Hubbry Logo
logo
Open educational resources
Community hub

Open educational resources

logo
0 subscribers
Read side by side
from Wikipedia

UNESCO Global Open Educational Resources logo

Open educational resources (OER)[1] are teaching, learning, and research materials intentionally created and licensed to be free for the end user to own, share, and in most cases, modify.[2][3][4] The term "OER" describes publicly accessible materials and resources for any user to use, re-mix, improve, and redistribute under some licenses.[5] These are designed to reduce accessibility barriers by implementing best practices in teaching and to be adapted for local unique contexts.[6][7]

The development and promotion of open educational resources is often motivated by a desire to provide an alternative or enhanced educational paradigm.[8]

Definition and scope

[edit]

Open educational resources (OER) are part of a "range of processes"[9] employed by researchers and educators to broaden access to scholarly and creative conversations.[9][10][11][12] Although working definitions of the term OER may vary somewhat based on the context of their use,[13] the 2019 definition provided by UNESCO provides shared language useful for shaping an understanding of the characteristics of OER.[14] The 2019 UNESCO definition describes OER as "teaching, learning and research materials that make use of appropriate tools, such as open licensing, to permit their free reuse, continuous improvement and repurposing by others for educational purposes."[14]

While collaboration, sharing, and openness have "been an ongoing feature of educational" and research practices "past and present",[9] the term "OER" was first coined to describe associated resources at UNESCO's 2002 Forum on Open Courseware,[15] which determined that "Open Educational Resources (OER) are learning, teaching and research materials in any format and medium that reside in the public domain or are under copyright that have been released under an open license, that permit no-cost access, re-use, re-purpose, adaptation and redistribution by others."[16]

Often cited is the 2007 report to the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation which defined OER as "teaching, learning, and research resources that reside in the public domain or have been released under an intellectual property license that permits their free use or re-purposing by others. Open educational resources include full courses, course materials, modules, textbooks, streaming videos, tests, software, and any other tools, materials, or techniques used to support access to knowledge."[17] The Foundation later updated its definition to describe OER as "teaching, learning and research materials in any medium – digital or otherwise – that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits no-cost access, use, adaptation and redistribution by others with no or limited restrictions." Of note in that definition is the explicit statement that OER can include both digital and non-digital resources, as well as the inclusion of several types of use that OER permit, inspired by 5R activities of OER.[18][19] In a 2022 overview of the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation's activities supporting open education since 2002, the Foundation describes OER as "freely licensed, remixable learning resources",[20] further including the Creative Commons definition of OER as "teaching, learning, and research materials that are either (a) in the public domain or (b) licensed in a manner that provides everyone with free and perpetual permission to engage in the 5R activities – retaining, remixing, revising, reusing and redistributing the resources."[20][19]

The 5R activities/permissions mentioned in the definitions above were proposed by David Wiley, and include:[21]

  • Retain – the right to make, own, and control copies of the content (e.g., download, duplicate, store, and manage)
  • Reuse – the right to use the content in a wide range of ways (e.g., in a class, in a study group, on a website, in a video)
  • Revise – the right to adapt, adjust, modify, or alter the content itself (e.g., translate the content into another language)
  • Remix – the right to combine the original or revised content with other material to create something new (e.g., incorporate the content into a mashup)
  • Redistribute – the right to share copies of the original content, your revisions, or your remixes with others (e.g., give a copy of the content to a friend)[22]

Authors, creators, and communities may apply a range of licenses or descriptions such as those facilitated by Creative Commons or Local Contexts | TK Labels to their work to communicate to what extent they intend for downstream users to engage in the 5R activities or other collaborative research, creative and scholarly practices.[23][24]

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) defines OER as: "digitised materials offered freely and openly for educators, students, and self-learners to use and reuse for teaching, learning, and research. OER includes learning content, software tools to develop, use, and distribute content, and implementation resources such as open licences".[25] By way of comparison, the Commonwealth of Learning "has adopted the widest definition of Open Educational Resources (OER) as 'materials offered freely and openly to use and adapt for teaching, learning, development and research'".[26] The WikiEducator project suggests that OER refers "to educational resources (lesson plans, quizzes, syllabi, instructional modules, simulations, etc.) that are freely available for use, reuse, adaptation, and sharing'.[27][28] Institutions emphasizing recognition of work with open educational resources in faculty promotion and tenure emphasize their use in research, scholarly and creative works as well.[29]

The above definitions expose some of the tensions that exist with OER:

  • Nature of the resource: Several of the definitions above limit the definition of OER to digital resources, while others consider that any educational resource can be included in the definition.
  • Source of the resource: While some of the definitions require a resource to be produced with an explicit educational aim in mind, others broaden this to include any resource which may potentially be used for learning.
  • Level of openness: Most definitions require that a resource be placed in the public domain or under a fully open license. Others require only that free use to be granted for educational purposes, possibly excluding commercial uses.

These definitions also have common elements, namely they all:

  • cover use and reuse, repurposing, and modification of the resources;
  • include free use for educational purposes by teachers and learners
  • encompass all types of digital media.[30]

Given the diversity of users, creators and sponsors of open educational resources, it is not surprising to find a variety of use cases and requirements. For this reason, it may be as helpful to consider the differences between descriptions of open educational resources as it is to consider the descriptions themselves. One of several tensions in reaching a consensus description of OER (as found in the above definitions) is whether there should be explicit emphasis placed on specific technologies. For example, a video can be openly licensed and freely used without being a streaming video. A book can be openly licensed and freely used without being an electronic document. This technologically driven tension is deeply bound up with the discourse of open-source licensing. For more, see Licensing and Types of OER later in this article.

There is also a tension between entities which find value in quantifying usage of OER and those which see such metrics as themselves being irrelevant to free and open resources. Those requiring metrics associated with OER are often those with economic investment in the technologies needed to access or provide electronic OER, those with economic interests potentially threatened by OER,[31] or those requiring justification for the costs of implementing and maintaining the infrastructure or access to the freely available OER. While a semantic distinction can be made delineating the technologies used to access and host learning content from the content itself, these technologies are generally accepted as part of the collective of open educational resources.[32]

Since OER are intended to be available for a variety of educational purposes, some organizations using OER neither award degrees nor provide academic or administrative support to students seeking college credits towards a diploma from a degree granting accredited institution.[33][34] However, many degree granting institutions have intentionally embraced the use of OER for research, teaching and learning, seeing their use and creation as in aligning with academic or institutional mission statements.[12] In open education, there is an emerging effort by some accredited institutions to offer free certifications, or achievement badges, to document and acknowledge the accomplishments of participants.[35]

In order for educational resources to be OER, they must have an open license or otherwise communicate willingness for iterative reuse and/or modification. Many educational resources made available on the Internet are geared to allowing online access to digitalized educational content, but the materials themselves are restrictively licensed. These restrictions may complicate the reuse and modification considered characteristic of OER. Often, this is not intentional, as educators and researchers may lack familiarity with copyright law [36] in their own jurisdictions, never mind internationally. International law and national laws of nearly all nations, and certainly of those who have signed onto the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), restrict all content under strict copyright (unless the copyright owner specifically releases it under an open license). The Creative Commons license is a widely used licensing framework internationally used for OER.[37]

Open textbooks

[edit]

The Open Textbook Library sponsored by the University of Minnesota offers open textbooks a wide range of law, medicine, engineering, and liberal arts disciplines.[38]

OpenStax, a nonprofit educational technology initiative based at Rice University, has created openly-licensed textbooks since 2012. The project was initially funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Michelson Twenty Million Minds Foundation, and the Maxfield Foundation.[39] The CNX platform was retired[40] in 2020, when OpenStax transitioned to the use of Google Docs instead.

LibreTexts is a nonprofit OER (online educational resource) project. Content from LibreTexts is made available under the CK-12 Foundation Curriculum Materials License.[41] The CK-12 Foundation itself also provides—online—a suite of open educational content, typically under that license.

The Pressbooks Directory is a free, searchable catalog that includes over 8,200 open access books published by 199 organizations and networks using Pressbooks.[42]

The B.C. Open Collection by BCcampus is a curated selection of OER that includes courses and textbooks that must meet quality criteria for it to be added to the collection.[43]

The MERLOT Collection is a curated resource of free and online textbooks and other resources for use in teaching and learning. Many resources undergo an extensive peer review.[44]

OER Commons provides an extensive library of OER textbooks and resources from higher education institutions around the world, as well as an OER authoring tool called Open Author.

History

[edit]

The term "learning object" was coined in 1994 by Wayne Hodgins and quickly gained currency among educators and instructional designers, popularizing the idea that digital materials can be designed to allow easy reuse in a wide range of teaching and learning situations.[45]

The OER movement originated from developments in open and distance learning (ODL) and in the wider context of a culture of open knowledge, open source, free sharing and peer collaboration, which emerged in the late 20th century.[45][7] OER and Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS), for instance, have many aspects in common,[46][47] a connection first established in 1998 by David Wiley[48] who coined the term "open content" and introduced the concept by analogy with open source.[49] Richard Baraniuk made the same connection independently in 1999 with the founding of the first global OER initiative, Connexions (now called OpenStax CNX).[50]

The MIT OpenCourseWare project is credited for having sparked a global Open Educational Resources Movement after announcing in 2001 that it was going to put MIT's entire course catalog online and launching this project in 2002.[51] Other contemporaneous OER projects include Connexions, which was launched by Richard Baraniuk in 1999 and showcased with MIT OpenCourseWare at the launch of the Creative Commons open licenses in 2002,[52] and the NROC Project, launched by Gary W. Lopez in 2003 that developed the HippoCampus OER site[53] and EdReady personalized learning platform.[54] Following an MIT OpenCourseWare conference in Beijing, the China Open Resources for Education (CORE) was established in November 2003. CORE's goal was to provide these resources to hundreds of universities in China.[55] In a first manifestation of this movement, MIT entered a partnership with Utah State University, where assistant professor of instructional technology David Wiley set up a distributed peer support network for the OCW's content through voluntary, self-organizing communities of interest.[56] The community college system was also an early participant in the movement. In 2004, the Sofia project[57] was launched by the Foothill-De Anza Community College District with funding support from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Content for eight community-college level courses was provided online for free, in what was termed an "open content initiative."

