Educational content on Curriki receives ongoing review, with the goals of:

1. Helping members find high quality learning resources within the Curriki database; and
2. Helping contributors improve the learning resources that they are building

To achieve these goals, the site features and utilizes several different forms of review:

• File Check: A Curriki staff member is responsible for reviewing the site and deleting any content that is patently offensive, harmful (viruses), not educationally focused, or otherwise objectionable (vandalism).
• Member Comments: Curriki members may post comments on any public learning resource they access on the site.
• Curriki Review System (CRS): Learning resources are reviewed and rated by expert staff members and trained volunteers on grounds of completeness, accuracy, and pedagogy. The remainder of this section details the Curriki Review System.

Ratings in the Curriki Review System

The Curriki Review System assigns resources one of five possible overall scores, as shown in the table below. Small resources that form part of complex resources often cannot be evaluated in isolation and are considered "Not Rateable."

Content that displays "Partner" has been provided by Curriki's partners and has already been field-tested or shown to rest on a strong research base.

All other resources will be rated on a scale from 1-3, as below.

Icon	Term	Definition
--	Not Rated/Not Rateable	A learning resource that has not yet been rated or that cannot be rated (e.g. an image that is part of a larger, composite resource and is too small to be rated by itself)
	Basic	A resource that requires a significant amount of cleanup or expansion to be used for teaching and learning
	Good	A resource that will be immediately useful to teachers and learners, but which has gaps or lacks polish
	Exemplary	A complete and highly polished resource of publishable quality that uses best practices in instructional design
	Partner	High-quality content provided by partner organizations

The ratings above are displayed prominently when viewing a resource in the main site. A reviewed resource’s Comments tab displays details of the review that explain the rating given. Ratings are also displayed in search results, and users can filter or sort search results by CRS rating.
 

Rating Sub-Scores

For every resource that has been reviewed, the date of its last review is displayed. If the review is recent, it should be very trustworthy. If the review is old, you may want to investigate further. Check the Revision History from the Information tab for that resource. Has the resource been edited since the last review? How many times? For a resource that has changed significantly, the review will be a clue to quality, but you should also examine the resource itself. You may even want to nominate it for a new review.

A resource’s overall CRS rating 1-3 is derived from its subscores in three areas:

• Technical Completeness – Are all necessary parts of the resource provided? Are activities fully and clearly explained? Has adequate metadata been applied (educational level, subject, ICT, etc.)?
• Content Accuracy – Is the subject matter presented consistent with expert consensus in the field? Does a spot-check reveal any errors in assessment items or answer keys?
• Appropriate Pedagogy – Are the learning activities well-chosen for the stated objectives, subject, and educational level? Does the learning resource use appropriate vocabulary and sequencing, clear explanations, and recognized best practices in instructional design? Are assessments carefully aligned to objectives and learning activities?

Reviewers rate a resource from 1-3 in each of these three areas, applying a rubric developed by Curriki and extended over time by Curriki reviewers and interested members of the Curriki community. The resource is then assigned an overall score equal to the average of its subscores. Content creators whose resources fall short in one area may work to improve their resource in the deficient area in order to meet the next threshold.

Reviewers

In each of the four core subject areas, Curriki has hired a master teacher or instructional designer to serve as Lead Reviewer. They conduct reviews as well as organize the work of volunteer reviewers, who are being recruited from pools of experienced teachers, curriculum developers, and teacher educators. Curriki is always seeking volunteer reviewers. If you would like to join the effort, email review@curriki.org and tell us about your relevant interest and your area of expertise.

Process

All members of Curriki can nominate resources for review—sometimes because they are suspect or worthy of recognition, other times because they have changed significantly since their last review. Reviewers in each subject work through a queue of nominated resources, usually in the order in which they were nominated. When a resource has been nominated, but not yet reviewed, the 'Nominate' link are replaced with the words 'Review Pending.' When the queue is empty, Curriki reviewers browse the site for resources to review. For each resource, reviewers submit both a numerical rating and textual feedback.

 

More information about the criteria used by the reviewers and other details are available in the Curriki Review System Collection. You may also want to watch the video tutorial "What is a Reviewed Resource?"