This session began with an introduction from John Hilton III, who leads the OER Research Fellows programme. The project is intended to build future research capacity in the OER field. Most of the work done by this group uses the COUP framework, which focuses on cost savings and learning outcomes. At present there are:
- 43 Fellows
- 18 articles submitted
- 1 article accepted
- 1 article published
Marcela Chiorescu of spoke about her work at Georgia College. On an algebra course, $86 was saved per student, and students expressed gratitude for monies saved. Between Spring 2014 (78.2%) and Spring 2015 (84.3%) there was a significant uplift in students receiving a C grade or above. There was also a statistically significant increase in the proportion of students receiving the top grade.
Christina Hendricks and Ozgur Ozdemir spoke about their work with the COOL4ED project in California. They focused on faculty motivations, cost savings for students, perceptions and impact on other factors. The OER included an OpenStax textbook on Sociology and a Libretext on Chemistry. They found that students has some negative attitudes towards the content of open textbooks as being rather basic. The impact on learning and retention outcomes were less clear because fewer faculty reported back on these. However, no-one reported a decline while some reported an improvement. Cost savings was the most prominent aspect for both faculty and students. Only 4% of faculty and 12% of students had anything negative to say about the open textbooks.
— COOL for Education (@cool4ed) November 2, 2016
Tsung-han Weng (University of Kansas) reported on a qualitative case study involving students from economics and statistics. He found that students tend to have ambivalent attitudes to open textbooks. They appreciated the cost savings but had some reservations about content and quality. This ambivalence was also found in teachers, whose main complaint was that using the open textbook required them to spend more time preparing assessments and supplementary materials.
Royce Kimmons (Brigham Young University) told conference about allowing students to select which textbook a project management studies class would use. Students decided the evaluation criteria (not including cost). What were the effects of this approach? The two most popular choices were subjected to a more detailed evaluation. They arrived at the conclusion that an open textbook was the best offering. Kimmons recommends involving students in the selection prices, arguing that textbook quality metrics are not objective, but relative to the needs of a particular class.
— Christina Hendricks (@clhendricksbc) November 2, 2016
Christopher Lawrence (Middle Georgia State University) spoke about the Affordable Learning Georgia initiative, which aimed to replace proprietary textbooks on American government with open versions. It was found that most students obtained used or new copies of the traditional text. On the whole, they felt that the proprietary version should continue to be used. In comparison with the traditional book, the quality of the open textbook was perceived to be lower. The online version of the open textbook was found to be a useful supplement. However, there was no significant difference in results between those using commercial and open textbooks. Particular challenges in this context included a poorly funded production process which led to a lack of polish in the open textbook; fixed textbook content; and a lack of ancillary materials. An emphasis on the need for sustainability was mentioned.
There was a question from the floor about open access publication of results. The Open Research Fellows are not committed to open dissemination – indeed, there is funding set aside for publication fees – but anonymised research data could be shared.