Support Role 7.2: Planning Phase
During Year 3, Month 1, the Revising Author develops an action plan in collaboration with the Project Manager and Developmental Editor.
The table below shows the full packet of documents that Revising Authors will work with. You must be familiar with all of the documents, even though you only take action on some of them.
| Document Title | Purpose | Revising Author Actions |
|---|---|---|
| Revising Author Chapter Docs | Textbook content | Revise chapter drafts so that the book is ready to launch. |
| {Course #} About This Book | Defines the original author team’s goals, equity lens, and scope. | Take no action – this is informational only! |
| {Course #} Prelaunch Front and Back Matter | Contains the book sections for students and future instructors that appear before and after the body of the text. | Use this draft to populate the template {Course #} Front and Back Matter. |
| {Course #} Key Terms | Glossary terms and definitions that align with learning objectives for each chapter. | Keep this spreadsheet updated if you revise key terms or their definitions so that the book’s glossary stays aligned with chapter content. |
| {Course #} H5P Questions | Formative assessments that align with learning objectives for each chapter and appear as interactive elements in the Pressbooks platform. | Keep this document updated as you revise chapters so that the questions stay aligned with the content. |
| {Course #} Revision Recommendations | Developmental Editor’s recommendations based on analysis of Year 2 feedback on the manuscript. | Develop an action plan for revision based on the Developmental Editor’s recommendations. |
| Chapter docs – Peer Reviewer copies | May contain comments optionally left by peer reviewers. | Scan for comments and incorporate them into your manuscript assessment. |
Chapter Versioning
Authors worked on their chapters during Year 2 to bring them into the best alignment possible with their {Course #} About This Book document. This means that you will read chapters that have been improved upon from the ones that peer reviewers, pilot instructors, and students are responding to.
This might sound as if it invalidates the reviewer feedback, but we believe that the feedback will still be just as useful when applied to the revised chapter documents. Both versions of the chapters share the same goals, outcomes, and criteria for success. The Year 2 work advanced the manuscript along this agreed-upon pathway so that your work as Revising Author can focus on the last mile.
The Developmental Editor is aware of the newer versions of the chapters. When they summarize the reviewer feedback for the Revising Author, they focus on suggestions that are relevant to the current versions of the chapters. Note that the Revising Author does not read the raw data from the reviewer feedback – just the Developmental Editor’s analysis.
In this project we practice a form of open peer review. Peer reviewers can choose for their comments to only be shared with authors anonymously, but they also have an opportunity to leave comments directly in Google Docs that are associated with their own name. The Developmental Editor does not look at the Google Doc comments. Revising Authors manage that feedback, so the peer reviewer copies of the chapters are also included in the packet. When you open the peer reviewer copies of the chapter docs to look for comments left directly in the manuscript, you will see the prior versions of the chapters.
Step 1: Read
The first step in assessing the manuscript you will revise is to read the entire thing in as few sittings as possible. Do not skim, but do not slow down to revise as you go. You can switch your Google Doc to Viewing mode or print out your chapters if you need to avoid the temptation to edit. We can print out the manuscript and mail it to you if you don’t have a printer.
Read all the documents in your packet, except for the following (for now):
- Wait to read the Developmental Editor’s {Course #} Revision Recommendations.
- Wait to open up the peer reviewer copies of chapter docs to check for comments.
Step 2: Assess the Manuscript
Use the rubric below to assess how well the manuscript currently meets the project’s Textbook Criteria for Success, which were introduced in Year 1, Unit 1. There is a corresponding tool in the “Revising Author Manuscript Assessment” tab of the {Course #} Deliverables for Open Curriculum Development Project spreadsheet.
| Characteristics for Review | Green light: Optional Change | Yellow light: Recommended Change | Red light: Required Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Learner Focus | This manuscript knows its audience and speaks directly and clearly to them at an appropriate level. The chapter has all required parts and the elements are aligned to support student learning. | This manuscript shows progress towards a learner focus and will benefit from work on readability and reducing word count. With more time invested the chapter elements will align to support the learning outcomes. | This manuscript needs to be refocused on the student audience. Chapter elements are missing or lack clarity on connection to learning outcomes. The drafting process is incomplete and outline elements are showing up in the chapter. |
| Representation of Diverse Voices | This manuscript demonstrates an exemplary focus on lifting up diversity, equity, and inclusion through examples, spotlights, and citations. | This manuscript discusses the elements of diversity, equity, and inclusion and will benefit from additional research or inviting new contributors to represent minoritized identities. | This manuscript does not currently meet the diversity, equity, and inclusion goals of this project. |
| Accessibility | This manuscript does an excellent job of anticipating the needs of all learners, including students with disabilities. | This manuscript follows some accessibility practices and will benefit from a review to make sure that all learners can use the whole text. | This manuscript will not be accessible to all learners as written. |
| Oregon Context | This manuscript will be relevant and engaging to current, diverse Oregon students. | This manuscript has started to develop its Oregon context and can do more to connect with current, diverse Oregon students. | This manuscript is missing an Oregon context. |
In Years 1 and 2 of this training, we did not present the Textbook Criteria for Success as a checklist. Rather, we expect that by following the process we lay out in this curriculum, original author teams will develop a textbook that meets the criteria. We aligned our training closely with the criteria so that authors could work towards them.
