If you are planning to make use of the TELRI institutional review tool, these notes aim to provide useful information about possible approaches for reviewing and suggest ways in which you might clarify the use of individual and institutional data.

The data should be held on a single secure database to which only the project team will have access, and only for the purposes of data analysis. Where necessary, care should be taken to ensure that it is not possible to identify individual institutional responses from any of the outcomes of data analysis.

The review is best undertaken as a series of face-to-face or telephone interviews using the review tool question areas and questions as a guide to draw out conceptions of innovation and embedding and personal experiences. These consider institutional structures and working practices that have been helpful or unhelpful in embedding new teaching and learning approaches into academic practice.Responses can be written by the interviewer or jointly into the boxes provided in the tool. Interviewees should be made aware that the interviewer may wish to tape record interviews.

For each review report produced, the institutional co-ordinator will own an "anonymous version of the data"; that is where the individuals have been protected by removal of their names or substitution of a fictional name. In cases where an individual is recognisable by their responsibility for a specified "role" even where their name is not provided, care should be taken to ensure that he/she agrees to their comments being presented. A draft of such sections might be made available to each prior to wider circulation.

Institutional reviewers should be given an opportunity to view and comment on the review analysis before a final report is published. An internal email list is a good way to support the process of data collection, distribution and discussion.