The term "open educational resources" was first adopted at UNESCO's 2002 Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries.[34]

In 2005 OECD's Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) launched a 20-month study to analyse and map the scale and scope of initiatives regarding "open educational resources" in terms of their purpose, content, and funding.[58] The report "Giving Knowledge for Free: The Emergence of Open Educational Resources",[59] published in May 2007, is the main output of the project, which involved a number of expert meetings in 2006.[60]

In September 2007, the Open Society Institute and the Shuttleworth Foundation convened a meeting in Cape Town to which thirty leading proponents of open education were invited to collaborate on the text of a manifesto. The Cape Town Open Education Declaration was released on 22 January 2008,[61] urging governments and publishers to make publicly funded educational materials available at no charge via the internet.[62][63]

The global movement for OER culminated at the 1st World OER Congress convened in Paris on 20–22 June 2012 by UNESCO, COL and other partners. The resulting Paris OER Declaration (2012) reaffirmed the shared commitment of international organizations, governments, and institutions to promoting the open licensing and free sharing of publicly funded content, the development of national policies and strategies on OER, capacity-building, and open research.[37] In 2018, the 2nd World OER Congress in Ljubljana, Slovenia, was co-organized by UNESCO and the Government of Slovenia. The 500 experts and national delegates from 111 countries adopted the Ljubljana OER Action Plan.[64] It recommends 41 actions to mainstream open-licensed resources to achieve the 2030 Sustainable Development Goal 4 on "quality and lifelong education".[65]

An historical antecedent to consider is the pedagogy of artist Joseph Beuys and the founding of the Free International University for Creativity and Interdisciplinary Research in 1973. After co-creating with his students, in 1967, the German Student Party, Beuys was dismissed from his teaching post in 1972 at the Staatliche Kunstakademie Düsseldorf. The institution did not approve of the fact that he permitted 50 students who had been rejected from admission to study with him. The Free University became increasingly involved in political and radical actions calling for a revitalization and restructuring of educational systems.[66][67]

Advantages and disadvantages

[edit]

Advantages of using OER include:[7]

  • Expanded access to learning – can be accessed anywhere at any time
  • Ability to modify course materials – can be narrowed down to topics that are relevant to course
  • Enhancement of course material – texts, images and videos can be used to support different approaches to learning
  • Rapid dissemination of information – textbooks can be put forward quicker online than publishing a textbook
  • Cost saving for students – all readings are available online, which saves students hundreds of dollars[68]
  • Cost savings for educators - lectures and lessons plans are available online, saving educator time, effort and money, while learning new knowledge[69]
  • Consolidate the foundation for more reproducible and inclusive science[70]
  • Improve the quality of research produced by future generation of researchers[70]
  • Removes barriers to entry and facilitate career progression by offering students to be involved in knowledge generation, enhancing diversity and representation within science.[70]

Challenges of using OER include:[7]

  • Quality/reliability concerns – some online material can be edited by anyone at any time, which may result in irrelevant or inaccurate information
  • Limitation of copyright property protection – OER licenses change "All rights reserved." into "Some rights reserved.",[71] so that content creators must be intentional about what materials they make available
  • Technology issues – some students may have difficulty accessing online resources because of slow internet connection, or may not have access to the software required to use the materials[68]
  • Languages in which OER are distributed – use of English as primary language of delivery may limit its use[7]
  • Awareness within educational institutions[7] – limits use of OER for research, teaching and learning

Licensing and types

[edit]
Turning a Resource into an Open Educational Resource

Open educational resources often involve issues relating to intellectual property rights. Traditional commercial educational materials, such as textbooks, are protected under conventional copyright terms. However, alternative and more flexible licensing options have become available as a result of the work of Creative Commons, a non-profit organization that provides ready-made licensing agreements that are less restrictive than the "all rights reserved" terms of standard international copyright. These new options have become a "critical infrastructure service for the OER movement."[72] Another license, typically used by developers of OER software, is the GNU General Public License from the free and open-source software (FOSS) community. Open licensing allows uses of the materials that would not be easily permitted under copyright alone.[73]

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are free online courses available to anyone who wants to enroll.[74] MOOCs offer a wide range of courses in many different subjects to allow people to learn in an affordable and easy manner.[75]

Types of open educational resources include full courses, course materials, modules, learning objects, open textbooks, openly licensed (often streamed) videos, tests, software, and other tools, materials, or techniques used to support access to knowledge.[7] OER may be freely and openly available static resources, dynamic resources which change over time in the course of having knowledge seekers interacting with and updating them, or a course or module with a combination of these resources.

OER policy

[edit]

OER policies (also sometimes known as laws, regulations, strategies, guidelines, principles or tenets) are adopted by governments, institutions or organisations in support of the creation and use of open content, specifically open educational resources, and related open educational practices.

Research

[edit]

The growing movement of OER has also fostered research activities on OER across the world, becoming "a mission-driven trend within the scientific literature".[76][7] Mishra et al. (2022)[7] found topics of research into OER included "open textbook, open online course, open courseware, open-source software related to open education, and open social learning." The Open Education Group suggests sorting research into four categories, called COUP Framework, based on the focus of research.[77] Members of the Global OER Graduate Network (GO-GN) have enacted research responding to critiques of open education research as "under-theorized" [9] and exploring the role of OER as well as open practices and processes in "embracing and foregrounding diversity, inclusion and equity."[78]

As part of the Open Education Group, Hilton (2016, 2019[79])[80] reviewed studies on OER with the focus on Cost, Outcomes, and Perceptions, finding that most of the studies (e.g. Fischer, Hilton, Robinson, & Wiley, 2015;[81] Lovett, Meyer, & Thille, 2008;[82] Petrides, Jimes, Middleton-Detzner, Walling, & Wiess, 2011[83]) had found that OER improve student learning while significantly reducing the cost of their educational resources (e.g. textbooks). He also found that perceptions of OER by faculty and students are generally positive (e.g. Allen & Seaman, 2014;[84] Bliss, Hilton, Wiley, & Thanos, 2013[85]).

The approaches proposed in the COUP framework have also been used internationally (e.g. Pandra & Santosh, 2017;[86] Afolabi, 2017[87]), although contexts and OER use types vary across countries. The COUP Framework explores:

Cost: the impact of OER adoption on cost reduction
Outcomes: the impact of OER adoption/use on student learning
Usage: the impact of and practices around customization of OER
Perceptions: faculty's and students' perceptions of OER

Studies continue to emerge which investigate the usage of OER which contribute to understanding of how faculty and student use of OER (enabled by the permission given by an open license) contribute to student learning.[77][10] For example, research from the Czech Republic has proved most students said they use OER as often as or more often than classical materials. Wikipedia is the most used resource. Availability, amount of information and easy orientation are the most value benefits of OER usage (Petiška, 2018)[88]

A 2018 Charles University study presents that Wikipedia is the most used OER for students of environmental studies (used by 95% of students) and argues educational institutions should focus their attention on it (e.g. by hosting and supporting a Wikipedian in residence).[89]

To encourage more researchers to join in the field of OER, the Open Education Group has created an "OER Research Fellowship" program, which selects 15–30 doctoral students and early career researchers in North America (US and Canada).[90] To date, more than 50 researchers have joined the program and conducted research on OER.[90] The Open University in UK has run another program aimed at supporting doctoral students researching OER from any country in the world through their GO-GN network (Global OER Graduate Network).[91] GO-GN provides its members with funding and networking opportunities as well as research support. Currently, more than 60 students are listed as its members. At every Institute and Universities level, each and everyone Student and Research scholar should aware of open educational resources and how to Implement the license should be educated and make all them to do hands on session.[clarification needed][92] However, the evidence underlying pedagogical research conducted on OER is found to be of a poor quality and requires a more rigorous design to find how it improves scientific literacy, student engagement and student attitudes towards science.[4]

Open educational practices

[edit]

OER have been used in educational contexts in a variety of ways, and researchers and practitioners have proposed different names for such practices. According to Wiley & Hilton (2018),[19] the two popular terms used are "open pedagogy" and "open educational practices". What these two terms refer to is closely related to each other, often indistinguishable. For example, Weller (2013) defines open pedagogy as follows: "Open pedagogy makes use of this abundant, open content (such as open educational resources, videos, podcasts), but also places an emphasis on the network and the learner's connections within this".[93] Open educational practices are defined as, for example, "a set of activities around instructional design and implementation of events and processes intended to support learning. They also include the creation, use and repurposing of Open Educational Resources (OER) and their adaptation to the contextual setting (the Open Educational Quality Initiative[94]). Wiley & Hilton (2018)[19] proposed a new term called "OER-enabled pedagogy", which is defined as "the set of teaching and learning practices that are only possible or practical in the context of the 5R permissions which are characteristic of OER", emphasizing the 5R permissions enabled by the use of open licenses. Moore has suggested that the Open Education movement, see do not see OER as a Zero sum game, but judge their OERs on eight criteria.[95]

Costs

[edit]

One of the most frequently cited benefits of OER is their potential to reduce costs.[96][97][98][99][100][7] A 2023 study co-authored by the Public Interest Research Group and Michelson 20MM Foundation found that 65% of student respondents skipped out on textbooks or course materials because they were too expensive.[101] While OER seem well placed to bring down total expenditures, they are not cost-free. New OER can be assembled or simply reused or repurposed from existing open resources. This is a primary strength of OER and, as such, can produce major cost savings. OER need not be created from scratch. On the other hand, there are some costs in the assembly and adaptation process. And some OER must be created and produced originally at some time. While OER must be hosted and disseminated, and some require funding, OER development can take different routes, such as creation, adoption, adaptation and curation.[37]

Each of these models provides different cost structure and degree of cost-efficiency. Upfront costs in developing the OER infrastructure can be expensive, such as building the OER infrastructure. Butcher and Hoosen[102] noted that "a key argument put forward by those who have written about the potential benefits of OER relates to its potential for saving cost or, at least, creating significant economic efficiencies. However, to date there has been limited presentation of concrete data to back up this assertion, which reduces the effectiveness of such arguments and opens the OER movement to justified academic criticism."[37]

Institutional support

[edit]

A large part of the early work on open educational resources was funded by universities and foundations such as the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation,[51] which was the main financial supporter of open educational resources in the early years and has spent more than $110 million in the 2002 to 2010 period, of which more than $14 million went to MIT.[33] The Shuttleworth Foundation, which focuses on projects concerning collaborative content creation, has contributed as well. With the British government contributing £5.7m,[103] institutional support has also been provided by the UK funding bodies JISC[104] and HEFCE.[105] The JISC/HEFCE UKOER Programme (Phase 3 from October 2011 – October 2012)[106] was meant to build on sustainable procedure indicated in the first two phases eventually expanding in new directions that connect Open Educational Resources to other fields of work.[107][108][109]

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is taking a leading role in "making countries aware of the potential of OER."[110] The organisation has instigated debate on how to apply OERs in practice and chaired vivid discussions on this matter through its International Institute of Educational Planning (IIEP).[111] Believing that OERs can widen access to quality education, particularly when shared by many countries and higher education institutions, UNESCO also champions OERs as a means of promoting access, equity and quality in the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[112] In 2012 the Paris OER Declaration[113] was approved during the 2012 OER World Congress held at UNESCO's headquarters in Paris.

As of 2022, many institutions of higher education provide a broad range of support for instructors and faculty incorporating open practices, including the adoption, modification and creation of OER.[12][114] Support provided may include financial stipends, course release, instructional design assistance, research expertise and recognition in retention, promotion and tenure. Manowaluilou (2020)[12][115] conducted research on the use of Open Educational Resources (OER) in higher education, particularly focusing on their role in enhancing academic English writing. The study highlights that OER can serve as valuable supplemental resources for students, potentially alleviating the need for professors to dedicate significant time and resources to teaching writing skills. This approach may improve learning efficiency and accessibility within academic environments.[116]

Initiatives

[edit]

SkillsCommons was developed in 2012 under the California State University Chancellor's Office and funded through the $2 billion U.S. Department of Labor's TAACCCT initiative. Led by Assistant Vice Chancellor, Gerard Hanley, and modeled after sister project, MERLOT, SkillsCommons open workforce development content was developed and vetted by 700 community colleges and other TAACCCT institutions across the United States. The SkillsCommons content exceeded two million downloads in September 2019 and at that time was considered to be the world's largest repository of open educational and workforce training materials.

A parallel initiative, OpenStax CNX (formerly Connexions), came out of Rice University starting in 1999. In the beginning, the Connexions project focused on creating an open repository of user-generated content. In contrast to the OCW projects, content licenses are required to be open under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY) license. The hallmark of Connexions is the use of a custom XML format CNXML, designed to aid and enable mixing and reuse of the content.

In 2012, OpenStax was created from the basis of the Connexions project. In contrast to user-generated content libraries, OpenStax hires subject matter experts to create college-level textbooks that are peer-reviewed, openly licensed, and available online for free.[117] Like the content in OpenStax CNX, OpenStax books are available under Creative Commons CC BY licenses that allow users to reuse, remix, and redistribute content as long as they provide attribution. OpenStax's stated mission is to create professional grade textbooks for the highest-enrollment undergraduate college courses that are the same quality as traditional textbooks, but are adaptable and available free to students.[117]

Other initiatives derived from MIT OpenCourseWare are China Open Resources for Education and OpenCourseWare in Japan. The OpenCourseWare Consortium, founded in 2005 to extend the reach and impact of open course materials and foster new open course materials, counted more than 200 member institutions from around the world in 2009.[118]

OER Africa is an initiative established by the South African Institute for Distance Education (Saide) to play a leading role in driving the development and use of OER across all education sectors on the African continent.[119] The OER4Schools project focusses on the use of Open Educational Resources in teacher education in sub-Saharan Africa.

