MERLOT has over 20 Editorial boards, each run by an Editor and includes a group of Peer Reviewers that are the essence of MERLOT materials. As a Peer Reviewer, you participate in the peer review process (described below). Each Editorial Board has an Editor that triages each material in their discipline and assigns it to a reviewer in their discipline. This section describes both the Peer Review Processes and MERLOT GRAPE Camp.
Materials in MERLOT that have been peer reviewed are eligible each year to become a MERLOT Classic award winner. You can find information about MERLOT awards below in the MERLOT Awards section.
Within each Editorial Board, there are three stages to completing a peer review:
The MERLOT editorial boards provide leadership, tools, and training in developing evaluation standards and processes for peer review which include:
Editorial boards decide on the process for selecting materials to be peer reviewed. If a collection of materials is not large enough to adequately establish inter-rater reliability, its editorial board works to expand the collection. Peer reviewer teams typically do the following:
The Editor or Associate Editor reviews the individual reviews and creates an integrated or composite peer review report in Workspace. The Editor sends the composite peer review to the material author(s) for feedback, and permission to post the review. When permission is obtained, the Editor posts the composite peer review report on the MERLOT website. Authors may ask the Editor to send letters to two individuals of their choice, summarizing the peer review process and including the composite report.
Additional Review Options in MERLOT
Crowd Sourced Review: Every learning material in the collection is described in detail in its own Detail Description Page. Registered MERLOT Members have an opportunity on every Detail Description Page to share their view of the value of a material by 1) rating it, 2) commenting on it, and 3) by starting or participating in a discussion of that material.
For additional detailed information on the process of peer review, contact the Director of Editorial Boards, Catherine Honig, for more information.
Editorial boards are the cornerstones of MERLOT. They lead the development of MERLOT's discipline communities - one Editorial Board for each community - and are comprised of:
Editors, Associate Editors, and peer reviewers are nominated by System Partners, Campus Partners, and the MERLOT Management Team. Many peer reviewers are those who volunteer their own time to review for MERLOT. All MERLOT editorial board members are faculty with:
Each editorial board is responsible for:
Here is a complete list of MERLOT editorial boards and associated editors.
To become a Peer Reviewer for MERLOT, individuals must be an instructor in an institution of higher education and have:
MERLOT has developed an orientation for Peer Reviewers to ensure they become familiar with MERLOT processes and policies about Peer Review. MERLOT Management conducts GRAPE 2.0 (Getting Reviewers Accustomed to the Process of Evaluation) to assist Peer Reviewers.
GRAPE 2.0 is a one-on-one orientation to the MERLOT Peer Review Process and will help familiarize participants with our processes. Participants will:
For information about GRAPE 2.0, contact Cathy Swift.
You can sign up for GRAPE 2.0 here: GRAPE 2.0
As a peer reviewer, I enjoy seeing the latest and greatest Open Education Resources (OER) in MERLOT Health Sciences. Through my service as a peer reviewer, I use the scholarly MERLOT format to review creative works and analyze the quality review criteria. Some OERs I have reviewed were so awesome that I have used them in the courses I teach.
I have been reviewing for ten years and enjoy it as much as ever. Reviewing helps me stay current in my field. I get to explore valuable resources that I might not know about or never seem to have the time to look at otherwise. And I get to network with knowledgeable peers.
I love the MERLOT peer review process because it gives me a delicious opportunity to delve into fascinating and relevant (to me) resources, it provides value to authors and creators, and because it connects me to the community of educators in my discipline and in MERLOT. The critical thinking challenges in the MERLOT review process inform and stretch my perspective on teaching, often prompting insights I would not have happened upon otherwise. And, like my work reviewing for journals, working with MERLOT to review resources absolutely feels like a worthwhile contribution to my profession.
Peer reviewing for MERLOT allows me to see what is out there for OER. I enjoy the chance to find exemplary materials so I can rate them highly, which increases the chance that others will find useful materials they can use for free. Often I have shared materials I come across while reviewing with instructors who might not otherwise have found the resources.
Reviewing for MERLOT means that I am contributing to the enhancement of open educational resources and improving the MERLOT collections. As a reviewer, I help to ensure that the materials in the collection are high-quality, accessible, and beneficial for learners and educators who use them. I am pleased to be part of a global movement that helps to improve access to educational resources worldwide.
Reviewing materials of MERLOT allows me discovering great surprises on how people have developed updated materials which open new opportunities in engineering education. Not only for distance learning but also for blended learning, as a compliment of presential learning. While reviewing you open your mind to new approaches you've never considered before.
The MERLOT Awards program recognizes and promotes outstanding online resources designed to enhance teaching and learning and to honor the authors and developers of these resources for their contributions to the academic community. Each MERLOT Editorial Boards selects an outstanding resource from its discipline to receive the MERLOT Classics award. MERLOT provides awards in three areas:
Awards for Exemplary Online Materials are presented to authors of peer-reviewed learning resources contributed to MERLOT. The awards honor the authors and developers of these resources for their contributions to the academic community by conferring
the MERLOT Classics Awards. In years past MERLOT also presented a Editor's Choice Awards, however that award is no longer given out. Each Editorial Board selects an outstanding peer-reviewed learning material in its discipline
to receive the Classics award according to program criteria. The Editors’ Council, composed of the editors of each MERLOT Editorial Boards, further reviewed the Classics awardees and selected among them, the resource they consider to be an exemplary
model for all disciplines. These resources then received the highest award of honor, the MERLOT Editors’ Choice award. The Editors’ Choice Award was curtailed in 2007 in order to provide more awards for the Application of MERLOT.
Past Exemplary Online Material award winners are listed here.
Authors wishing to have their learning material considered to receive the Classics Award must first contribute the material to MERLOT. Once the material is submitted it needs to be peer-reviewed by the Editorial Board, which may take several
months. Materials are only considered for the award when they are catalogued in the disciplines for which there are Editorial Boards. Editorial Boards make their decisions regarding the Classics Award in December for awards at the Innovate Conference
the following Spring. Authors who wish to have their materials considered should send email to Catherine Honig.
Application of MERLOT Awards recognize those who demonstrate leadership in the use and application of MERLOT.
These awards are provided to Members who make contributions to MERLOT and also to MERLOT Higher Education Partners for longevity as partners. MERLOT recognizes the outstanding contributions that individuals make to the growth and development of MERLOT. This leadership is rewarded in several ways: