational resources
Read some of the other reviews to get a feel for what is useful and how they are written. Include most of the information below, if you can. Add other information if you think it will be useful to other potential users of the resource.
We expect reviews to be less than a page in length (450 words), but if the resource you are reviewing is very large (an hour long video, for instance) or complex then by all means make the review longer. By the same token, if you are reviewing only a small item (perhaps just a small group of images that might be used in teaching) then a shorter review is all that is called for. The review should contain information and commentary that will be of use to potential users. Below we give some recommendations for content. Your review will be published under the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence
The content of the resource. Say what it does, with enough details to tell another potential user if they should look more closely at it. Include your commentary and judgement about the content that you wish. For example, it may use examples from a particular discipline which you think make it of less general use. Or it does that but you believe students will not be put off or confused by the examples. It is especially valuable if you can say what students thought of the resource. Maybe even include student comments.
Author and date of creation of the resource. Give some background about the author if you can.
Media used by the resource. Is it video, a text, a PowerPoint presentation, an interactive RLO etc. If it is a video, is it a talking face, an audio file behind PowerPoint slides, or a mixture of these and animations? Make some judgement of the reproduction quality, e.g. clarity of the picture and the sound. Is it useable and are details readable if shown full screen?
Size. How big is it and especially how long does it last or will it take to do?
Pedagogic use. Give some indication of what level of student it is suitable for (first year undergrad, postgrad etc.) along with some suggestions of how you have used it or in what kind of contexts it might be used.
Prerequisites. Add more detail to the student level, explain if you think students need to have a certain level of understanding before using this resource.
Licence. If it has a Creative Commons (CC) licence then say so. Otherwise give any indication you can of the conditions for use and reuse/repurposing of the resource.
Link to the resource. Give the URL or other indication of how the resource can be obtained. If you know how to do it, you may embed the resource in this review.
Related materials of interest. Give some other resources (that can include books and articles) that are relevant to this educational resource. Or perhaps links to other resources by the same author(s) or in the same series.
Classification. Use one or more of our 8 classification areas and/or their many subareas. Please use only our classifications. Use a higher level classification rather than creating a new one.
Your name and background. Ideally, complete your author profile (with your photo) on our site, but at least give your name and affiliation.
Citation. Include a brief note of how to cite your review.