This study examines faculty perceptions, awareness, and utilization of Open Educational Resources (OER) in higher education and identifies barriers hindering their adoption. The research encompasses multiple perspectives, including demographic information, teaching practices involving technology, familiarity and opinions regarding OER, types of OER utilized by faculty, ease of searching for OER, a comparison between open and traditional resources, intentions to use OER in the future, and factors deterring the adoption of OER. The study employed a quantitative approach using an online survey questionnaire to gather data. Using descriptive and MANOVA tests, the findings highlight a diverse gender distribution among respondents, a combination of teaching roles and administrative responsibilities, varying levels of teaching experience, a preference for blended teaching styles, significant awareness of OER, ease in searching for OER, and a strong intention to use OER in the future. The results emphasize the importance of addressing concerns related to institutional support, intellectual property policies, recognition of contributions, and creating a supportive environment to enhance faculty engagement with OER. The study implications suggest comprehensive and targeted approaches to support faculty members in adopting and utilizing OER effectively, including promoting gender equity, enhancing ease of adoption, considering workload impact, recognizing differences based on teaching experience, tailoring support based on teaching style, and actively promoting the benefits and opportunities of OER. The study acknowledges limitations regarding sample size and demographics and suggests future research directions to enhance generalizability, incorporate qualitative approaches, and investigate the pedagogical impact of OER adoption on student outcomes.
Research Article
Embracing the Promise of Open Educational Resources: Faculty Insights and Implications in Higher Education
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2984517/v1
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License
Version 1
posted
You are reading this latest preprint version
Open Educational Resources
OER
OER adoption
Faculty
Higher Education
Since the introduction of Open Educational Resources (OER) in 2002 by UNESCO, it has gained increasing attention among academia, especially in higher education (Hodgkinson-Williams & Arinto, 2017). The value and significance of OER have been further recognized and appreciated, particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic, as it provides a viable solution for overcoming limitations in accessing traditional education (Contrada & Good-Schiff, 2021; Marín et al., 2020). Van Allen and Katz (2020) propose that “increasing the use of OER, which are globally available, may help to lessen these disparities and work to close the achievement gap not only in today’s collective crisis but also beyond the pandemic” (p. 210). Further, the emergence of OER, particularly in higher education is driven by the widespread use of technology and the availability of internet access (Abri & Dabbagh, 2018). This trend has gained momentum as educators and institutions recognize the potential of OER to revolutionize teaching and learning (Marín et al., 2020).
OER has experienced widespread adoption among numerous organizations and foundations since its inception. One of the most significant approaches toward OER is the concept of 5Rs (Retain, Reuse, Revise, Remix, and Redistribute). This concept of openness was first proposed by David Wiley in 2007 as a framework and a way to describe the permissions and freedoms associated with OER (David, 2014). The 5Rs framework has since become widely recognized and adopted within the open education community as a guiding principle for the use and sharing of OER. The 5Rs refer to the permissions granted by open educational resources and stress the openness and flexibility of OER, allowing educators and learners to freely access, customize, and share educational materials to support teaching and learning (David, 2014).
In terms of definition, OER refers to the “educational materials made freely and legally available on the Internet for anyone to reuse, revise, remix and redistribute” (Wickline, 2016: no page number). Accordingly, OER has the potential to address barriers to access, enhance student achievement, and foster pedagogical innovation (Tillinghast, 2020; Todorinova & Wilkinson, 2020). By providing free and openly licensed educational resources, OER can lower financial obstacles that limit students' access to learning materials (Wickline, 2016). This accessibility can contribute to improved student outcomes and academic success. In addition, OER encourages educators to explore innovative teaching approaches, as they have the freedom to adapt, remix, and customize the resources to meet their specific instructional needs. This flexibility promotes pedagogical innovation and supports the development of engaging and learner-centered educational experiences (Todorinova & Wilkinson, 2020).
While OER holds promise in breaking down barriers, enhancing student achievement, and promoting innovative teaching practices, current research suggests that the full implementation of OER in higher education has not been realized (Abri & Dabbagh, 2018; Hoosen & Butcher, 2019; Marín et al., 2020; Otto, 2021). “Recognizing the value of OER for students; learning more about the faculty experience is one of the key elements in expanding the reach of OER to encourage more faculty adoptions and consequently expanding OER impact” (Lantrip & Ray, 2021: 897).
The current study, therefore, aims at harnessing the potential of OER in higher education, informing decision-making processes, and advancing the adoption of OER. It also supports the ongoing efforts to provide quality education that is accessible, inclusive, and responsive to the evolving needs of students and educators.