Wikiwijs (the Netherlands) was a program intended to promote the use of open educational resources (OER) in the Dutch education sector;[120]

The Open Educational Resources Programme (phases one[121] and two[122]) (United Kingdom) was funded by HEFCE, the UK Higher Education Academy and Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC), which has supported pilot projects and activities around the open release of learning resources, for free use and repurposing worldwide.

In 2003, the ownership of Wikipedia and Wiktionary projects was transferred to the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit charitable organization whose goal is to collect and develop free educational content and to disseminate it effectively and globally. Wikipedia ranks in the top-ten most visited websites worldwide since 2007.

OER Commons was spearheaded in 2007 by the Institute for the Study of Knowledge Management in Education (ISKME), a nonprofit education research institute dedicated to innovation in open education content and practices, as a way to aggregate, share, and promote open educational resources to educators, administrators, parents, and students. OER Commons also provides educators tools to align OER to the Common Core State Standards; to evaluate the quality of OER to OER Rubrics; and to contribute and share OERs with other teachers and learners worldwide. To further promote the sharing of these resources among educators, in 2008 ISKME launched the OER Commons Teacher Training Initiative, which focuses on advancing open educational practices and on building opportunities for systemic change in teaching and learning.

One of the first OER resources for K-12 education is Curriki. A nonprofit organization, Curriki provides an Internet site for open-source curriculum (OSC) development, to provide universal access to free curricula and instructional materials for students up to the age of 18 (K-12). By applying the open source process to education, Curriki empowers educational professionals to become an active community in the creation of good curricula. Kim Jones serves as Curriki's Executive Director.[123]

In August 2006 WikiEducator was launched to provide a venue for planning education projects built on OER, creating and promoting open education resources (OERs), and networking towards funding proposals.[124] Its Wikieducator's Learning4Content project builds skills in the use of MediaWiki and related free software technologies for mass collaboration in the authoring of free content and claims to be the world's largest wiki training project for education. By 30 June 2009 the project facilitated 86 workshops training 3,001 educators from 113 countries.[125]

Between 2006 and 2007, as a Transversal Action under the European eLearning Programme, the Open e-Learning Content Observatory Services (OLCOS) project carries out a set of activities that aim at fostering the creation, sharing and re-use of Open Educational Resources (OER) in Europe and beyond. The main result of OLCOS was a Roadmap,[126] in order to provide decision makers with an overview of current and likely future developments in OER and recommendations on how various challenges in OER could be addressed.[127]

Peer production has also been utilized in producing collaborative open education resources (OERs). Writing Commons, an international open textbook spearheaded by Joe Moxley at the University of South Florida, has evolved from a print textbook into a crowd-sourced resource for college writers around the world.[128] Massive open online course (MOOC) platforms have also generated interest in building online eBooks. The Cultivating Change Community (CCMOOC) at the University of Minnesota is one such project founded entirely on a grassroots model to generate content.[129] In 10 weeks, 150 authors contributed more than 50 chapters to the CCMOOC eBook and companion site.[130]

In 2011–12, academicians from the University of Mumbai, India, created an OER Portal with free resources on Micro Economics, Macro Economics, and Soft Skills – available for global learners.[131]

Another project is the Free Education Initiative from the Saylor Foundation, which is currently more than 80% of the way towards its initial goal of providing 241 college-level courses across 13 subject areas.[132] The Saylor Foundation makes use of university and college faculty members and subject experts to assist in this process, as well as to provide peer review of each course to ensure its quality. The foundation also supports the creation of new openly licensed materials where they are not already available as well as through its Open Textbook Challenge.[133]

In 2010 the University of Birmingham and the London School of Economics worked together on the HEA and JISC funded DELILA project, the main aim of the project was to release a small sample of open educational resources to support embedding digital and information literacy education into institutional teacher training courses accredited by the HEA including PGCerts and other CPD courses.[134] One of the main barriers that the project found to sharing resources in information literacy was copyright that belonged to commercial database providers[135]

In 2006, the African Virtual University (AVU) released 73 modules of its Teacher Education Programs as open education resources to make the courses freely available for all. In 2010, the AVU developed the OER Repository which has contributed to increase the number of Africans that use, contextualize, share and disseminate the existing as well as future academic content. The online portal serves as a platform where the 219 modules of Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, ICT in education, and teacher education professional courses are published. The modules are available in three different languages – English, French, and Portuguese – making the AVU the leading African institution in providing and using open education resources[136]

In August 2013, Tidewater Community College become the first college in the U.S. to create an Associate of Science degree based entirely on openly licensed content – the "Z-Degree". The combined efforts of a 13-member faculty team, college staff and administration culminated when students enrolled in the first "z-courses" which are based solely on OER. The goals of this initiative were twofold: 1) to improve student success, and 2) to increase instructor effectiveness. Courses were stripped down to the Learning Outcomes and rebuilt using openly licensed content, reviewed and selected by the faculty developer based on its ability to facilitate student achievement of the objectives. The 21 z-courses that make up an associate of science degree in business administration were launched simultaneously across four campus locations. TCC is the 11th largest public two-year college in the nation, enrolling nearly 47,000 students annually.[137]

During this same period from 2013 to 2014, Northern Virginia Community College (NOVA) also created two zero-cost OER degree pathways: one an associate degree in General Studies, the other an associate degree in Social Science. One of the largest community colleges in the nation, NOVA serves around 75,000 students across six campuses. NOVA Online (formerly known as the Extended Learning Institute or ELI) is the centralized online learning hub for NOVA, and it was through ELI that NOVA launched their OER-Based General Education Project. Dr. Wm. Preston Davis, Director of Instructional Services at NOVA Online, led the ELI team of faculty, instructional designers and librarians on the project to create what NOVA calls "digital open" courses. During the planning phase, the team was careful to select core, high-enrollment courses that could impact as many students as possible, regardless of specific course of study. At the same time, the team looked beyond individual courses to create depth and quality around full pathways for students to earn an entire degree. From Fall 2013 to Fall 2016, more than 15,000 students had enrolled in NOVA OER courses yielding textbook cost savings of over 2 million dollars over the three-year period.[138] Currently, NOVA is working to add a third OER degree pathway in Liberal Arts.

Nordic OER is a Nordic network to promote open education and collaboration amongst stakeholders in all educational sectors. The network has members from all Nordic countries and facilitates discourse and dialogue on open education but also participates in projects and development programs. The network is supported by the Nordic OER project co-funded by Nordplus.

In Norway the Norwegian Digital Learning Arena (NDLA) is a joint county enterprise offering open digital learning resources for upper secondary education. In addition to being a compilation of open educational resources, NDLA provides a range of other online tools for sharing and cooperation. At project startup in 2006, increased volume and diversity were seen as significant conditions for the introduction of free learning material in upper secondary education.[139] The incentive was an amendment imposing the counties to provide free educational material, in print as well as digital, including digital hardware.[140]

In Sweden there is a growing interest in open publication and the sharing of educational resources but the pace of development is still slow. There are many questions to be dealt with in this area; for universities, academic management and teaching staff. Teachers in all educational sectors require support and guidance to be able to use OER pedagogically and with quality in focus. To realize the full potential of OER for students' learning it is not enough to make patchwork use of OER – resources have to be put into context. Valuable teacher time should be used for contextual work and not simply for the creation of content. The aim of the project OER for learning OERSweden is to stimulate an open discussion about collaboration in infrastructural questions regarding open online knowledge sharing. A network of ten universities led by Karlstad University will arrange a series of open webinars during the project period focusing on the use and production of open educational resources. A virtual platform for Swedish OER initiatives and resources will also be developed. The project intends to focus in particular on how OER affects teacher trainers and decision makers. The objectives of the project are: To increase the level of national collaboration between universities and educational organisations in the use and production of OER, To find effective online methods to support teachers and students, in terms of quality, technology and retrievability of OER, To raise awareness for the potential of webinars as a tool for open online learning, To increase the level of collaboration between universities' support functions and foster national resource sharing, with a base in modern library and educational technology units, and To contribute to the creation of a national university structure for tagging, distribution and storage of OER.

Founded in 2007, the CK-12 Foundation is a California-based non-profit organization whose stated mission is to reduce the cost of, and increase access to, K-12 education in the United States and worldwide.[141] CK-12 provides free and fully customizable K-12 open educational resources aligned to state curriculum standards and tailored to meet student and teacher needs. The foundation's tools are used by 38,000 schools in the US, and additional international schools.[141]

LATIn Project[142] brings a Collaborative Open Textbook Initiative for Higher Education tailored specifically for Latin America. This initiative encourages and supports local professors and authors to contribute with individual sections or chapters that could be assembled into customized books by the whole community. The created books are freely available to the students in an electronic format or could be legally printed at low cost because there is no license or fees to be paid for their distribution, since they are all released as OER with a Creative Commons CC BY-SA license. This solution also contributes to the creation of customized textbooks where each professor could select the sections appropriate for their courses or could freely adapt existing sections to their needs. Also, the local professors will be the sink and source of the knowledge, contextualized to the Latin American Higher Education system.

In 2014, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation started funding the establishment of an OER World Map that documents OER initiatives around the world. Since 2015, the hbz and graphthinking GmbH develop the service with funding by the Hewlett Foundation. The first version of the website was launched in March 2015[143] and the website had been continuously developing. The OER World Map invited people to enter a personal profile as well to add their organization, OER project or service to the database. The service was shut down in April 2022.[144]

In March 2015, Eliademy.com launched the crowdsourcing of OER courses under CC licence. The platform expects to collect 5000 courses during the first year that can be reused by teachers worldwide.[145]

In 2015, the University of Idaho Doceo Center launched open course content for K-12 schools, with the purpose of improving awareness of OER among K-12 educators.[146] This was shortly followed by an Open Textbook Crash Course,[147] which provides K-12 educators with basic knowledge about copyright, open licensing, and attribution. Results of these projects have been used to inform research into how to support K-12 educator OER adoption literacies and the diffusion of open practices.[148]

In 2015, the MGH Institute of Health Professions, with help from an Institute of Museum and Library Services Grant (#SP-02-14-0), launched the Open Access Course Reserves (OACR). With the idea that many college level courses rely on more than a single textbook to deliver information to students, the OACR is inspired by library courses reserves in that it supplies entire reading lists for typical courses. Faculty can find, create, and share reading lists of open access materials.

Today, OER initiatives across the United States rely on individual college and university librarians to curate resources into lists on library content management systems called LibGuides.

In response to COVID-19, the Principal Institute has partnered with Fieth Consulting, LLC, California State University's SkillsCommons and MERLOT to create a free online resource hub designed to help Administrators, Teachers, Students, and Families more effectively support teaching and learning online.[149]

Several universities of higher education, initiated OER : notable OER sites are Open Michigan, BCcampus Open Textbook collection, RMIT, Open access at Oxford University Press,[150] Maryland Open Source Textbook (M.O.S.T.),[151] OpenEd@UCL, OER initiative by the University of Edinburgh, etc. There were several initiatives taken by faculties of higher education, such as Affordability Counts by faculties across Florida state universities and colleges and Affordable Learning Georgia which is across public Georgian institutions. The North Dakota University System was appropriated funding from the North Dakota state legislature to train instructors to adopt OER[152] and has a repository of OER.[153]

There were several initiatives taken by faculties of higher education, such as Affordability Counts by faculties across Florida state universities and colleges[154] and also by individual faculties offering free textbooks affordable by initiating Green tea press.

