As technological advances rapidly create new opportunities for the development and dissemination of scholarly learning materials, it is essential that scholarly peer review processes are redesigned and implemented to continue to ensure quality and enable recognition.
Following submission of an e-Case, e-Study or video brief, authors can opt to enter into a scholarly double blind, peer review process. Completion of this process will result in the learning material having a peer reviewed icon next to its title and description on the site, providing users a quick guide to high quality, reviewed materials.
If an author chooses not to enter into the peer-review process, the Hubert Project Director and Academic Oversight Committee will determine if the material can still serve as a useful learning tool. If it is deemed acceptable, it will be approved and made public on the site, without a peer-reviewed icon.
Peer Review Process
Following submission to the Hubert Project website, the Hubert Project team will ensure technical usability testing has been conducted on each material, ensuring the material is functioning smoothly from a technical standpoint. Each material will then be reviewed by at least two instructors in accredited public affairs institutions who have:
- Expertise in public affairs, including public sector or nonprofit management
- Curiosity about using technology in teaching and learning
Reviewers will be expected to rate the material across three primary criteria: content quality, technical usability and potential effectiveness as a teaching tool. Furthermore, reviewers will be expected to provide narrative comments on these three criteria guided by a series of open-ended questions.
The Hubert Project Director and Academic Oversight Committee will analyze their reviews, particularly any suggested changes, for feasibility. The reviews will be returned to the author with suggestions of what can be improved to ensure the material is listed as a peer-reviewed material in the repository.
Training of Reviewers
Upon expressing interest, a peer reviewer will participate in a 60-minute virtual training with the Hubert Project core team in the process and review criteria. These trainings will be scheduled on a quarterly basis.
Expected contribution is approximately 5 hours/quarter, 20 hours annually. On a rolling basis, the Hubert Project Director will direct peer reviewers – based on their area(s) of expertise and the issue of the material – to review new materials that have been added to the site through a double blind process in which links are sent to view the materials without an associated author’s name. Reviewers will have 6 weeks for review and authors will have 6 weeks for edits before the edited material is expected for final submission.
Peer reviewers who have reviewed a material will be provided pro bono support from the core Hubert team in the creation of one material that year to fit their curriculum needs.