OEC Review Process

The materials on the Online Ethics Center undergo the following review process to ensure they are appropriate and relevant for our audiences. 

Stage 1: Staff review – Resource submissions (eg. case studies, bibliographies, assessment tools, multimedia items, instructor materials, educational activities, and essays) are first reviewed by OEC staff to ensure the submission is potentially suitable for our collection. 

Stage 2: Editorial Board review – A relevant editorial board leader manages the review of resource submissions sent forward by OEC staff. Editorial board leaders may choose to consult with other editorial board members or outside experts to evaluate the resource for usefulness on the OEC website. In determining usefulness evaluators consider the following questions:

  1. Is the resource well-written and easily understood?
  2. Is the material relevant to one or more OEC audiences?
  3. Are the included facts accurate?
  4. Does the resource significantly add to the materials already in the OEC Collection?

Stage 3: Posting – If the resource is deemed useful by the editorial board it is posted on the OEC, and the author is notified. Depending on results from the review, a posted resource may be highlighted or featured on the OEC. If improvements are suggested by the editorial board or if problems with the item’s accessibility are identified by OEC staff, these are discussed with the resource author, and revisions are requested prior to online publication.

Stage 4: Supplementation – Editorial board leaders may determine that an OEC resource would benefit from additional or related commentary.  Commentaries may cover ethical issues and/or suggestions for using a resource in teaching and learning. If a commentary is sought, OEC staff or the editorial board identifies and contacts a relevant expert to request their remarks and then reviews the submitted commentary for usefulness on the OEC. Commentaries deemed useful by the editorial board are posted with the resource on the OEC, and the author of the commentary is identified.