Reviewing Synchronous Learning Objects

In response to Christy's comments regarding the use of LORI in sychronous environments.

The creators of the LORI describe using a convergent participation evaluation model in conjunction with the rating instrument.  Please see;
Nesbit, J., Belfer, K., & Vargo, J. (2002). A convergent participant model for evaluation of learning ob-jects. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 28 (3). Retrieved  from http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol28.3/nesbit_etal.html

I believe that both could be applicable for digital objects available synchronously as many of the criteria in the LORI would be relevant; feedback adaptation; learning goal alignment, content quality, presentation design.

You might want to adapt the criteria in the LORI to address some of the dynamics that are present during real-time activities, i.e. ability to guage understanding and respond to the needs of learners.

Learner motivations in a business and academic environment may not be the same, but there needs to be a formal reward system in place to recognize those who take part in the review process.  Recognition also makes the activity more credible, because in effect the organization/ insitution is reinforcing the idea that this activity is a valuable undertaking.  In academia, the idea behind engaging in a rigorous evaluation of the quality of learning materials is to promote it as a scholarly activity similar to articles being peer reviewed for a journal.  Having someone use your LO would be equivalent to a citation in an article which may indicate that your resource is of some value in that particular discipline. One way of recognizing people who engage in these activities in a corporate environment would be to provide them with the training and time to develop/ evaluate these materials.