21 Review Guide Template (Hypothes.is)

This template may be used as you’re conducing peer review on your project in Hypothes.is. Find an editable version here. This template includes a rubric developed by BCcampus Open Education. Our thanks to the team at BCcampus Open Education.

Review Guide (Hypothes.is): Template

Welcome to the guide for Rebus open textbook reviewers. This guide is meant to help you give great, useful feedback on the open textbooks we are helping to develop. You are welcome to print this Google doc, make a copy for yourself, or share with others.

Please read through sections below, and use this as a reference as you complete your review. If you have any questions, you can email the project lead.

Before We Begin

As we strive to work openly, all contributions made to this textbook will be licensed under a CC BY 4.0 International License. You will be credited as a reviewer in the published version of the book.

No OER textbook can serve all learners, so it is important to be aware of the context the book is meant to live in. Take a moment to read through the project summary to familiarise yourself with the book’s purpose and audience before beginning your review.

About This Book

Include a quick summary and description of your project and book here. You should also link to project info page, so interested readers can learn more.


Insert a few sentences about the book’s intended audience here. For example: “This book is meant for use in first-year introductory courses. The audience will primarily consist of undergraduates pursuing the major, however can also include some mixed-major undergraduates.” You can include as much detail as you think is necessary, such as technical requirements, reading levels, etc.

Core Components

If there were one single question your review should seek to answer, it should probably be:

“To what extent is the book successful in meeting the needs of its primary market?”


When reviewing drafts, also consider:

  1. Comprehensiveness: The text covers all areas and ideas of the subject appropriately and provides an effective index and/or glossary.
  2. Content Accuracy: Content is accurate, error-free and unbiased.
  3. Relevance Longevity: Content is up-to-date, but not in a way that will quickly make the text obsolete within a short period of time. The text is written and/or arranged in such a way that necessary updates will be relatively easy and straightforward to implement.
  4. Clarity: The text is written in lucid, accessible prose, and provides adequate context for any jargon/technical terminology used.
  5. Consistency: The text is internally consistent in terms of terminology and framework.
  6. Organization Structure Flow: The topics in the text are presented in a logical, clear fashion.
  7. Grammatical Errors: The text contains no grammatical errors.
  8. Cultural Relevance: The text is not culturally insensitive or offensive in any way. It should make use of examples that are inclusive of a variety of races, ethnicities, and backgrounds.

This rubric was developed by BCcampus Open Education. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license.

Project Specific Questions

This is where you can add guiding questions for reviewers that are specific to your project. This helps to draw their attention to any areas you think need particular consideration, and helps ensure the feedback you receive is valuable.

Leaving Feedback

Please leave comments on the web version of the text using Hypothes.is, and/or provide a short memo summarising your feedback. This memo can be submitted to the project lead or review coordinator. Please also notify the lead and coordinator when you have finished making your comments in Hypothesis, if you choose to do so.

How to Use Hypothes.is

In-line Comments

  1. Open the chapter you are reviewing in your browser.
  2. Open the Hypothesis panel by clicking on the left arrow in the sidebar.
  3. Log in using the username and password provided by Rebus (if you have not been provided with these details please contact the project manager).
  4. By default, Hypothesis annotations are made to the Public group. For the purposes of peer review, a group called Rebus Review has been created. To make annotations to this group, click on the dropdown menu next to Public, and select Rebus Review. All of your annotations will now be made in this group, and will remain private.
  5. Select the text you would like to comment on or highlight.
  6. Click on Annotate to add a comment. You can type in your comment and click on “Post to Rebus Review” to post it in the group.
  7. You can edit, delete, reply to or share your comment once it has been posted by using the buttons on the bottom-right of the comment box.

Page Notes

  1. Log in to Hypothesis account using the account and password provided by Rebus, as described above, and switch to the Rebus Review group.
  2. By default, Hypothesis is set to display and enter annotations. To enter a longer memo-style note, or view other notes on a particular chapter, click on Page Notes from the top menu.
  3. Click on the page icon to write your own note. You will see a comment box pop-up, where you can type in your lengthier comments.
  4. Once you have finished typing, click on Post to Rebus Review to post your note to the group.
  5. You can edit, delete, reply to, or share page notes similar to annotations!

Reviewer Etiquette

Here you can add a few sentences about reviewer etiquette. The following is a short example, but could be expanded on, particularly if authors will see reviewer comments – you may want to mention this specifically.

When leaving feedback, please be conscious your language and tone and remember that the content you are critiquing is the product of many hours of concerted labour. Keep your criticism constructive, and avoid using derogatory phrases, or making personal remarks about the author. As a courtesy to the author or editor, avoid using abbreviations or short forms of words when providing feedback. Doing so ensures that your feedback remains clear and easy to understand for everyone.

If you run into any issues during this process, please contact the project lead.


Specify the deadline for completion of review here.


If financial compensation is available for reviewers upon completion of the review, you can mention so here.

Recognition for Reviewers

If you plan to credit reviewers in a review statement, or elsewhere in the book, make a note of it here.



This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Find an editable version of this template here.


Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

The Rebus Guide to Publishing Open Textbooks (So Far) Copyright © 2019 by Apurva Ashok and Zoe Wake Hyde is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book