Literature Review
Higher education worldwide is witnessing an increasing inclination towards exploring the diverse advantages offered by OER. This exploration encompasses not only the financial advantages but also the potential pedagogical benefits that OER can bring (Nusbaum et al., 2020; Tillinghast, 2020; Todorinova & Wilkinson, 2020). OER is recognized as a vital component in driving positive transformations in both affordability and pedagogy within education (Lantrip & Ray, 2021). Given the assumption that faculty are unlikely to select OER of lower quality compared to traditional resources, there are compelling arguments supporting the adoption of OER (Contrada & Good-Schiff, 2021). These include the affordability and equity that OER offers, as well as the flexibility it provides in terms of customization and adaptation to diverse learning needs. Additionally, the easy digital access to OER resources further enhances their appeal for educators and learners (Contrada & Good-Schiff, 2021; Martin & Kimmons, 2019).
Further, OER has the potential to revolutionize access to educational materials by allowing individuals from all backgrounds to access, adapt, and personalize resources that were previously limited to students at prestigious universities. In this regard, “disparities in student access to resources can be lessened through OER” (Van Allen & Katz, 2020: 215). Also, “a college education is becoming increasingly expensive, and the burden of this cost is often felt disproportionately by marginalized students” (Nusbaum et al., 2020: 1). Further, OER have the potential to empower women by providing them with a platform to express their thoughts, facilitating their access to valuable information and educational resources (Perryman & Arcos, 2016). The democratization of education has the power to catalyse career opportunities and stimulate economic growth in underprivileged communities (Wickline, 2016). Faculty are now more conscious of the cost impact on students, leading to greater consideration of affordable alternatives and increased adoption of OER (Spilovoy et al., 2020). OER addresses issues of social justice by reducing the financial burden on students and promoting access to educational materials (Lantrip & Ray, 2021).
It seems clear that a common understanding is established regarding the definition of OER. “The idea behind Open Educational Resources (OER) is simple but powerful” (Wickline, 2016: no page number). Most definitions share the same notion of openness of online educational materials that can be modified and purposefully reused. For instance, 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” (UNESCO, 2023: no page number). Similarly defined, OER are “educational resources that are offered freely, are openly available to anyone, and, under some licenses, allow others to reuse, adapt, and redistribute the resources with few or no restrictions” (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019: 9). Also, OER are “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 (retain, reuse, revise, remix, redistribute)” (Green & Vézina, 2020: no page number).
Licensing procedures “provide legal mechanisms to ensure that people retain acknowledgement for their work while allowing it to be shared and which enable copyright holders, if they so wish, to restrict commercial activity or prevent people from adapting the work” (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019: 9). Hence, the open license is a type of license that respects the intellectual property rights of the copyright owner while granting the public certain permissions to access, reuse, repurpose, adapt, and redistribute educational materials (UNESCO, 2023).
The increasing demand for integrating OER in higher education calls for a better understanding of faculty motivation to adopt OER. Particularly, the role of incentives in encouraging faculty adoption remains unclear (Nagashima & Hrach, 2021). By assessing the impact of incentives on faculty willingness to use OER, institutions can identify effective strategies to promote OER adoption and overcome existing barriers (Nagashima & Hrach, 2021). From another perspective, there is a need to shed light on the complexities and barriers that institutions and individuals encounter when adopting and integrating OER. The study of Marín et al. (2020) recognizes and addresses the challenges associated with the infrastructure and adoption of OER at various levels including the availability and development of OER infrastructure, policy considerations, ensuring quality of resources, and managing the process of change. Sustainable support structures and processes are essential for wide-scale OER implementation as it involves more complexity than traditional textbook adoption and requires ongoing assistance for faculty (Lantrip & Ray, 2021). However, there is limited evidence of supportive policies around OER (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019). Academic publishers are responding to this by adapting their marketing strategies, embracing digital materials and exploring new approaches like "inclusive access" models (Spilovoy et al., 2020).
Several studies were conducted in relation to the promise and implementation of OER in the context of higher education. For example, Todorinova and Wilkinson (2020) found that there were significant variations among faculty in their knowledge of and engagement with OER, as well as their interest in creating open textbooks. Tillinghast (2020) found that several factors such as attitude, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, self-efficacy, and facilitating conditions significantly influence faculty adoption of OER, except for social influence. Moreover, Abri and Dabbagh (2018) found that there is limited awareness among faculty and students. This study also highlights the minimal level of OER adoption in educational contexts. Furthermore, they identify various challenges hindering OER adoption, including the difficulty in finding suitable OER materials and concerns regarding the quality of available resources.
The study of Nagashima and Hrach (2021) examined faculty motivation and experiences in adopting OER. The results revealed that faculty were motivated by both traditional factors such as cost reduction and improved student learning, as well as additional incentives. Faculty reported various benefits and challenges associated with OER adoption. Similarly, the study of Martin and Kimmons (2019) suggests that faculty are driven to adopt and develop OER to lower expenses and enhance their teaching methods. However, they frequently encounter challenges that impede their progress such as concerns regarding the quality of available resources, anxieties related to copyright issues, technical complexities, and uncertainties about the long-term viability of OER initiatives. Furthermore, Otto (2021) observed that individuals' intentions and behaviours regarding the adoption of OER are strongly influenced by their emotional connection to the core ideas and values of OER. Beliefs about OER are more abstract and less focused on specific benefits, and there is a lack of belief in OER at the level of knowledge about OER. Nevertheless, the actual usage of OER is positively associated with individuals' knowledge about OER.
Concerning OER awareness and actual implementation, Spilovoy et al. (2020) argue that while increased awareness and acceptance of OER among faculty is observed, many still lack familiarity with OER and how to utilize them. Also, faculty awareness of OER initiatives positively correlates with adoption, and institutional-level initiatives boost faculty awareness. Awareness of OER drives adoption as required course materials and indicates future adoption potential. Moreover, the study of Lantrip & Ray (2021) found that faculty modified OER during adoption and adjusted instructional practices accordingly. Faculty also reported positive benefits for students, such as cost savings, increased access, and greater engagement. Therefore, sustained support structures, including training, time for reflection, and resources, were crucial for successful adoption.
Senn et al. (2022) noted that trends in OER usage include instructors searching and evaluating materials based on course alignment, quality, and ease of implementation. Instructors often customize the materials to suit their classroom context and utilize them in various course environments. Additionally, Hilton’s (2020) study shows that students achieve comparable or even better learning outcomes when using OER while saving substantial amounts of money. Moreover, the majority of faculty and students who have utilized OER report positive experiences and express a willingness to continue using them in the future.
Recently, Marín et al. (2022) investigated faculty perspectives and usage of OER and their repositories in various countries by employing a multiple case study approach to examine similarities, differences, and the influence of institutional policy and quality on individual views of OER. In this study, faculty had low awareness and utilization of OER repositories, with external platforms like YouTube being more popular. There was a lack of awareness and frameworks for quality assurance procedures. Therefore, higher education institutions need to implement measures to encourage faculty to use OER, with an emphasis on co-creation, remixing, and sharing.
Research Problem
Despite the potential benefits of OER in higher education, their full implementation and impact have not been fully realized. Existing research suggests that there is a need to further understand the experiences of faculty regarding OER adoption to encourage more widespread use.
This gap in knowledge should be addressed by investigating the faculty's perspective on OER, with the goal of informing decision-making processes and promoting the adoption of OER. By doing so, this study seeks to contribute to the provision of inclusive, accessible, and high-quality education that meets the evolving needs of students and educators.
Research Aim and Scope
The current study aims to examine faculty perceptions, awareness, and utilization of OER in higher education, as well as the barriers hindering their adoption. The research will encompass multiple perspectives, including demographic information, teaching practices involving technology, familiarity and opinions regarding OER, types of OER utilized by faculty, ease of searching for OER, a comparison between open and traditional resources, intentions to use OER in the near future, and factors deterring the adoption of OER. By examining these factors, the study seeks to provide insights into the role of OER in higher education and inform strategies for promoting their use while addressing adoption barriers.
Research Questions
Listed below are the primary research questions:
-
RQ1: How do faculty incorporate technology into their teaching practices?
-
RQ2: To what extent do faculty receive institutional support for utilizing OER?
-
RQ3: What are faculty' perceptions of OER in terms of their value and relevance to teaching and learning?
-
RQ4: What are faculty' beliefs regarding the benefits associated with the use of?
-
RQ5: what specific types of OER are most commonly utilized by faculty and how frequently do they use them?
-
RQ6: How do faculty perceive the quality and effectiveness of OER compared to traditional educational resources?
-
RQ7: What are the primary deterrents that prevent faculty from adopting OER?
-
RQ8: How do faculty characteristics impact on their engagement with OER?
The research design employed a quantitative approach to address the research questions. The study utilized an online survey questionnaire to align with the specific aims, scope, and context of the current study. The questionnaire consists of two main sections. The first section consists of demographic information, including participants' gender, workload, teaching experience, teaching style, awareness of OER, ease of searching for OER, use of OER in the next three years. The second section explores participants' perspectives and attitudes towards OER, covering various aspects such as teaching with technology, institutional support, perception, believes, use and type of OER, OER compared to traditional resources (3 points scale), and adoption deterrents.
Sampling strategy and participants
The study used a random sample of faculty members. They were invited to join the study through university and personal emails, and personal contacts were used to increase the reach. The researcher's connection with the university where the study was conducted made the data collection easier.
Validity and Reliability
The questionnaire was validated through piloting with three experts in the field of educational technology. Then, necessary changes were made. Regarding reliability, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used indicating a good level of internal consistency (α = .86).
Demographics and background
Table 1 provides an overview of the demographics and background of the respondents. In terms of gender, 52.5% of the respondents identified as male, while 47.5% identified as female. Regarding workload, 51.8% of the respondents reported being involved in teaching only, while 48.2% reported teaching with an administrative role. The respondents had varied teaching experience, with 38.1% reporting having 5 to less than 15 years, and 37.4% reporting having more than 15 years of experience. In terms of teaching style, the majority, 66.9%, preferred blended or hybrid teaching. When it comes to awareness of OER, the majority of faculty were aware (38.1%) and very aware of OER (27.3%). Regarding the ease of searching for OER, the majority of faculty found it easy (54.0%) and very easy (32.8%). Looking at the intention to use OER in the next three years, the vast majority of faculty (82.0%) indicated that they would consider using OER.
Table 1: Demographics and Background
Teaching with technology
Table 2 presents faculty ratings on their agreement levels regarding various aspects of teaching with technology, using a 5-point scale.
|
How much do you agree on the following? |
M |
SD |
|---|---|---|
|
1. Used social media to interact with colleagues |
4.56 |
0.66 |
|
2. Used social media to interact with students |
4.22 |
1.19 |
|
3. Published digital scholarship work |
4.06 |
0.99 |
|
4. Assigned books for which eText books and traditional formats are both available |
4.04 |
1.08 |
|
5. Used digital materials such as simulations and videos in course presentations |
3.99 |
1.15 |
|
6. Assigned material available only in eText book format |
3.91 |
1.24 |
Faculty show a high level of agreement with using social media for interaction, engaging in digital scholarship, and assigning books available in both eText and traditional formats. However, the level of agreement is slightly lower when it comes to using digital materials in course presentations and assigning material exclusively available in eText book format. The findings suggest that faculty members are generally open to integrating technology into their teaching practices.
Institutional support
Table 3 examines respondents' opinions on institutional support for OER.
|
What is your opinion about the nature of support that you receive from your institution? |
M |
SD |
|---|---|---|
|
1. Respects teaching with OER (in person or online) |
3.57 |
1.27 |
|
2. Provides support and flexibility in understanding and choosing intellectual property policies |
2.81 |
1.29 |
|
3. Has a fair system of rewarding contributions made to digital pedagogy |
2.73 |
1.40 |
|
4. Has strong policies to protect intellectual property rights for digital work |
2.62 |
1.26 |
Faculty members expressed a need for more support and flexibility in understanding and choosing intellectual property policies, as well as a fair system for recognizing contributions made to digital pedagogy. Additionally, there is a perceived lack of strong policies to protect intellectual property rights for digital work. This Results suggests that while faculty members perceive some level of institutional support for teaching with OER, there are areas where the support could be improved.
Faculty perception of OER
Table 4 presents faculty ratings regarding their perception of OER.
|
Which of the following would you include in your description of OER? |
M |
SD |
|---|---|---|
|
1. Is available for free |
4.21 |
0.81 |
|
2. Is easy to combine with other course materials |
4.21 |
0.84 |
|
3. Has the ability to remix and repurpose |
4.09 |
0.79 |
|
4. Is more up to date than textbooks |
3.97 |
1.12 |
|
5. Is provided with a Creative Commons license |
3.86 |
0.97 |
|
6. Is easy to modify |
3.56 |
1.15 |
|
7. Is of high quality |
3.53 |
1.13 |
Faculty members perceive several positive aspects of OER, including its availability for free and the ease of combining it with other course materials. They also recognize its potential for remixing and repurposing. However, there are some concerns regarding the timeliness compared to textbooks and the presence of creative commons licenses. Faculty members also have a moderate perception regarding the ease of modification and the overall quality of OER.
Faculty believes about OER
Table 5 presents faculty's beliefs regarding OER.
|
Do you believe the following statements about OER? |
M |
SD |
|---|---|---|
|
1. OER lead to more equitable access and serve a broader base of learners than traditional education |
4.47 |
0.58 |
|
2. Use of OER leads to improvement in student performance |
4.47 |
0.59 |
|
3. Use of OER leads to critical reflection by educators, with evidence of improvement in their practice |
4.37 |
0.69 |
|
4. The open aspect of OER creates different usage and adoption patterns than other online resources |
4.29 |
0.75 |
|
5. Use of OER leads to improvement in student satisfaction |
4.29 |
0.73 |
|
6. OER adoption at an institutional level lead to financial benefits for students and/or institutions |
4.12 |
0.89 |
The findings indicate that faculty members have positive beliefs about the impact and benefits of OER. They strongly believe that OER can contribute to equitable access, improved student performance, critical reflection by educators, and different usage patterns compared to other online resources. Faculty members also hold a moderate to strong belief that OER can enhance student satisfaction and lead to financial benefits at the institutional level.
Faculty use and type of OER
Table 6 provides information on the types of OER used by faculty.
|
Have you used any of the following types of OER? |
M |
SD |
|---|---|---|
|
1. Class presentations |
4.65 |
0.75 |
|
2. Images |
4.29 |
1.00 |
|
3. Videos |
4.04 |
1.23 |
|
4. Open textbooks, chapters from textbooks |
3.96 |
1.22 |
|
5. Infographics |
3.94 |
1.21 |
|
6. Tests and quizzes |
3.94 |
1.17 |
|
7. eBooks |
3.93 |
1.22 |
|
8. Homework exercises |
3.76 |
1.25 |
|
9. Interactive games or simulations |
3.50 |
1.33 |
|
10. Audio podcasts |
3.38 |
1.35 |
|
11. Video lectures/tutorials |
3.36 |
1.50 |
|
12. Whole course |
3.35 |
1.40 |
|
13. Elements of an existing course |
3.25 |
1.35 |
Class presentations, images, and videos are the most frequently used OER types, suggesting their effectiveness in enhancing instructional materials. Open textbooks and chapters from textbooks are also commonly adopted, highlighting their role as alternative resources. While other types of OER show slightly lower usage, their utilization demonstrates a diverse range of OER integration. These findings indicate that faculty are actively incorporating various types of OER into their teaching practices.
OER compared to traditional resources
Table 7 presents faculty ratings on the quality of OER compared to traditional resources on a 3-point scale.
|
How would you compare the quality of OER to the of traditional resources? |
M |
SD |
|---|---|---|
|
1. Current |
2.79 |
0.44 |
|
2. Wide adoption |
2.77 |
0.46 |
|
3. Range of subjects |
2.68 |
0.50 |
|
4. Range of materials for each subject |
2.63 |
0.54 |
|
5. Cost |
2.61 |
0.68 |
|
6. Works with LMS |
2.53 |
0.59 |
|
7. Mapped to learning outcomes |
2.49 |
0.58 |
|
8. Ease of Use |
2.49 |
0.74 |
|
9. Easy to find and select |
2.42 |
0.74 |
|
10. Proven efficacy |
2.40 |
0.66 |
|
11. Trusted quality |
2.29 |
0.70 |
These ratings suggest that faculty members recognize the advantages of OER in terms of their up-to-date content, widespread usage, availability across various subjects, diverse range of materials, cost-effectiveness, compatibility with LMS platforms, alignment with desired learning outcomes, user-friendliness, ease of access and selection, proven effectiveness, and trusted quality.
Deterrents to the adoption of OER
Table 8 presents the most important deterrents identified by faculty regarding the use of OER.
|
What are the most important deterrents to the use of OER in your courses? |
M |
SD |
|---|---|---|
|
1. Lack of support from my institution |
3.82 |
1.26 |
|
2. Not used by other faculty I know |
3.72 |
1.23 |
|
3. No comprehensive catalogue |
3.57 |
1.44 |
|
4. Not enough resources for my subject |
3.35 |
1.36 |
|
5. Too hard to find what I need |
3.14 |
1.33 |
|
6. Too difficult to change or edit |
2.96 |
1.51 |
|
7. Not knowing if I have permission to use or change |
2.91 |
1.35 |
|
8. Not current, up to date |
2.62 |
1.32 |
|
9. Too difficult to use |
2.61 |
1.33 |
|
10. Not relevant to my local context |
2.53 |
1.36 |
|
11. Not high-quality |
2.51 |
1.17 |
|
12. Too difficult to integrate into technology I use |
2.35 |
1.36 |
|
13. Not effective at improving student performance |
2.20 |
1.17 |
The top deterrent identified is the lack of support from their institution. This suggests that faculty members feel the need for institutional backing and resources to effectively implement OER in their courses.
The second deterrent is the perception that other faculty members they know are not using OER, indicating that peer influence and collaboration play a role in the adoption of OER.
Another significant deterrent identified is the absence of a comprehensive catalogue of OER. Also, insufficient availability of resources for their subject area and difficulty in finding the required materials also contribute to the perceived deterrents. Faculty members may find it challenging to locate a comprehensive catalogue of OER and suitable OER materials for their specific subject areas without a centralized and easily accessible resource repository.
Faculty members also expressed concerns about the difficulty of changing or editing OER materials, as well as uncertainty about permissions to use or modify the resources. These factors indicate a need for user-friendly tools and clear guidelines regarding the licensing and customization of OER.
The perceived deterrents also include issues related to the currency and quality of OER. Faculty members expressed concerns about the timeliness and relevance of OER materials, as well as the overall quality of the resources available. These factors highlight the importance of curating and maintaining high-quality and up-to-date OER collections.
Technical challenges were also identified as deterrents, such as difficulties in using and integrating OER into existing technology platforms and systems. This suggests a need for user-friendly interfaces and seamless integration options to enhance the adoption of OER.
In summary, total mean scores were computed for each variable. Table 9 presents a summary of faculty perspectives on OER. Faculty beliefs about OER received a high mean score of 4.34, indicating positive attitudes. Teaching with technology received a favourable mean score of 4.13. Faculty perceptions of OER scored 3.92 on average, indicating generally positive views. The mean score for faculty uses and type of OER was 3.80, indicating moderate utilization. Deterrents to the adoption of OER had a lower mean score of 2.94, suggesting some challenges or concerns. Institutional support received a mean score of 2.93, indicating a perceived need for greater support. When comparing OER to traditional resources on a 3-point scale, OER scored 2.55 on average, suggesting a slightly more positive perception.
|
Totals |
M |
SD |
|---|---|---|
|
Faculty believes about OER |
4.34 |
0.52 |
|
Teaching with technology |
4.13 |
0.76 |
|
Faculty perceptions of OER |
3.92 |
0.62 |
|
Faculty use and type of OER |
3.80 |
0.91 |
|
Deterrents to the adoption of OER |
2.94 |
0.93 |
|
Institutional support |
2.93 |
1.16 |
|
OER vs. traditional resources (3-points scale) |
2.55 |
0.40 |
The impact of faculty characteristics on their engagement with OER
A Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) test was conducted to investigate the impact of faculty characteristics on their different perspectives and practices and revealed several significant effects (Table 10).
Table 10: Multivariate Testsa
|
Effect |
Value |
F |
Hypothesis df |
Error df |
Sig. |
ηp² |
|
|
Gender |
Wilks' Lambda |
.630 |
5.807b |
9.000 |
89.000 |
.000 |
.370 |
|
Ease of OER |
.098 |
11.764 |
27.000 |
260.568 |
.000 |
.540 |
|
|
Workload |
.624 |
5.969b |
9.000 |
89.000 |
.000 |
.376 |
|
|
Teaching Experience |
.398 |
5.793b |
18.000 |
178.000 |
.000 |
.369 |
|
|
Teaching Style |
.340 |
19.213b |
9.000 |
89.000 |
.000 |
.660 |
|
|
a. Design. b. Exact statistic. c. The statistic is an upper bound on F that yields a lower bound on the significance level. d. Computed using alpha = .05 |
|||||||
The summary of significant effects follows:
-
Gender: Gender had a significant effect (Wilks' Lambda = 0.630, F = 5.807, p < 0.001) with a moderate Partial Eta Squared (ηp²) of 0.370, indicating that it influenced the dependent variables.
-
Ease of OER: Ease of OER had a significant effect (Wilks' Lambda = 0.098, F = 11.764, p < 0.001) with a relatively high ηp² of 0.540, suggesting its impact on the dependent variables.
-
Workload: Workload had a significant effect (Wilks' Lambda = 0.624, F = 5.969, p < 0.001) with a moderate ηp² of 0.376, indicating its influence on the dependent variables.
-
Teaching Experience: Teaching Experience had a significant effect (Wilks' Lambda = 0.398, F = 5.793, p < 0.001) with a moderate ηp² of 0.369, suggesting its impact on the dependent variables.
-
Teaching Style: Teaching Style had a significant effect (Wilks' Lambda = 0.340, F = 19.213, p < 0.001) with a high ηp² of 0.660, indicating its influence on the dependent variables.
The Tests of Between-Subjects Effects are conducted to examine the impact of independent variables on dependent variables in a between-subjects design (Table 11).
Table 11: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
1. Gender
Gender differences were observed in various aspects related to faculty perspectives on OER, although the effect sizes were modest. The findings indicate that male faculty members perceived higher institutional support for OER compared to their female counterparts. Males also had slightly stronger perceptions of OER, higher engagement with OER, and greater awareness of OER compared to females.
2. Ease of OER
The ease of using OER was found to be influenced by various factors according to the study. Participants reported different levels of difficulty or ease in teaching with technology using OER, indicating that the perceived ease varied depending on the specific technologies involved. Institutional support was also found to have a significant impact on the perceived ease of OER adoption, suggesting that participants' experiences of adopting OER were influenced by the level of support provided by their institutions.
Additionally, faculty perceptions, beliefs about OER, and the type of OER used were all factors that influenced the perceived ease of OER adoption. Participants reported different levels of difficulty or ease in adopting OER based on their perceptions, beliefs, and the specific type of OER they engaged with.
Furthermore, participants' comparison of using OER to traditional resources also played a role, with varying levels of difficulty or ease reported. Overcoming deterrents to OER adoption was perceived differently among participants, indicating that some individuals found it more challenging to overcome barriers to OER adoption than others.
The level of OER awareness also had an impact, as participants reported different levels of difficulty or ease in adopting OER based on their awareness of the resources.
Lastly, the perceived ease of using OER in the future was found to vary among participants. This suggests that individuals had different expectations and anticipated different levels of difficulty or ease in utilizing OER in the coming years.
3. Workload
The workload of faculty members was found to have a significant impact on various aspects related to institutional support and beliefs about OER. Specifically, the study revealed that workload significantly affected institutional support, indicating that faculty members solely involved in teaching perceived lower support compared to those with a teaching role and administrative responsibilities who had a slightly higher perception of support.
Furthermore, workload was also found to have a significant impact on faculty beliefs about OER. Faculty members solely involved in teaching exhibited stronger beliefs about OER, indicating a higher level of belief in the benefits and value of OER, compared to those with a teaching role and administrative responsibilities who had slightly lower beliefs about OER.
