The purpose of this consultation is to work with the community and use your feedback to introduce ways to drive up resource quality, so that Tes can continue to be a trusted place for teachers to get their resources. For further detail and context please visit the original thread. Current review/rating system The current system we use for determining resource quality (the five-star rating / review system) doesn’t contain any of the nuance around whether a resource was useful, has met the needs of teachers, or in @thinky’s words provide “feedback towards actively improving a resource (instead it's a rate it good vs bad system)”. We will be reviewing this the near future to help us arrive at a measure that is more relevant to teachers using Tes. Some of the feedback we have had relates to promoting “further dialogue with customers / downloaders” on how a resource has been used, or whether they “recommend a resource”, as suggested by @elder_cat and @thinky. We really welcome these ideas and we will be exploring the possibilities here. We encourage you to share your ideas if you haven’t already. We ran an experiment last year to test out an alternative rating system, which allowed people to rate the resource based on a series of key criteria. We found that most people were willing to provide more feedback in this way. We will be continuing to explore different models that we can adopt here, and will be sharing examples of these with select groups in future, so please let us know if you’d like to be a part of this testing process. One of the other things we have noticed is that most people aren’t willing to provide detailed written comments or feedback, and many authors have told us that they really value these comments when they do get them, as it shows them that teachers are using the resources they’ve created. We want to explore more ways to encourage more teachers to provide more written comments and feedback on the resources they’ve used - for instance, to tell others how they used the resource in the classroom. What things drive you to leave more detailed written comments? Incentivising reviews Ratings and reviews are super important. We have been exploring ways to help drive up the number of people rating and reviewing resources on Tes, and have seen some great successes already, but have a long way to go. @lcallard21 and @mrsquenan have suggested that we send follow-up emails asking the person to review: the good news is that we already do this! We’ve had some great success with these so far, and are looking at ways to improve these notifications, and to find other ways to include notifications within the site experience, like making it part of the download process, as suggested by @elder_cat. Some feedback on the current system’s usability comes from @Krazikas: “Make it easier to provide a review technically instead of having to go 'all around the houses' to give a review”. Thankfully we have now addressed a lot of these issues with the most recent set of changes to the reviews system, and have hopefully fixed all the issues that were causing this to be unstable and not work reliably. We made some significant improvements to the usability of the reviews process last year with the introduction of the reviews page, though recognise that there are still issues that we need to address. If there are other specific pain points or issues that you have when it comes to leaving a rating and review, please let us know! An overwhelming response to this topic has been around introducing a mechanism to incentivise reviews and it has been raised by a great number of authors in this forum and outside of Tes, including @EC_Resources, @HSX, @alutwyche, @lcallard21, @Thedigitalstationer, @Krazikas. The idea of incentivising reviews is a great one - and certainly one that’s been tried and tested elsewhere - and is something we will likely trial. In terms of increasing the quality of the reviews left, @thinky suggests that “a rewards system for giving reviews it could give some weighting to how useful that feedback is...those reviewers that provide useful feedback would gain better rewards.” Similarly, this is an idea that many other sites use, to help gauge whether or not the person leaving the review is trusted, and helping the site understand whether the review itself was useful and trustworthy. We like the idea of rewarding reviewers that leave more useful feedback, and it’s definitely something we will explore further! We could also perhaps look at finding a way to establish “trusted” reviewers. Author ‘code’ We feel there is a need to develop an ‘author code’ relating to behaviour on Tes around promotion of resources, soliciting of reviews and acceptable behavior which the community contributes to and agrees to uphold. We know the community cares about relevant and real reviews from teachers about the resources they download and purchase. This informs downloaders and buyers and helps teachers make decisions, and can make a difference not only to sales but to the quality of the resources themselves. We would like to work with you all - the author community on Tes - to write up a shared code of conduct that all authors can subscribe to, which helps guide how authors interact and engage with each other in these shared spaces and how authors conduct activities around promoting, as well as relating to the content they upload. We will be launching a separate consultation with you in the coming weeks to gather more specific feedback on establishing this. But, in the meantime, we’d love to hear more thoughts on this, so please contribute to the discussion! Tes Picks Many authors have asked for clarification on ‘Tes Picks’. It is worth noting that over the years the approach to Tes picks has undergone many significant changes, and as a result there may be some inconsistencies as things have developed and the library has grown. For clarification, we would like to reiterate that we do not perform a systematic review of all content on Tes, nor do we review resources on request, because of the sheer volume of resources published. We currently use an approach that focuses on an internal shift towards content hubs, topical and themed blogs, and other such projects, and view these selections as a Tes-equivalent of an ‘editor’s pick’. However, please be aware that this is not a systematic or full-time process, and in order to maintain quality, we can only focus on a few subjects / phases at a time. For insight into what the team look for, please check out this post. We appreciate your feedback about this and will include it as part of our ongoing review. There have been some suggestions around establishing groups of teachers who regularly review resources, whose reviews might have a more trusted status. We’ve discussed this idea at Tes, and would love to explore it more. Obviously there is a lot to unpick here, particularly around how the members of this group are selected, what process they go through, what their standards are, etc. We would be transparent with the community as we test out the ideas here, and would look to run things on a pilot basis, rather than establishing fully-fledged systems!