Oregon Open Educational Resources offers a wide variety of open textbooks and resources that community college and university instructors are using to reduce textbook costs in their courses.[155]

International programs

[edit]

High hopes have been voiced for OERs to alleviate the digital divide between the global North and the global South, and to make a contribution to the development of less advanced economies.[156]

  • Europe – Learning Resource Exchange for schools (LRE) is a service launched by European Schoolnet in 2004 enabling educators to find multilingual open educational resources from many different countries and providers. Currently, more than 200,000 learning resources are searchable in one portal based on language, subject, resource type and age range.
  • India – National Council Of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) digitized all its textbooks from 1st standard to 12th standard. The textbooks are available online for free. Central Institute of Educational Technology (CIET), a constituent Unit of NCERT, digitized more than thousand audio and video programmes. All the educational AV material developed by CIET is presently available at Sakshat Portal an initiative of Ministry of Human Resources and Development. In addition, National Repository for Open Educational Resources (NROER) houses a variety of e-content.
  • US – Washington State's Open Course Library Project is a collection of expertly developed educational materials – including textbooks, syllabi, course activities, readings, and assessments – for 81 high-enrolling college courses. All course have now been released and are providing faculty with a high-quality option that will cost students no more than $30 per course. However, a study found that very few classes were actually using these materials.[157]
  • Japan – Since its launch in 2005, Japan OpenCourseWare Consortium (JOCW) has been actively promoting OER movement in Japan with more than 20 institutional members.[158]
  • Dominica – The Free Curricula Centre at New World University expands the utility of existing OER textbooks by creating and curating supplemental videos to accompany them, and by converting them to the EPUB format for better display on smartphones and tablets.[159]
  • Bangladesh is the first country to digitize a complete set of textbooks for grades 1–12.[160] Distribution is free to all.
  • Uruguay sought up to 1,000 digital learning resources in a Request For Proposals (RFP) in June 2011.[161]
  • In 2011, South Korea announced a plan to digitize all of its textbooks and to provide all students with computers and digitized textbooks by 2015.[162]
  • The California Learning Resources Network Free Digital Textbook Initiative at high school level,[163] initiated by former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
  • The Michigan Department of Education provided $600,000 to create the Michigan Open Book Project in 2014. The initial selection of OER textbooks in history, economics, geography and social studies was issued in August 2015. There has been significant negative reaction[164] to the materials' inaccuracies, design flaws and confusing distribution.
  • The Shuttleworth Foundation's Free High School Science Texts for South Africa[165]
  • Saudi Arabia had a comprehensive project in 2008 to digitize and improve the Math and Science text books in all K-12 grades.[166]
  • Saudi Arabia started a project in 2011 to digitize all text books other than Math and Science.[citation needed]
  • The Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO) and the U.S. State Department launched an Open Book Project in 2013, supporting "the creation of Arabic-language open educational resources (OERs)".[167]

With the advent of growing international awareness and implementation of open educational resources, a global OER logo was adopted for use in multiple languages by UNESCO. The design of the Global OER logo creates a common global visual idea, representing "subtle and explicit representations of the subjects and goals of OER". Its full explanation and recommendation of use is available from UNESCO.[168]

Major academic conferences

[edit]
  • Open Education Conference – [169] held annually in North America (US and Canada)
  • OER Conference – [170] held annually in Europe
  • OE Global Conference – [171] run by Open Education Global and held annually in a variety of locations across the world
  • Creative Commons Global Summit – [172] Creative Commons hosts its global summit annually and one of the main topics is Open Education and OER.

OER competence development, OER training and OER certification

[edit]

There are various approaches and efforts focused on developing OER competencies. One notable framework is Organisation internationale de la Francophonie's OER Competency Framework, which outlines essential skills and knowledge for effective OER use.[173] Researchers funded by Austria's Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research and the 2020-2024 Open Education Austria Advanced project found that of 2021, few higher education institutions had comprehensive certificates for OER training, though many institutions offered singular workshops or incentives for OER development.[174] In 2022, Austria launched a certification process for OER adoption and expansion. The certification requires Austrian higher education to show and verify their activities and competencies for OER training, policy, classroom use, and sustainability at their institution.[175]

Critical discourse about OER as a movement

[edit]

External discourse

[edit]

The OER movement has been accused of insularity and failure to connect globally: "OERs will not be able to help countries reach their educational goals unless awareness of their power and potential can rapidly be expanded beyond the communities of interest that they have already attracted."[176]

More fundamentally, doubts were cast on the altruistic motives typically claimed by OERs. The project itself was accused of imperialism because the economic, political, and cultural preferences of highly developed countries determine the creation and dissemination of knowledge that can be used by less-developed countries and may be a self-serving imposition.[177]

To counter the general dominance of OER from the developed countries, the Research on Open Educational Resources for Development (ROER4D) research project, aims to study how OER can be produced in the global south (developing countries) which can meet the local needs of the institutions and people.[178] It seeks to understand in what ways, and under what circumstances can the adoption of OER address the increasing demand for accessible, relevant, high-quality and affordable post-secondary education in the Global South.

One of the sub-projects of Research on OER for development project aimed to work with teachers from government schools in Karnataka, to collaboratively create OER, including in the Kannada language spoken in the state.[179] The aim was to create a model where teachers in public education systems (who number hundreds of thousands in most countries) can collaborate to create and publish OER.

Internal discourse

[edit]

Within the open educational resources movement, the concept of OER is active.[180] Consider, for example, the conceptions of gratis versus libre knowledge as found in the discourse about massive open online courses, which may offer free courses but charge for end-of-course awards or course verification certificates from commercial entities.[181][182] A second example of essentially contested ideas in OER can be found in the usage of different OER logos which can be interpreted as indicating more or less allegiance to the notion of OER as a global movement.

Stephen Downes has argued that, from a connectivist perspective, the production of OER is ironic because "in the final analysis, we cannot produce knowledge for people. Period. The people who are benefiting from these open education resource initiatives are the people who are producing these resources."[183]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Open educational resources (OER) are teaching, learning, and research materials in any medium that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license permitting free access, use, adaptation, and redistribution.[1] These resources encompass textbooks, courses, modules, videos, software, and other tools designed to support education without financial barriers imposed by traditional copyright restrictions.[1] The concept emerged in the late 1990s, with the term formalized at a 2002 UNESCO forum, building on earlier initiatives like MIT's OpenCourseWare launched in 2001 to freely share course materials online.[2][3] OER adoption has demonstrated empirical benefits, including reduced student costs and improved academic outcomes, as multiple studies indicate comparable or superior learning results compared to proprietary materials, with lower rates of failure and withdrawal in OER-using courses.[4][5] For instance, meta-analyses reveal small but positive effects on achievement (Hedges' g = 0.07), particularly with OER textbooks, alongside enhanced persistence and equity in access for underserved students.[4] Key drivers include open licensing frameworks like Creative Commons, which facilitate modification and reuse, fostering collaborative improvement over time.[6] Despite these gains, OER faces challenges such as inconsistent quality, limited discoverability, and insufficient institutional support for creation or adaptation, which hinder widespread efficacy.[7][8] Ethical concerns also arise, including potential non-compliance with openness principles and risks of commercialization undermining the public-good intent.[9] While academic sources promoting OER often reflect institutional incentives toward cost-saving and access narratives, rigorous empirical reviews confirm causal links to better retention without evidence of systemic bias inflating outcomes in controlled studies.[10] Overall, OER represents a structural shift toward democratized knowledge dissemination, though realizing its full potential requires addressing production barriers and verifying long-term scalability through ongoing research.[11]

Definition and Core Concepts

Definition and Scope

Open educational resources (OER) are defined by UNESCO as teaching, learning, and research materials in any medium—digital or otherwise—that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license permitting no-cost access, use, adaptation, and redistribution by others.[1] This definition, formalized in the 2019 UNESCO Recommendation on Open Educational Resources adopted on November 25, 2019, by the UNESCO General Conference, emphasizes the role of open licensing in enabling these permissions to maximize educational impact.[12] The framework aims to support quality education as outlined in Sustainable Development Goal 4, focusing on equitable access without financial, legal, or technical barriers.[12] The scope of OER encompasses a wide array of materials designed to facilitate teaching, learning, and research, including but not limited to full courses, course materials, modules, textbooks, streaming videos, multimedia applications, podcasts, and faculty-created content.[13] These resources can exist in various formats such as text, audio, video, interactive simulations, and software tools, provided they meet the open licensing criteria that allow users to retain, reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute them—the so-called "5Rs" framework commonly associated with OER principles.[14] OER are distinguished by their intentional design for openness, excluding materials that are merely free but restricted in modification or sharing, such as those under all-rights-reserved copyrights.[14] In practice, the scope extends to any educational asset that supports knowledge dissemination and pedagogy innovation, applicable across primary, secondary, higher education, and lifelong learning contexts.[15] This includes supplemental units, lessons, assessments, and data sets, as long as they are openly licensed to permit adaptation for local needs, such as translation or cultural contextualization.[15] The emphasis on adaptability addresses diverse learner requirements, though empirical validation of specific implementations remains essential to assess causal impacts on outcomes.[16]

Distinctions from Proprietary and Other Open Materials

Open educational resources (OER) are distinguished from proprietary educational materials by their licensing framework, which permits broad permissions beyond mere access. Proprietary resources, such as commercial textbooks from publishers like Pearson or McGraw-Hill, operate under "all rights reserved" copyrights that typically require payment for use, limit access to licensed purchasers or subscribers, and prohibit reproduction, adaptation, or redistribution without explicit contractual permission.[17] In contrast, OER are released under open licenses—most commonly Creative Commons (CC) variants—that enable the "5Rs" framework: users can retain copies indefinitely, reuse for any purpose, revise or adapt content, remix with other materials, and redistribute derivatives, often with attribution as the sole requirement.[18] This structure reduces financial barriers and fosters customization for specific pedagogical needs, as evidenced by initiatives like the OpenStax project, which has provided over 50 peer-reviewed textbooks adopted by millions of students since 2012 without licensing fees. Proprietary materials often prioritize revenue models, leading to frequent updates driven by market demands rather than user feedback, whereas OER development emphasizes community-driven revisions, with platforms like MERLOT hosting over 50,000 resources vetted by educators for adaptability since 1997. Empirical analyses indicate that proprietary dominance persists in higher education, with U.S. students spending an average of $1,240 annually on textbooks as of 2023, while OER adoption correlates with cost savings of up to 80% per course without compromising quality when properly implemented. However, proprietary resources may offer structured support like publisher-provided instructor tools, which OER communities replicate through voluntary contributions but not always at the same scale. OER also differ from other openly available materials, such as free digital resources or open access (OA) publications, in their explicit emphasis on editability and educational applicability. Free digital content, like Khan Academy videos, may be accessible at no cost but remains under restrictive terms that preclude legal modification or integration into new curricula, treating them as view-only assets.[17] OA materials, defined by initiatives like the Budapest Open Access Initiative of 2002, focus on removing paywalls for scholarly articles to enable reading and downloading but retain copyrights that limit remixing or derivative works unless an open license is applied. OER, per UNESCO's 2012 recommendation, specifically target teaching, learning, and research tools—encompassing textbooks, syllabi, simulations, and assessments—that reside in the public domain or under licenses ensuring "no-cost access, use, adaptation, and redistribution by others," distinguishing them from broader open content like Creative Commons-licensed images or software not tailored for pedagogy.[18]
AspectOERProprietary MaterialsOther Free/Open Materials (e.g., OA or Free Digital)
CostFreePaid (purchase/subscription)Free
LicenseOpen (e.g., CC BY-SA)Restrictive copyrightVaries (often non-commercial, no derivatives)
PermissionsRetain, reuse, revise, remix, redistributePersonal use only, no adaptationAccess and download; limited/no modification
CustomizationHigh (editable for local contexts)Low (fixed content)Varies (often view-only)
This table illustrates core differences, with OER's permissive terms enabling iterative improvements, as seen in the adaptation of MIT OpenCourseWare materials into localized versions across 20+ languages since 2001.[19] While some critiques note potential quality variability in OER due to decentralized creation, peer-reviewed studies affirm that open licensing does not inherently reduce rigor when vetted through platforms like those endorsed by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