4. Teaching Experience
The study revealed that teaching experience has a notable impact on several aspects related to the use of technology in teaching and the perception of OER. First, participants with more teaching experience perceived teaching with technology to be more challenging, with those having over 15 years of experience finding it the most difficult. This suggests that familiarity and adaptability to new technologies may vary among faculty members based on their teaching experience.
Furthermore, teaching experience influenced the perception of institutional support for utilizing OER. Participants with longer teaching experience generally had a slightly higher perception of support compared to their less-experienced counterparts. This indicates that faculty members with more experience may have established stronger support networks and resources within their institutions, which could facilitate their adoption and integration of OER.
Moreover, the perception of OER compared to traditional resources was also influenced by teaching experience. Participants with more teaching experience tended to hold a slightly more positive view of OER, potentially indicating their recognition of the benefits and value that OER can bring to their teaching practices. Conversely, those with less experience displayed a slightly lower perception of OER, suggesting a potential need for further awareness and education about the advantages of OER among this group.
Teaching experience also impacted the awareness of OER, with participants having 5 to less than 15 years of experience exhibiting the highest level of awareness. This suggests that faculty members in the mid-career stage may have been exposed to OER initiatives and resources and thus possess a better understanding of their availability and potential benefits.
Lastly, teaching experience influenced the intention to use OER in the future. Participants with more experience expressed a higher intention to adopt OER, indicating their readiness to incorporate these resources into their teaching practices. This aligns with the notion that teaching experience can contribute to the openness and willingness to embrace innovative pedagogical approaches.
5. Teaching Style
Teaching style emerged as a significant factor influencing various aspects related to the use of OER and perceptions of institutional support. Participants teaching in different settings, namely fully online, blended or hybrid, and face-to-face, displayed distinct patterns in their perceptions and behaviors regarding OER.
First, teaching style had a notable impact on the perceived level of institutional support. Faculty members teaching in a fully online setting reported the highest perception of support, indicating that the online teaching environment may offer more resources and assistance for OER implementation. In contrast, those teaching in a blended or hybrid setting had a slightly lower perception of support, and individuals teaching in a face-to-face setting reported the lowest perception of support. This suggests that the type of teaching setting can influence the level of institutional support available to faculty members, which in turn may affect their engagement with OER.
Furthermore, teaching style influenced faculty beliefs about OER. Faculty members teaching in a fully online setting exhibited stronger beliefs about OER compared to their counterparts in blended or hybrid and face-to-face settings. This finding suggests that the nature of the teaching environment may shape faculty members' understanding and appreciation of OER, with online instructors being more inclined to recognize the value and benefits of OER.
The use and type of OER also varied according to teaching style. Faculty members teaching in a fully online setting reported a higher use of OER, followed by those in a blended or hybrid setting, and individuals teaching in a face-to-face setting had the lowest OER usage. This indicates that online instructors may have more opportunities and incentives to incorporate OER into their teaching practices compared to their counterparts in traditional face-to-face classrooms.
Teaching style also influenced the perception of OER compared to traditional resources. Faculty members teaching in a fully online setting had a more positive view of OER, followed by those in a face-to-face setting, while individuals teaching in a blended or hybrid setting had a slightly lower perception. This suggests that the unique characteristics and affordances of different teaching environments may shape faculty members' perceptions of OER's value and relevance compared to traditional resources.
Moreover, the deterrents to OER adoption varied based on teaching style. Faculty members teaching in a fully online setting reported fewer deterrents, indicating that the online teaching environment may offer more facilitative conditions for OER adoption. In contrast, those in a blended or hybrid setting had more perceived deterrents, and individuals teaching in a face-to-face setting reported a slightly higher level of deterrents. This finding suggests that the teaching setting can influence the challenges and barriers faced by faculty members when considering OER adoption.
Teaching style also had a significant impact on the awareness of OER. Faculty members teaching in a blended or hybrid setting exhibited the highest awareness, followed by those in a face-to-face setting, while individuals teaching in a fully online setting had the lowest awareness. This finding suggests that faculty members in blended or hybrid settings may have been exposed to OER initiatives and resources more prominently compared to their counterparts in other teaching settings.
Lastly, teaching style influenced the intention to use OER in the future. Faculty members teaching in a fully online setting expressed a higher intention to use OER, followed by those in a blended or hybrid setting, while individuals teaching in a face-to-face setting had a lower intention. This suggests that the teaching style can influence faculty members' openness and readiness to embrace OER in their future teaching practices.
The findings reveal a diverse gender distribution among respondents, a combination of teaching roles and administrative responsibilities, varying levels of teaching experience, a preference for blended or hybrid teaching styles, a significant awareness of OER, ease in searching for OER, and a strong intention to use OER in the future.
The results emphasize faculty members' willingness to embrace technology in different aspects of teaching while also highlighting the need for further exploration and support in specific areas of technology integration (Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Marín et al., 2020; Spilovoy et al., 2020).
