OLPC:Peer review: Difference between revisions
(..) |
(..) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
We need a process for general peer review of any proposal, overview, collection, project, website, or implementation for OLPC -- for public discussion and feedback, and for the generation of every improving heuristics for what makes an effort brilliant, scalable, effective for children. a set of separate heuristics is necessary to help refine the process of improvement. |
|||
Please sumbit projects, pages, or ideas here for peer review by the OLPC community. To submit something, include a section for it, with the name of what you wish to be reviewd (and a wikilink to it) in the appropriate section below. Please use the following template: |
|||
See [[OLPC:Featured content]] for a discussion. |
|||
== <name> == |
|||
:'''Description''': one-line description of the project and its creators |
|||
: <review and questions by submitter> |
|||
=== Comments === |
|||
''input by individual reviewers; listing each adressable point on a new line.'' |
|||
== submitting a page or project for peer review == |
|||
To submitsomething for peer review, please add a link to it and a brief description below. Include what you hope to get out of peer review, as appropriate. |
|||
== |
== peer review candidates == |
||
Please assess projects according to how well it promotes OLPC's [[mission]] to improve education for children throughout the world, and help them learn how to learn. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
* General guidelines: [[Project guidelines]] |
|||
This is an interesting example of documentation. Questions: the name, the style, the length; how effectively it defines and reaches its audience. By [[user:mstone|mstone]], submited by --[[User:Sj|Sj]] [[User talk:Sj|<font style="color:#f70; font-size:70%">talk</font>]] |
|||
* Local guidelines : please add any guidelines that are particular to a region, language, or culture. |
|||
== |
=== [[Open source]] === |
||
One of the most popular pages on the wiki. How should it be updated, many moons down the line? |
|||
''If you have an [[activity]] you'd like to hvae reviewed, post it here.'' |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
:'''description''': One of the first non-core activities tested on the laptop. By Julius Lucks. |
|||
: How could it be made better, integrated with other activities more? It currently can share tilesets with [[Memorize]]; how can that be improved? Any comments welcome. |
|||
== Reviewing ideas and related projects == |
|||
''If you want to review or move forward an idea or sister project that hasn't really started yet, list it here. Criteria for review will be a bit different than for active projects; including how likely it is to find a sustainable development and maintenance community.'' |
|||
{{stub}} |
|||
[[category:peer review]] |
|||
Latest revision as of 01:41, 14 February 2008
We need a process for general peer review of any proposal, overview, collection, project, website, or implementation for OLPC -- for public discussion and feedback, and for the generation of every improving heuristics for what makes an effort brilliant, scalable, effective for children. a set of separate heuristics is necessary to help refine the process of improvement.
See OLPC:Featured content for a discussion.
submitting a page or project for peer review
To submitsomething for peer review, please add a link to it and a brief description below. Include what you hope to get out of peer review, as appropriate.
peer review candidates
Taste the Rainbow
This is an interesting example of documentation. Questions: the name, the style, the length; how effectively it defines and reaches its audience. By mstone, submited by --Sj talk
Open source
One of the most popular pages on the wiki. How should it be updated, many moons down the line?