Do we have the right assumptions and guiding principles for developing a QA and review policy?
This is a new thread to inviting the community to provide feedback on the assumptions and guiding principles we're using to inform the development of a QA and review policy for WE.
It might be interesting to tie the quality measure/ratings to each article's history page rather than the article page itself... then it would be obvious what changes had taken place since which reviews.
I like the notion of having some measure of quality based on the number of "eyes" by measure of unique edits, who have contributed to an article page. You're right, from a technical perspective this is a measure of the history page rather than the article itself.
I've not looked at the Flagged Revisions extension in detail yet --- so not sure how this might relate to the history page itself.
A fair bit of research ties quality back to a healthy workplace. Without a healthy working environment how do people produce quality? I believe this discussion also needs to include the concept of a healthy workplace within a collaborative wiki environment.
mmmm -- I like the concept of a "healthy" wiki environment. Over and above our community values and principles already stated -- have you given any thought to the characteristics of a healthy wiki environment?
What are the indicators of a healthy wiki environment? Would be interesting to see peoples thoughts on this.
I agree, it would be good to know what is a healthy wiki environment. particulary in the context of how it ties to people creating high quality OER content. What are the characteristics of a healthy wiki environment? One where the materials are of highest and exemplary quality. If the resources aren't exemplary and CC-BY-SA why would people reuse them? As an educator I seek out exemplary OER, otherwise I create them myself. To a certain dgree I would think the health of OER is measured by its reuse. If it isn't being reused, maybe it is a quality issue.
I think this question should be put out to the google group...
I now understand what you mean by a healthy wiki environment. Makes good sense to me.
I'll post something on the main list inviting people to comment -- Given the substantive nature of these discussions which will ultimately lead to the development of a consensus policy -- I think we should try and encourage members of the community list to post their thoughts in this forum, so we have a good record in one place dealing with the QA developments.
We can post regular updates on the main list with links to the specific questions.
What do you think?