Historical Development

Origins in the Early 2000s

The concept of open educational resources (OER) emerged in the early 2000s, drawing inspiration from the open source software movement and the broader push for open access to knowledge amid rising internet accessibility.[20] Early efforts focused on making high-quality educational materials freely available online without traditional copyright restrictions, aiming to democratize learning beyond institutional barriers. This period marked a shift from proprietary educational content, with pioneers emphasizing reusable, adaptable formats under permissive licenses.[21] A pivotal development occurred in 2001 when the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) faculty approved the creation of MIT OpenCourseWare (OCW), an initiative to publish syllabi, lecture notes, assignments, and other course materials from nearly all MIT courses online for free public access.[22] The project, initially funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and MIT itself, launched a proof-of-concept pilot site on September 30, 2002, featuring materials from 32 courses.[22] By 2003, the full OCW website debuted with content from over 500 courses, establishing a model for institutional commitment to open sharing that influenced subsequent OER projects worldwide.[19] The term "open educational resources" was formally coined in 2002 during UNESCO's Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries, held in Paris, where participants defined OER as educational materials in digital or non-digital form available for free use, adaptation, and distribution under open licenses.[1] This UNESCO endorsement highlighted OER's potential to address educational inequities in resource-limited regions, building on early experiments like Rice University's Connexions platform, which began developing modular, openly licensed content in 1999 but gained traction in the early 2000s.[21] Concurrently, the launch of Creative Commons licenses in December 2002 provided a legal framework for OER by enabling creators to retain copyright while granting permissions for reuse, further accelerating the movement's growth.[21] These foundational steps laid the groundwork for OER as a distinct field, prioritizing empirical accessibility over commercial models.

Expansion and Institutionalization in the 2010s

During the 2010s, open educational resources experienced rapid expansion, driven by the proliferation of massive open online courses (MOOCs) and supportive international declarations. The launch of platforms such as Coursera in April 2012 and edX in May 2012 facilitated widespread dissemination of OER-integrated content, attracting millions of learners globally and encouraging institutions to release course materials under open licenses.[23] By 2018, these efforts had resulted in over 11,400 MOOCs offered by more than 900 universities, amplifying the visibility and reuse of OER.[23] This growth was complemented by the UNESCO World OER Congress in Paris in June 2012, where the Paris OER Declaration was adopted, urging member states to promote OER accessibility, encourage open licensing of publicly funded educational materials, and conduct research on their impact to inform public investments.[24] [25] Institutionalization accelerated through targeted funding and policy frameworks. Philanthropic organizations, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, allocated significant grants to OER-related projects; for instance, in 2010, the foundation announced up to $20 million for the Next Generation Learning Challenges, requiring grant-funded materials to use Creative Commons BY licensing to enable adaptation and reuse.[26] Several nations, such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, [South Korea](/page/South Korea), and Turkey, formulated national strategies between 2010 and 2020 to integrate OER into higher education, often linking them with MOOC development to enhance scalability and reduce reliance on proprietary textbooks.[27] In the U.S., states like California responded to budget pressures by initiating programs such as the Free Digital Textbook Initiative around 2010, aiming to cut costs by nearly $19 billion through OER adoption in high-enrollment courses.[28] Universities increasingly embedded OER into operations via dedicated policies, repositories, and faculty support. Higher education institutions developed guidelines for OER storage, access, and adaptation, as recommended in UNESCO's 2011 framework, leading to the establishment of institutional repositories and incentives for faculty to create and adopt open materials.[29] By the late 2010s, U.S. states had enacted OER policies in at least 28 jurisdictions, including mandates for course markings and committees to oversee implementation, reflecting a shift toward systemic integration.[30] Awareness among faculty rose notably, reaching 46% by 2019—up from 34% three years prior—correlating with higher adoption rates in community colleges and research universities focused on cost savings and equity.[31] Empirical indicators underscored this institutional momentum, with OER quantity expanding globally as repositories like those tracked by UNESCO reported increased deposits and usage.[32] However, challenges persisted, including uneven policy enforcement and the need for sustained funding, as national strategies often prioritized short-term MOOC pilots over long-term OER infrastructure.[27] These developments positioned OER as a core component of educational reform by decade's end, transitioning from niche experiments to institutionalized practices in select regions.[32]

Recent Advances and Challenges Since 2020

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a surge in OER awareness and experimentation, particularly through emergency remote teaching, where institutions rapidly adapted freely available materials to maintain continuity in online instruction. A 2023 study analyzing OER use during this period found that educators frequently incorporated platforms like Khan Academy and MIT OpenCourseWare to supplement disrupted curricula, with adoption rates increasing due to immediate accessibility needs, though sustained integration varied by institutional support. Post-pandemic, faculty familiarity with OER rose to 64% in higher education by 2023, up 7% from the prior year, driven by cost-saving initiatives that saved students substantial amounts, such as nearly $500,000 at the University of Northern Colorado alone in the 2023-24 academic year.[33][34][35] Advancements since 2020 include expanded OER repositories and policy frameworks, such as UNESCO's ongoing implementation of its 2019 OER Recommendation, which emphasized global collaboration and quality assurance through initiatives like the 2022 Dubai Declaration on OER. In K-12 education, teacher awareness of OER and Creative Commons licensing climbed to 28% by 2023-24, reflecting targeted professional development efforts to foster reusable content creation. Emerging integrations, such as student-generated OER for science education, have shown promise in enhancing engagement, with studies from 2024 highlighting their role in inspiring self-directed learning without proprietary barriers.[12][36][37] Despite these gains, challenges persist in OER quality, sustainability, and equitable adoption. Faculty report intrinsic barriers like time constraints for adaptation, legal uncertainties in licensing, and institutional resistance, with a 2024 review identifying these as primary obstacles to broader uptake. Content reliability remains an issue, as OER can suffer from inaccuracies or incompleteness akin to unvetted online resources, necessitating rigorous curation that many creators lack resources for.[38][39][40] Sustainability poses a core challenge, with OER providers grappling for funding to update materials post-initial release, as reliance on grants or volunteers often leads to outdated content. Student-facing hurdles include digital divides, such as inconsistent internet access and content relevance across cultures, exacerbated in developing regions. Research gaps in long-term impact, highlighted in a 2024 review of OER studies, underscore needs for better metrics on international cooperation and scalability beyond pilot programs.[41][42][43]

Key Open Licenses and Permissions

Open licenses for educational resources extend permissions beyond those provided by traditional copyright or fair use doctrines, enabling users to retain, reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute materials—the so-called 5R framework defined by educational technology scholar David Wiley in 2014. These permissions facilitate adaptation to specific pedagogical needs, distinguishing OER from merely free or openly accessible content.[44] Creative Commons (CC) licenses, developed by the nonprofit Creative Commons organization since 2001, dominate OER licensing, with over 2 billion works licensed globally by 2023.[45] The suite includes six core licenses (versions 1.0 to 4.0, with 4.0 released on October 29, 2013, offering improved international compatibility and machine-readability) and the CC0 public domain dedication tool. CC licenses build on copyright by requiring attribution while waiving certain restrictions, but vary in allowances for commercial use (NC), derivatives (ND), and share-alike (SA) conditions. For maximal openness in OER, CC BY 4.0 is recommended, permitting all 5R activities provided the original creator receives attribution; it has no commercial, derivative, or share-alike restrictions.[46] CC BY-SA 4.0 adds a share-alike requirement, mandating that adaptations use the same or compatible license, which supports remixing but can complicate aggregation with non-SA materials. Licenses with ND clauses, such as CC BY-ND, prohibit revisions or remixes, limiting their utility for adaptive educational reuse despite allowing redistribution. NC variants, like CC BY-NC-SA, restrict commercial applications, which may hinder institutional adoption or scalability, as evidenced by surveys showing preference for non-NC licenses in higher education OER repositories. Other licenses occasionally used in OER include the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), originally designed for software documentation and permitting derivatives with section invariance, though its complexity has led to declining use in favor of CC since the Wikimedia Foundation's partial migration in 2009. Public domain works, dedications via CC0 (waiving all copyright where possible), or expired copyrights provide unrestricted permissions but lack the structured attribution norms of CC licenses. UNESCO's 2019 Recommendation on OER endorses CC BY or equivalent maximally permissive licenses to promote global interoperability and reuse.[47] Empirical analyses of OER platforms, such as those hosted on OER Commons, confirm that CC-licensed materials constitute over 90% of content, underscoring their practical dominance.[48]

Types and Formats of OER Materials

Open educational resources (OER) materials span diverse types designed to support teaching, learning, and research, including full courses, textbooks, modules, and supplemental aids, which permit free use, adaptation, and redistribution under open licenses.[49][15] These resources are typically produced in digital formats to enhance accessibility and remixability, though some can be adapted for print, encompassing text-based documents, multimedia files, and interactive tools.[50][51] Common types include open textbooks, which are complete digital or printable books covering specific subjects, often structured like traditional textbooks but with embedded open licenses for modification; examples encompass peer-reviewed texts in disciplines such as biology and economics available through platforms like OpenStax.[52][53] Full courses or courseware, such as those offered via open courseware initiatives, provide structured sequences of lectures, readings, and assessments, enabling self-paced learning or institutional adoption without cost barriers.[53][54] Supplemental and modular materials form another core category, comprising lesson plans, syllabi, quizzes, assignments, lab experiments, and simulations that instructors can integrate into existing curricula; these are often granular, allowing targeted reuse for specific learning objectives.[55][56] Multimedia resources, including streaming videos, audio lectures, animations, and images, deliver content in engaging, non-text formats suitable for diverse learners, with examples like educational videos and interactive case studies facilitating visual and auditory comprehension.[53][51] Interactive and software-based OER extend to tools like open-source educational software, online tutorials, and digital learning objects—self-contained units such as simulations or games—that support hands-on practice and problem-solving, often requiring computational environments for full functionality.[57][58] Open access journals and ancillary media, such as datasets or infographics, further augment these types by providing primary research outputs or visual aids freely available for educational integration.[53] While digital prevalence dominates due to ease of distribution—predominantly in formats like PDF, HTML, MP4 video, and executable code—hybrid adaptations for offline use persist in resource-constrained settings.[59][60]

Empirical Evidence on Effectiveness

Studies on Learning Outcomes and Performance

A 2019 meta-analysis of 22 studies by Clinton and Khan found no significant difference in student learning performance, as measured by grades and exam scores, between courses using open textbooks and those using traditional commercial textbooks, though withdrawal rates were lower in OER sections (effect size d = -0.15 for withdrawals).[61] Similarly, Hilton's 2019 review of 16 studies concluded that students achieved equivalent or slightly better learning outcomes with OER compared to proprietary materials, based on data from over 46,000 students across nine efficacy investigations.[62] More recent meta-analyses present nuanced results. A 2023 synthesis of 25 studies involving 119,840 participants reported a negligible overall effect of OER and open educational practices (OEP) on learning achievement (Hedges' g = 0.07), with variations by subject (e.g., higher in history, g = 1.14), educational level (stronger in professional development, g = 2.26), and region (larger in Asia, g = 1.01).[63] In contrast, a 2024 meta-analysis of 26 studies indicated small positive effects on course grades (d = 0.17) and completion rates, particularly for earning at least a C grade (d = 0.29, k=12 studies) or D grade (d = 0.61, k=6).[10] These findings suggest OER maintains parity with traditional resources in core performance metrics while occasionally boosting persistence. Individual empirical studies reinforce the pattern of equivalence or modest gains. For instance, a 2022 multilevel analysis across multiple courses found traditionally aged students (under 25) earned higher grades with OER (positive association), but no reliable grade improvements for older students, with effects varying by course modality like online vs. face-to-face.[64] A 2021 community college study controlling for confounders observed slower grade declines in OER sections during high-difficulty courses compared to traditional textbook sections, attributing this to reduced financial barriers rather than inherent pedagogical superiority.[65] However, some controlled comparisons, such as those replacing traditional texts entirely, report no differences in final grades or engagement metrics.[66] Overall, the evidence indicates OER does not systematically underperform traditional materials in learning outcomes, with small advantages in retention metrics potentially linked to cost savings enabling greater access, though causal attribution remains challenging due to self-selection in adoptions and limited randomized designs.[67] Research gaps persist in long-term performance impacts and interactions with instructor adaptation quality.[63]