In other words, the original author team has done their best to hand you a manuscript that meets the criteria for success for this project. By the end of your revision process, we will be ready to launch a book that meets all of the criteria.
You will likely need an additional document to record notes that you want to discuss with your Developmental Editor and Project Manager. Use your notes to describe in more detail what the manuscript is doing well that you’d like to build on; and why you’ve identified any yellow or red lights to prioritize.
After completing your own assessment, come back to the remaining documents in your packet, and add the following to your notes document:
- Read the Developmental Editor’s {Course #} Revision Recommendations.
- Are there significant areas of overlap or difference that you want to discuss at your meeting?
- Open each peer reviewer chapter doc to check for comments.
- Remember, these are earlier versions of chapters. Focus on comments that are still relevant to the current version of the chapter.
- Are there comments that reinforce your assessment of the manuscript?
- Are there comments that raise new issues you would like to discuss with the Developmental Editor?
Revising Authors Bring a Unique Point of View
Your priorities for revision will reflect the expertise and experience that you bring to the Revising Author role. Here are a few examples of reasons that past Revising Authors took on the role:
- They teach a 100-level course in the discipline taken by a mix of future majors and nonmajors fulfilling general education requirements. They are especially skilled at ensuring that a curriculum is tailored to beginners.
- Their identity has been historically underserved and marginalized both in their discipline and in higher education. They want to center that perspective so that future students feel seen and welcomed by the profession.
- They were the Lead Author that developed the manuscript in Years 1 and 2 on this project and are motivated to fulfill the original vision for the curriculum.
Step 3: Create an Action Plan
The next step is for the Revising Author to collaborate with the Developmental Editor and Project Manager on an action plan for revision to bring the manuscript into full alignment with the Open Curriculum Development Project’s Textbook Criteria for Success. This meeting takes place during Year 3, Month 1.
Revising Authors should complete Step 1 and Step 2 before the meeting. Be prepared to discuss your notes and the Developmental Editor’s recommendations.
The outcome of the meeting is to populate the Revising Author Action Plan tab of the {Course #} Deliverables for Open Curriculum Development Model spreadsheet. In addition to the Project Manager, you can rely on support from the following roles:
Your action plan must be feasible – in other words, you will need to consider the scope of work carefully because you only have four months to complete revisions. Your plan should identify milestones with dates, and include regular meetings with the Project Manager so that your plan stays on track.
The action plan prioritizes the project’s goals so that we are launching a textbook that we feel confident will be high-quality and widely adopted in Oregon. This can mean making difficult tradeoffs with the vision expressed in the {Course #} About This Book document or with your own personal goals for the curriculum. The Project Manager will help you find a balance so that your action plan lists the very top priorities that align with the project’s criteria for success.
Every Revising Author’s work will be different, depending on the manuscript that is handed off to you. But all of our textbooks need to meet the Textbook Criteria for Success. This list of criteria can help you prioritize in two ways:
- The Textbook Criteria for Success shows you where to start because you’ll need to put your earliest attention towards “red light” issues where the book is not succeeding on its own terms or by the project’s standards.
- The Textbook Criteria for Success also shows you how to allocate your time, because no part of the list is optional. This puts boundaries around the amount of time you will spend on “red light” issues so that you’ll still have a reasonable amount of time to spend on other priorities.
Scope and Feasibility
The Revising Author has four months to prepare the manuscript for launch. We believe that this is enough time to focus on the priorities defined for this role. But it is not enough time to make major changes to the overall plan for the book. Here are a few examples of good ideas that are out of scope:
- Add a new chapter: Perhaps there is a content area that deserves more coverage, or a draft that had to be moved to the parking lot. Save this idea for the second edition. There isn’t time to develop a complete new chapter and finish the existing ones.
- Move to a new format: You might see great possibilities for the existing content to be repurposed as a workbook, lab manual, or podcast. Save this idea for a separate project. For this phase of the project the deliverable is a textbook.
- Develop new technology: There may be a student learning enhancement that you could achieve if new technology infrastructure could be built. Save this idea for the future. Our funding does not cover software development.
We (Veronica and Amy) would like to introduce you to “Priority Level 4.” We don’t know if we made up this term, but it helped us organize our time while revising this curriculum. This is because we only tackled to-dos that were Priority 1, 2, or 3 (and actually only the first two, if we’re completely honest).
Licenses and Attributions for Planning Phase
“Planning Phase” by Open Oregon Educational Resources is licensed under CC BY 4.0.
