CLEAN > CLEAN Pathway Workspace > Review Camp 2010

Review Camp 2010

Dates: Monday, July 26th 2010, 1 pm until Wednesday, July 28th 2010, 6 pm


Monday, July 26th 1 pm – 6pm followed by a dinner at the Chautauqua Dining Hall (

Tuesday, July 27th 8 am – 5 pm

Wednesday, July 28th 8 am – 6 pm

See the current online agenda or download the Final Agenda for CLEAN Review Camp as of July 22 (Acrobat (PDF) 76kB Jul22 10) .


Boulder, University of Colorado campus,

Field Trip(s):

1. Monday AM - National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL)

2. Time for a hike in the foothills outside Boulder in the late afternoon Monday or Tuesday (between end of afternoon session and before group dinner)

Lodging Information:

Rooms reserved at the (770 28th Street, Boulder, 303-449-3800)

Please call Best Western with credit card info to confirm your reservations and make additional arrangements if you are bringing your family.

If you are planning on bringing your family to Boulder please contact Mark (Mark.Mccaffrey@Colorado.EDU) in regards to the dinner on Monday night.

Goal for Review Camp:Certify approximately 100 teaching activities as "cream of the crop" resources that are ready to be entered into the CLEAN Pathway Collection. Complete resources will include a description and full annotations (i.e., a summary of prior reviews).

Number of Incoming Resources: Total of 153 resources (or teaching activities) with two reviews (plus science review). In the second round reviews 70 of these resources ranked as High Priority, 63 as Medium Priority and 20 as Low Priority. This means that 133 of these resources ranked as high or medium in their second reviews; 153 ranked as high, medium or low. The focus will be on the group of 133 resources first.

Participants: Total of 24 people plus evaluators

· 6 PIs/co PIs of CLEAN project

· 8 resource collectors

· 8 external reviewers

· 2 specialists for standards

Out of the above: 7 PhD scientists

Review Teams: We will have 6 review teams - each with 4 people with at least one PhD scientist, one educator and one resource collector.

See the members of the review teams and the resources assigned to each team.

Review time slots:About 13 hours split up in 9 review time slots.

Review Camp Process:

We plan a NSF-panel style review process. Each Review Team will be assigned approximately 1/6 of the teaching activities (~ 22 resources) to complete during the 2 and 1/2 days of the review camp. Each final review will average about 35 minutes.

The style of resource presentation will be similar to an NSF panel. Each participant in the review team will be in charge of the presentation and discussion of about 25% (~ 6) of the total number of resources assigned to the group. The presenter should know the resource, have read the two prior reviews and the science review and the annotation. Other team members should be familiar with their assigned resources and read the reviews and annotations in order to contribute to the discussions. See the notes on the questions on the review form used in these initial reviews.

See the resource assignments for each team member.

At the review camp there will be a projector and a computer for each group with bookmarks to their resources and hard copies of the annotations.

Each resource will come with a brief guideline about how much time should be spent on this resource (only stamp of approval versus in-depth discussions).

Each review team gets a certain percentage of high quality resources that should be covered in the beginning so that everyone has an understanding of what excellent resources look like.

Goals of the discussion should be

1) approve the rating of the resource,

2) edit and approve the annotation/description,

3) brainstorm if the science is cutting edge,

4) decide whether the resource should be part of the collection or not.

See the notes on how to record the results of the discussion in Step 10 of the Review Form.

See the following diagram for a recommended workflow while reviewing each resource. It consists of a set of steps down the center of the diagram with reporting functions on either side. To the left are the boxes for the facilitator to add general (non-resource-specific) questions to the discussion threads for discussion by the entire plenary group. To the right are boxes for the notetaker to add material to Step 10 of the review tool.


      Next Page »