Impacts on Engagement, Retention, and Equity

Studies indicate that open educational resources (OER) can enhance student engagement by allowing greater flexibility in accessing materials and enabling active learning practices, such as student-led adaptation of content.[68] For instance, in a multi-institution analysis involving faculty and students, OER adoption correlated with reported increases in student interaction with course materials and shifts toward more interactive pedagogies, though causal links remain debated due to confounding factors like instructor enthusiasm.[68] However, empirical evidence is mixed; some controlled comparisons found no statistically significant differences in engagement metrics, such as time on task or participation rates, between OER and traditional textbook users.[69] On retention, OER implementation has been associated with reduced withdrawal rates and higher course completion in several large-scale studies. A analysis of over 21,000 students across multiple courses showed OER sections experiencing lower dropout rates and improved pass rates compared to non-OER counterparts, attributing this partly to eliminated financial barriers that might otherwise deter persistence.[70] Similarly, institutional data from zero-textbook-cost initiatives reported retention gains of up to 5-10% in OER-adopting courses, with effects most pronounced in high-enrollment introductory classes.[71] Critiques note that these outcomes may stem from selection biases, where motivated instructors select OER, rather than the resources themselves driving retention.[72] Regarding equity, OER promotes access for underserved populations by removing textbook costs, which disproportionately burden low-income and first-generation students. Research from community colleges demonstrated that OER use narrowed achievement gaps, with underrepresented minority students in OER courses showing 7-15% higher completion rates than in commercial textbook sections, potentially due to increased material affordability and availability.[73] A 2023 study of 21,822 students confirmed reduced DFW (D, F, withdrawal) rates across demographics, supporting OER as an equity tool, though long-term persistence beyond single courses requires further validation.[70] Nonetheless, equity benefits are not universal; without targeted adaptation, OER may perpetuate existing content biases, failing to fully address cultural or linguistic barriers for marginalized groups.[74]

Methodological Critiques and Research Gaps

Many empirical studies on open educational resources (OER) effectiveness rely on quasi-experimental designs rather than randomized controlled trials, owing to practical and ethical barriers in assigning students to OER versus traditional materials, which introduces risks of selection bias and confounding variables such as concurrent pedagogical changes.[63] This approach complicates causal attribution, as OER adoption often coincides with other interventions like flipped classrooms, obscuring isolated effects on learning outcomes.[63] Additionally, outcome measures frequently depend on course-specific metrics like final exam scores or grade-point averages, lacking standardization across studies and hindering comparability.[63] Quantitative emphasis in OER research, particularly on metrics like grades and retention, often marginalizes qualitative insights into student experiences, pedagogical adaptations, and institutional labor dynamics, such as uncompensated faculty time for OER curation.[75] Critiques highlight assumptions of uniform cost savings, which may overestimate benefits since a substantial portion of students already forgo purchasing commercial textbooks.[75] Equity analyses remain sparse, with few studies disaggregating outcomes by socioeconomic or racial subgroups, potentially masking disparities despite some evidence of gains for low-income students.[75] Research gaps persist in methodological rigor, including the scarcity of high-quality meta-analyses and systematic reviews adhering to standards like PRISMA, with many exhibiting low evidential quality.[43] Empirical work is predominantly U.S.-centric, higher-education focused, and survey-based, underrepresenting K-12 contexts, international settings, and experimental designs that probe usability, remixing, or long-term knowledge retention.[76] Further voids include OER's influence on pedagogical innovation, sustainability models, quality moderation by instructor variables, and broader equity in diverse global populations.[43][63][76]

Economic Impacts

Student Cost Savings and Accessibility Gains

Open educational resources (OER) substantially lower student expenses by substituting free or low-cost materials for proprietary textbooks, which averaged $1,240 annually per full-time undergraduate in the United States as of 2023.[77] This reduction addresses a key barrier, as textbook costs have risen faster than tuition in recent decades, prompting many students to skip purchases or opt for used, incomplete alternatives. Empirical analyses confirm per-course savings typically range from $75 to $100 per student when OER replace traditional texts, enabling institutions to scale adoption across programs.[78] [79] At the institutional level, OER implementations yield measurable aggregate savings; for instance, the University of Northern Colorado reported $481,973 in student savings during the 2023-2024 academic year from OER-integrated courses.[35] Similarly, a multi-year effort at another institution generated $985,000 in collective savings over four years by converting courses to OER, without evidence of diminished learning outcomes.[80] These figures derive from tracked enrollment data and pre-adoption textbook pricing, underscoring OER's role in alleviating financial pressures that correlate with higher dropout rates among cost-sensitive students.[81] Accessibility gains extend beyond costs, as OER's digital, openly licensed formats enable ubiquitous access via the internet, benefiting underserved populations such as low-income and Pell Grant recipients who face material shortages.[70] Data from OER initiatives show these students achieve lower DFW (drop, fail, withdraw) rates and higher course completion when materials are freely available, compared to peers in traditional courses.[82] For example, the OER Degree Initiative demonstrated that participants earned more credits over time than matched non-OER students, attributing gains to reduced barriers in high-enrollment general education courses.[83] Broad-scale adoption amplifies these effects; a 2020 study across multiple U.S. colleges found that cumulative exposure to several OER courses yielded greater persistence and credit accumulation, particularly for part-time and economically disadvantaged enrollees, than isolated OER use.[84] Such outcomes align with causal mechanisms where cost-free access mitigates trade-offs between textbooks and essentials like housing or food, fostering equity without relying on subsidized loans or aid reallocations.[85] However, gains depend on institutional support for digital infrastructure, as uneven internet access can limit benefits in rural or low-resource settings.[86]

Hidden Costs in Creation, Adaptation, and Maintenance

The creation of open educational resources (OER) imposes significant hidden costs primarily through uncompensated faculty labor, as educators invest extensive time in developing original content that meets pedagogical and quality standards. Faculty often spend countless hours authoring or revising materials, with qualitative studies highlighting this as a major barrier to adoption due to the lack of institutional support or remuneration for such efforts.[40][87] When compensation is offered, it typically takes the form of modest stipends—around $2,500 for course conversions—or course releases valued at $3,900 or more to account for the time diverted from other duties like research or direct student interaction.[88] These opportunity costs are compounded by the need for specialized skills in content curation and open licensing, which many faculty lack without additional training.[89] Adaptation of existing OER further entails hidden expenditures in evaluation and customization, as instructors must assess resources for accuracy, relevance, and alignment with specific curricula amid fragmented repositories lacking comprehensive catalogs. A 2016 survey of over 3,000 faculty found that 49% cited insufficient subject-specific OER availability and 48% noted difficulties in locating high-quality materials, contributing to low adoption rates of just 5.3% for open textbooks.[90] This process demands ongoing effort to remix or modify content, often requiring collaboration with librarians or instructional designers, which adds personnel overhead and delays implementation.[91] Without centralized tools, adaptation risks inconsistent quality, potentially necessitating further revisions that erode time savings promised by OER's reusability.[92] Maintenance of OER introduces persistent hidden costs through the need for regular updates to incorporate emerging research, fix obsolete links, and ensure compliance with evolving licenses, particularly burdensome in dynamic fields like health sciences or technology. Institutions must allocate resources for quality assurance mechanisms, such as rubrics or review committees, alongside infrastructural support for storage, versioning, and integration into learning management systems.[91] These demands can strain budgets, as faculty time for revisions—valued monetarily but rarely compensated—may indirectly raise operational expenses or tuition, shifting cost burdens from students to educators and administrators.[89] Empirical analyses underscore that while per-student provision costs can decline to around $70 with scale, initial and sustained maintenance investments remain a key sustainability challenge, often unaccounted for in OER advocacy focused on upfront student savings.[83][93]

Sustainability and Market Dynamics

The sustainability of open educational resources (OER) hinges on securing ongoing funding for creation, curation, and updates, as creators typically receive no direct revenue, diminishing incentives for long-term maintenance.[94] [95] Production and dissemination costs persist despite free access, often shifting burdens to institutions without reliable revenue streams, leading to risks of resource obsolescence or abandonment.[96] Systematic reviews identify institutional commitment, quality assurance, and decision-maker involvement as key factors for viability, yet many initiatives falter due to finite grant dependencies.[97] Common funding models include internal institutional allocations and public grants, with the former being the most established for scaling OER development.[98] Examples encompass state-level programs, such as Texas's Open Educational Resources Grant Program awarding up to $5,000 per course redesign in fiscal years 2022-2023, and Colorado's $1 million cycle for zero-textbook-cost degrees in 2023.[99] [100] Literature and expert analyses via Delphi methods outline ten models, emphasizing hybrid approaches blending philanthropy and partnerships to mitigate economic pressures, though no universal framework guarantees perpetual support.[96] [101] In market dynamics, OER exerts downward pressure on traditional textbook pricing through zero marginal production costs and perfectly elastic supply, contrasting with proprietary materials averaging $1,200 annually per student as of 2022.[102] This substitution model has intensified competition, prompting publishers to critique OER for potential quality shortfalls and underfunding of rigorous content development, while some adapt via low-cost digital bundles or inclusive access programs.[103] [104] Faculty adoption, rising to 64% familiarity by 2023, further erodes demand for high-priced editions, though publishers argue OER often complements rather than fully replaces vetted commercial resources.[34] [105] Microeconomic analyses recommend accelerating OER curation to enhance access without evident learning deficits, yet warn of equity gaps if faculty time for adaptation remains uncompensated.[102]

Advantages and Limitations

Evidence-Based Benefits

Open educational resources (OER) have been associated with modest improvements in student completion rates in higher education courses. A meta-analysis of 26 studies found that students in OER-based courses exhibited a higher likelihood of earning at least a C grade (Cohen's d = 0.29, k = 12), alongside increased course completion compared to those using non-OER materials.[10] Similarly, multiple syntheses of empirical research indicate that OER usage results in student performance that is equivalent to or slightly superior to traditional textbooks, with no evidence of diminished academic outcomes.[106] On learning outcomes, systematic reviews and meta-analyses reveal a statistically significant but negligible positive effect from OER and open educational practices (OEP). One analysis of empirical studies reported an overall effect size of g = 0.07 (p < 0.001), suggesting minor enhancements in achievement attributable to OER adoption, potentially driven by factors like resource adaptability and reduced financial barriers.[63] Another recent meta-analysis corroborated this, estimating g = 0.10 for impacts on performance, while emphasizing that such gains are small in magnitude and require further disaggregation by context, such as course level or student demographics.[107] These findings align with controlled comparisons showing comparable or marginally better results in OER environments, particularly when materials support iterative improvements over time.[108] OER contribute to greater educational access and equity by mitigating textbook costs, which can exceed $1,200 annually for U.S. college students, thereby enabling broader participation among low-income and underrepresented groups. Empirical evidence from adoption studies demonstrates that OER implementation correlates with reduced dropout risks linked to financial strain, fostering retention gains especially in community colleges and for first-generation students.[109] Institutional analyses further highlight OER's role in promoting inclusive practices, as freely available and adaptable resources diminish barriers to high-quality materials, supporting equity initiatives without compromising instructional efficacy.[110] Longitudinal data from 2020–2024 implementations underscore these access benefits, with OER enabling sustained engagement in underserved regions through digital dissemination.[111] Additional benefits include enhanced pedagogical flexibility, as OER's open licensing permits customization to local contexts, yielding reported improvements in student motivation and application of knowledge. Reviews of global OER deployments note advantages in lifelong learning support and knowledge dissemination, with empirical cases showing increased instructor innovation in resource adaptation.[112] However, these outcomes depend on effective integration, as isolated OER use without pedagogical alignment yields minimal gains.[113]

Documented Drawbacks and Risks

One documented drawback of open educational resources (OER) is the variable quality arising from inconsistent peer review and vetting compared to commercial textbooks, which can result in inaccuracies, incomplete coverage, or pedagogical shortcomings.[40][63] Faculty skepticism often stems from this lack of standardized quality assurance, with surveys indicating concerns over content reliability in fields requiring precision, such as STEM disciplines.[38] Sustainability challenges further undermine OER viability, as initiatives frequently encounter funding shortages for updates and maintenance, leading to obsolescence; a 2025 systematic review identified institutional support deficits and resource discoverability issues as primary factors hindering long-term persistence.[97][38] Without dedicated revenue models, creators face disincentives for ongoing contributions, exacerbating content staleness in rapidly evolving subjects like technology and medicine.[114] Accessibility risks include technological barriers that disproportionately affect low-income or rural users lacking reliable internet or devices, potentially widening rather than closing educational gaps.[115] Readability analyses of 200 English-language OER courses revealed widespread failures to meet standard accessibility benchmarks, such as those for diverse learner needs, limiting usability for non-native speakers or those with disabilities.[116] Cultural and linguistic mismatches in globally sourced materials compound these issues, reducing effectiveness in non-Western contexts.[115] Adoption barriers, including time-intensive searches and evaluations for reusable content, deter widespread integration, with quantitative surveys showing faculty cite these as key obstacles to reuse.[117] Legal risks from unclear licensing awareness can expose users to inadvertent copyright infringements during adaptation, as noted in adoption studies across higher education institutions.[118] Overall, these factors contribute to uneven implementation, where OER may fail to deliver consistent outcomes without supplementary instructor effort.[112]

Policy and Adoption Strategies

International and Government Policies

The 2012 Paris OER Declaration, adopted at the UNESCO World Open Educational Resources Congress in Paris from June 20-22, called on governments worldwide to promote OER use, release publicly funded educational materials under open licenses, and foster supportive policies including capacity building and quality assurance mechanisms.[24] This declaration emerged from consultations involving over 600 participants from 90 countries and built on prior UNESCO efforts to expand access to education.[25] In 2019, UNESCO adopted the Recommendation on Open Educational Resources, the sole intergovernmental standard in this domain, urging member states to develop national policies that enhance OER capacity, remove legal and technical barriers, promote inclusive practices, and ensure sustainability through funding and incentives.[12] The recommendation emphasizes empirical monitoring of OER impacts on access and equity, with implementation tracked via periodic reviews.[119] Building on these, the 2024 Dubai Declaration, adopted on November 20 at the third UNESCO World OER Congress, reinforced commitments to OER as digital public goods, advocating for policies that integrate OER into national digital transformation strategies and address emerging challenges like AI-generated content licensing.[12] International surveys, such as the 2012 UNESCO/COL global assessment, revealed that while 60 countries reported some OER activity, only a minority had formal policies, prompting calls for targeted government action to scale adoption.[120] Organizations like the OECD and World Bank have supported OER policy development through funding and advisory roles, though effectiveness varies due to implementation gaps in resource-constrained regions.[121] Nationally, the United States Department of Education launched the Open Textbooks Pilot Program in 2018 under the Higher Education Act reauthorization, allocating grants up to $10 million annually to institutions for developing and expanding OER, with a focus on high-enrollment courses to reduce student costs.[122] By 2023, at least 28 U.S. states had enacted OER-related legislation, including mandates for state-funded materials to use open licenses and grants for faculty adaptation, as tracked by advocacy groups.[123] In the European Union, the 2013 "Opening Up Education" initiative directed that all Erasmus+ program-supported educational materials be released under open licenses, influencing over €14 billion in funding from 2014-2020 to prioritize OER in digital learning platforms.[124] Countries like Poland and the Netherlands have integrated OER into national curricula policies, with the Dutch government mandating open licensing for publicly funded higher education resources since 2015.[125] Other examples include India's National Education Policy 2020, which promotes OER platforms like SWAYAM for massive open online courses, aiming to cover 100% digital content access by 2025, and South Africa's 2019 policy framework encouraging provincial governments to adopt OER for teacher training.[126] A 2023 UNESCO-COL study on policy effectiveness found that nations with dedicated OER funding, such as those in Scandinavia, achieved higher adoption rates—up to 40% of courses using OER—compared to regions relying solely on declarations without enforcement.[127] These policies often face challenges in enforcement, with surveys indicating that while endorsements are widespread, measurable outcomes like cost savings require sustained investment beyond initial commitments.[128]

Institutional Barriers and Support Mechanisms

Institutional barriers to the adoption of open educational resources (OER) in higher education primarily stem from faculty perceptions of resource quality and the time-intensive nature of adaptation. Surveys of faculty indicate that concerns over the perceived inferiority of OER compared to traditional textbooks, including doubts about pedagogical rigor and up-to-date content, deter widespread use, with one study finding that 40% of instructors cited quality as a primary obstacle.[40] Additionally, the technical demands of locating, customizing, and attributing OER—such as navigating licenses and ensuring compliance—exacerbate workload burdens, particularly for instructors lacking specialized training, leading to low adoption rates even when cost savings are evident.[129] Institutional structures compound these issues through insufficient integration into tenure and promotion criteria, where OER creation or adaptation receives minimal recognition relative to traditional scholarship, discouraging faculty investment.[7] Copyright and intellectual property policies at many universities further hinder OER uptake by creating ambiguity around open licensing, with faculty often unaware of Creative Commons options or fearing institutional repercussions for sharing materials.[118] Administrative silos, such as fragmented support between libraries, IT departments, and academic units, result in poor discoverability of OER repositories, as evidenced by reports highlighting inadequate metadata standards and search tools that fail to surface relevant resources efficiently.[129] These barriers persist despite empirical evidence of OER's potential, reflecting a causal disconnect where short-term individual costs outweigh long-term institutional benefits like reduced student expenses. Support mechanisms to overcome these barriers include targeted professional development programs, which have demonstrated efficacy in boosting adoption by equipping faculty with skills in OER curation and integration; for instance, workshops focusing on pedagogical adaptation increased usage by 25% in participating cohorts.[118] Incentives such as stipends, course release time, and explicit inclusion of OER contributions in promotion evaluations address motivational gaps, as implemented at institutions like Old Dominion University, where such measures correlated with higher OER-enabled course enrollments.[34] Institutional policies mandating OER consideration in curriculum reviews, alongside dedicated funding for repositories and licensing support, facilitate scalability; Virginia Tech's guidelines, for example, provide frameworks for maintenance and sharing that align OER with accreditation standards.[130] Collaborative structures, including cross-departmental OER working groups and partnerships with centers for teaching and learning, enable sustained implementation by fostering advocacy and resource allocation.[131] Federated search tools and open-source platforms further mitigate findability issues by aggregating OER from multiple sources, reducing technical barriers for instructors.[132] Empirical evaluations of these mechanisms reveal that bundled approaches—combining training, incentives, and policy—yield the highest adoption rates, though success depends on leadership commitment to long-term funding amid competing priorities.[133]

Major Initiatives

Global and UNESCO-Led Programs

UNESCO first formalized the concept of open educational resources (OER) at its 2002 Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries, where the term "OER" was coined to describe openly accessible teaching, learning, and research materials.[1] This initiative positioned OER as a means to enhance knowledge sharing and educational equity, particularly in resource-constrained regions, though empirical evidence on widespread adoption remains limited by varying national capacities.[1] The inaugural World Open Educational Resources Congress, convened by UNESCO in Paris from June 20 to 22, 2012, resulted in the Paris OER Declaration, adopted by over 60 governments and international organizations.[24] The declaration urged member states to promote OER use for social inclusion and lifelong learning, facilitate enabling environments through policies supporting open licensing, and encourage the open release of publicly funded educational materials to maximize public investment returns.[25] It emphasized five priority areas: raising awareness, strengthening infrastructure, developing supportive policies, promoting quality assurance, and fostering international cooperation, though subsequent implementation has been uneven, with stronger uptake in developed nations compared to developing ones due to infrastructural and policy gaps.[24] Building on this, UNESCO's General Conference unanimously adopted the Recommendation on Open Educational Resources on November 25, 2019, marking the first international normative instrument dedicated to OER.[47] The recommendation outlines five action areas: building stakeholder capacity for OER creation and reuse; developing enabling policies; promoting inclusive access and quality; supporting sustainable OER infrastructure; and encouraging research and international collaboration.[12] It calls for governments to integrate OER into national education strategies, with monitoring mechanisms to track progress toward Sustainable Development Goal 4 on quality education, though critiques note that without binding enforcement, compliance relies on voluntary state action.[47] To advance the 2019 recommendation's implementation, UNESCO established the OER Dynamic Coalition in March 2020, comprising over 50 partners including governments, NGOs, and academic institutions.[134] The coalition facilitates advocacy, knowledge sharing, and capacity-building activities, such as regional workshops and policy toolkits, aimed at embedding OER in educational systems globally.[135] Subsequent World OER Congresses, including the second in Ljubljana, Slovenia, in 2017 (yielding the Ljubljana OER Action Plan for policy and capacity development) and the third in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, from November 18 to 20, 2024 (producing the Dubai Declaration on digital public goods and open solutions), have reinforced these efforts by focusing on practical strategies for OER integration amid digital transformation challenges.[12] Despite these programs, data from UNESCO reports indicate persistent barriers like digital divides and licensing inconsistencies, limiting global OER impact.[12]

National and Regional Efforts

In the United States, federal efforts to promote open educational resources (OER) gained momentum under the Obama administration, with the Department of Labor's Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) program from 2010 to 2018 requiring grantees to produce openly licensed educational materials, resulting in over 700 openly licensed courses and resources developed by community colleges.[136] In 2015, the U.S. government committed to advancing OER by openly licensing federally grant-supported educational materials, encouraging federal agencies to prioritize open licensing in funding opportunities, and collaborating with stakeholders to expand access.[137] At the state level, as of 2023, 28 states had enacted OER policies, often including grants for OER development, textbook affordability mandates, or course marking requirements, such as Oregon's policy for institutions to designate OER-inclusive courses in catalogs.[30] Regional compacts like the National Consortium of Open Educational Resources (NCOER), formed by the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) and other groups, facilitate cross-state collaboration on OER adoption and sustainability.[138] In Brazil, national OER initiatives include the Open University of Brazil (UAB), launched in 2005 as a partnership between public universities and government entities to deliver distance education with openly accessible materials, expanding to over 100 institutions by the early 2010s.[139] The National Textbook Program incorporated open licensing requirements for digital supplemental resources accompanying publicly funded textbooks starting in 2019, aiming to enhance reusability and reduce costs for K-12 education.[140] Community-driven efforts like REA Brasil, active since around 2008, have supported OER repositories such as the MIRA project and REA Paraná, focusing on teacher training and resource sharing in higher education.[141] European national programs vary by country but often align with EU open education goals. In Ireland, the National Resource Hub, established to support OER use, provides curated repositories and professional development for educators, emphasizing accessibility in primary and secondary schooling.[142] A 2013-2015 EU study across 22 member states identified national policies promoting OER in vocational training and higher education, with countries like the Netherlands and Poland implementing dedicated funding for OER platforms and adaptation.[143] These efforts prioritize integration with national curricula, though implementation faces challenges from varying licensing standards and institutional buy-in.[144]

Open Educational Practices

Integration with Pedagogy and Teaching Methods

Open educational resources (OER) integrate with pedagogy by enabling instructors to adapt and remix materials to align with specific teaching strategies, such as active learning and student-centered approaches, due to their permissive licensing that permits modification without legal barriers.[63] This flexibility supports constructivist methods where learners co-create knowledge, as seen in open pedagogy practices where students contribute to OER repositories, enhancing engagement through authentic tasks.[145] For instance, in blended learning environments, OER modules facilitate flipped classroom models by providing accessible pre-class content, allowing in-class time for collaborative problem-solving.[146] Empirical studies indicate that OER adoption correlates with shifts toward innovative teaching practices, though causal impacts on pedagogical efficacy remain modest. A 2023 meta-analysis of 20 studies found OER and open educational practices (OEP) yield a small positive effect on learning outcomes (Hedges' g = 0.07, p < 0.001), primarily through increased resource customization rather than inherent superiority over proprietary materials.[63] In secondary education, professional development focused on OER integration led five teachers to incorporate collaborative and inquiry-based methods, resulting in reported improvements in student interaction but requiring sustained training for full adaptation.[147] Similarly, K-8 implementations showed teachers adapting OER curricula over 2–3 years to embed personalized differentiation, though initial resistance stemmed from unfamiliarity with remixing tools.[148] Integration challenges persist, as effective OER use demands pedagogical redesign beyond mere substitution for textbooks; without targeted training, instructors often revert to lecture-based delivery, limiting transformative potential.[73] Research from community colleges highlights that while OER supports equity in access, its pedagogical benefits—such as fostering critical thinking via open assignments—depend on faculty competence in aligning resources with learning objectives, with studies showing equivalent student achievement to non-OER courses but enhanced motivation in open tasks.[145][10] UNESCO guidelines emphasize embedding OER in teacher training to promote such alignments, advocating metrics that track pedagogical shifts alongside usage.[149] Overall, OER's value in pedagogy lies in enabling scalable, adaptable instruction, though evidence underscores the need for evidence-based implementation to realize gains beyond cost reduction.[150]

Training, Competence Development, and Certification

Training in open educational resources (OER) emphasizes acquiring practical skills for locating, evaluating, adapting, and creating openly licensed materials, alongside understanding intellectual property rights and licensing such as Creative Commons. OER for teacher professional development includes free downloadable PowerPoint (PPT/PPTX) slides available from numerous .edu and .org websites. These resources cover topics such as research-based teaching strategies, tiered prevention models, data-informed instruction, classroom management, lesson planning, teacher stress management, and subject-specific content (e.g., energy education). Downloads are typically direct, without paywalls, and released under Creative Commons licenses or for personal/professional use, facilitating open access and adaptation.[151][152] These programs address gaps in educator preparedness, as surveys indicate that many lack familiarity with open practices despite institutional adoption efforts.[153] Competence development draws from structured frameworks that define core abilities for effective OER engagement. The OER Competency Framework, released by the International Organisation of La Francophonie in support of the 2019 UNESCO Recommendation on OER, targets educators and outlines competencies in designing resources with attention to educational content, cultural relevance, technical quality, and open licensing.[154] Similarly, the OER Trainer's Guide (version 1.1) provides a competency profile for trainers, focusing on best practices for resource development, including accessibility, reusability, and integration into pedagogical contexts.[155] A 2024 peer-reviewed framework for open educational practices (OEP) in higher education identifies a transversal attitude of openness to collaboration, paired with competencies in policy awareness, resource curation, and ethical sharing to foster institutional OEP adoption.[156] The Open Education Global community's adapted competency list, originating from a 2016 baseline, extends to professional development in advocacy, quality assurance, and sustainability of open initiatives.[157] Notable training initiatives include UNESCO's OER Development course, launched on June 20, 2022, via its Open Learning platform, which equips educators—initially in Zimbabwe but adaptable globally—to search for existing OER and produce new openly licensed materials.[158] OER Commons delivers modular professional learning hubs emphasizing skills in collaboration, curation, instructional design, and leadership, with resources aligned to frameworks like UNESCO's ICT Competency for Teachers.[152][153] University-affiliated programs, such as Library Juice Academy's four-week Introduction to OER course, train librarians in facilitation and adoption strategies, often extending to broader faculty.[159] Formal certification remains nascent and primarily targets librarians or specialized roles, reflecting uneven institutional prioritization. The University of Minnesota's Open Education Network offers an eight-month Certificate in Open Education Librarianship, featuring online modules, mentor cohorts, and project support for OER implementation.[160] Library Juice Academy's Certificate in Open Education for Librarians integrates courses on copyright, licensing evaluation, and OER discovery, culminating in verified expertise for campus advocacy.[161] In Europe, Austria's "Open Education Austria Advanced" initiative, documented in 2021, certifies individuals and higher education organizations for OER proficiency through assessed criteria on creation, sharing, and infrastructure, aiming to scale national capacity.[162] These programs, while beneficial, cover a fraction of global educators, with evidence suggesting broader certification could accelerate OER integration but faces barriers like resource constraints in developing regions.[162]

Controversies and Critical Discourse

Quality Control and Reliability Issues

Open educational resources (OER) frequently encounter quality control challenges stemming from their open, user-contributed model, which bypasses the structured editorial gatekeeping of traditional publishing. Unlike commercial textbooks subjected to multiple rounds of expert review, many OER lack formal peer review, resulting in inconsistent standards and heightened risks of factual inaccuracies or pedagogical flaws. A 2023 analysis highlighted that the absence of transparent quality metrics serves as a primary barrier to broader OER adoption, as users struggle to discern reliable materials amid vast repositories.[163] Empirical evaluations underscore reliability gaps, including low inter-rater agreement in assessing OER content, with meta-reviews reporting critically low scores (average 0.48) for inter-rater reliability and coding schemes used in quality appraisals. This variability arises partly from decentralized authoring, where contributors range from experts to novices without mandatory vetting, leading to documented instances of outdated information—such as unupdated scientific data or obsolete pedagogical approaches—that users must independently verify. For example, repositories permitting unrestricted uploads have been criticized for hosting irrelevant or erroneous materials, exacerbating concerns over accuracy in subjects like science and history.[43][94] Pedagogical reliability poses additional hurdles, as OER often prioritize accessibility over instructional efficacy; studies note frequent shortcomings in alignment with learning objectives, depth of coverage, or inclusive design, requiring educators to invest significant time in curation and adaptation. Technical aspects, such as broken links or incompatible formats, further undermine usability, with regular maintenance checks needed to prevent obsolescence—yet many resources languish without updates due to absent institutional oversight. While frameworks like OERTrust propose versioning and remixing validation to mitigate these issues, their implementation remains sporadic, perpetuating skepticism among faculty who cite quality doubts as a key adoption barrier.[164][165][166]

Ethical Concerns Including Commercialization and Equity

Critics argue that the commercialization of open educational resources (OER) undermines their foundational ethos of free and open access, as institutional incentives often prioritize marketing and cost-saving over genuine openness. For instance, universities may leverage OER to brand themselves and attract fee-paying students, aligning with neoliberal profit motives rather than social justice goals.[167] Additionally, faculty labor, particularly from adjuncts, is exploited in OER creation without adequate compensation or tenure recognition, devaluing educational contributions.[167] Transactional elements, such as purchases or funding from for-profit entities like Lumen Learning, introduce conflicts that erode compliance with open principles.[168] [167] Equity concerns arise from the digital divide, which prevents uniform access to OER despite reduced material costs. Empirical studies reveal that opt-in OER platforms see low uptake among struggling students—only 12% for those with prior D/F grades compared to 23% for passing students—potentially widening achievement gaps without targeted interventions like parent-involved messaging, which boosted usage by 46% but still left adoption at 26% for at-risk groups.[169] In open education systems, digital competency disparities persist, with males, higher-income earners, and private-sector workers outperforming females, lower-income individuals, and public-sector employees, indicating that later-term students experience greater inequities.[170] In regions like Africa, barriers including device shortages, unreliable internet, and scarcity of OER in local languages—where 40% of the global population lacks education in their understood language—further entrench access inequalities.[171] Content-related equity issues stem from "implicit creative redlining," where privileged educators dominate OER production due to better access to time, funding, and training, resulting in underrepresented perspectives and potential ideological biases in materials.[172] This exclusion risks perpetuating cultural and viewpoint imbalances, as voluntary or under-supported creation favors those in tenured positions over adjuncts or marginalized creators.[172] While OER licenses like CC BY permit commercial reuse to encourage adaptation, ethical lapses occur when adaptations fail to reciprocate openness or attribute properly, prioritizing profit over communal benefit.[168] Overall, these concerns highlight that OER's equity potential requires deliberate policies to mitigate divides and ensure inclusive participation, rather than assuming openness alone suffices.[172][169]

Ideological and Movement Critiques

Critics from within academic and open access communities have argued that the OER movement inadequately theorizes the concept of "openness," often conflating it with mere accessibility without addressing deeper philosophical tensions between positive and negative liberties in educational contexts.[173] This under-theorization, they contend, frames learners in atomistic, individualistic terms that align with neoliberal assumptions of self-directed autonomy, potentially diminishing the role of structured pedagogy and institutional support in favor of a content-centric model.[174] Such views posit that OER reinforces a two-tiered educational system, where elite institutions produce resources consumed by less-resourced ones, perpetuating rather than dismantling hierarchies under the guise of democratization.[175] Further ideological scrutiny highlights OER's embedding within neoliberal university structures, where "openness" rhetoric masks economic imperatives, commodifying knowledge production and failing to challenge underlying inequalities in higher education.[176] Proponents of this critique assert that OER does not reflexively confront the political economy of education, instead promoting market-friendly disaggregation of teaching from institutions, which prioritizes efficiency over transformative equity.[177] These concerns, often voiced in peer-reviewed analyses from educational technology scholars, reflect a broader skepticism that OER's ethical claims are undermined by its operational ties to funding models involving for-profit entities and institutional branding.[167] From a global perspective, OER practices have been accused of perpetuating cultural imperialism through a unidirectional flow of predominantly Western content toward the Global South, assuming universal applicability without sufficient localization or adaptation to diverse epistemological traditions.[167] This dynamic, critics argue, echoes colonial knowledge hierarchies, as seen in initiatives like repository networks dominated by North American and European materials, which risk eroding local pedagogical contexts under the banner of technological aid.[178] Such critiques emphasize that OER's content often replicates standardized formats like textbooks, embedding ideological biases reflective of creators' privileges and limiting innovation in self-directed learning.[167] Movement-level objections include the erosion of intellectual property incentives, where open licensing is seen to undermine creators' rights and market-driven quality assurance in educational materials. Publishers and IP advocates maintain that weakening copyright protections reduces financial motivations for developing rigorous resources, potentially leading to a proliferation of unvetted content over sustained innovation.[179] This perspective, drawn from economic analyses of content industries, contrasts with OER's communal ethos by prioritizing causal links between proprietary protections and high-value production. Empirical observations note that despite a decade of promotion since UNESCO's 2002 forum, OER has minimally disrupted higher education practices, suggesting overpromising on transformative impact while sustaining existing power structures.[180] These critiques, while varying in origin, underscore tensions between OER's idealistic framing and its practical alignments with economic and institutional realities.

References

User Avatar
No comments yet.