Institutions should address concerns such as providing support and flexibility in understanding and selecting intellectual property policies, establishing fair systems for recognizing contributions to digital pedagogy, protecting intellectual property rights, and creating a supportive environment that encourages faculty engagement with OER (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019; Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Marín et al., 2020; Spilovoy et al., 2020; UNESCO, 2023).
The findings underscore the key attributes that faculty members associate with OER, including affordability, flexibility, remixing potential, and open licensing (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019; UNESCO, 2023). Institutions and educators should continue to promote and support the use of OER while addressing concerns related to timeliness, licensing, and ease of modification to enhance faculty confidence and engagement (Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Marín et al., 2020; Spilovoy et al., 2020)
The results demonstrate faculty members' active involvement with OER across different formats, indicating their readiness to explore and leverage the potential of OER in their teaching practices. Faculty members are receptive to incorporating various types of OER into their instructional approaches, aligning with the flexible and adaptable nature of OER resources (e.g., Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Marín et al., 2022; Spilovoy et al., 2020). This result contradicts Abri and Dabbagh (2018) who found that there is limited awareness among faculty regarding OER.
The findings shed light on the challenges and barriers that faculty members encounter when considering OER adoption. These include lack of institutional support, limited peer models using OER, absence of comprehensive OER catalogs, resource scarcity, difficulty in finding required materials, challenges in modifying OER materials, uncertainties regarding permissions for use and modification, concerns about the currency and quality of OER, and difficulties in integrating OER into existing technology platforms and systems (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019; Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Tillinghast, 2020). To overcome these barriers and facilitate the effective integration of OER into teaching and learning practices, institutions should address these deterrents through providing institutional support, developing comprehensive catalogs, ensuring resource availability, offering user-friendly tools, and implementing quality assurance measures (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019; Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Marín et al., 2020; Spilovoy et al., 2020; UNESCO, 2023).
Male participants received higher institutional support for OER and reported higher engagement with OER, while female participants had slightly higher perceptions of OER. The gender differences highlight the need for promoting gender equity in terms of institutional support, perceptions, use, and awareness of OER among faculty members (Perryman & De Los Arcos, 2016).
The findings highlight the multidimensional nature of the ease of using OER, which is influenced by factors such as technology, institutional support, perceptions, beliefs, deterrents, awareness, and future expectations. Understanding these factors can help inform efforts to enhance the ease of adopting and utilizing OER in educational settings (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019; Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Otto, 2021; Tillinghast, 2020).
The findings suggest that the workload of faculty members can influence their perceptions of institutional support and their beliefs about the effectiveness and importance of OER. It implies that faculty members with administrative responsibilities, in addition to their teaching roles, may have slightly different perspectives due to the additional workload they bear. Understanding the impact of workload on institutional support and beliefs about OER can be valuable in addressing the needs and concerns of faculty members and providing appropriate support to enhance their engagement with OER (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019; Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Tillinghast, 2020).
The findings underscore the influence of teaching experience on various factors related to teaching with technology and the adoption of OER. Recognizing the differences in perceptions and attitudes among faculty members based on their teaching experience can inform targeted strategies to provide appropriate support, training, and resources for different cohorts of educators. By addressing the specific needs and challenges associated with teaching experience, institutions can effectively promote the integration of technology and OER, ultimately enhancing the overall teaching and learning experience (Hoosen & Butcher, 2019; Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Spilovoy et al., 2020; Tillinghast, 2020)
The findings highlight the influence of teaching style on faculty perceptions, beliefs, behaviors, and intentions regarding OER. Understanding the unique characteristics and demands of different teaching environments can inform targeted support, professional development, and resources to facilitate OER adoption and integration. By addressing the specific needs and challenges associated with teaching style, institutions can foster a more favorable environment for faculty members to explore (Abri & Dabbagh, 2018; Contrada & Good-Schiff, 2021; Hoosen & Butcher, 2019; Lantrip & Ray, 2021; Martin & Kimmons, 2019; Spilovoy et al., 2020; Tillinghast, 2020).
The results emphasize the importance of creating awareness and fostering positive intentions toward OER among faculty members. Efforts should be made to ensure that faculty members are well-informed about the benefits, opportunities, and resources available in relation to OER. Promoting awareness and intention can help cultivate a culture of OER adoption and utilization among faculty, leading to increased collaboration, sharing of resources, and ultimately improving the quality and accessibility of education.
The findings provide valuable insights into the gender distribution, workload considerations, teaching experience, and teaching styles of faculty members, as well as their awareness, perceptions, and intentions related to OER. By considering these factors, institutions can develop targeted strategies and initiatives to support faculty members in adopting, integrating, and utilizing OER effectively, thereby promoting a more inclusive, innovative, and accessible educational environment.
The current study aimed to examine faculty perceptions, awareness, and utilization of OER in higher education, as well as the barriers hindering their adoption. The study findings reveal a diverse gender distribution among respondents, a combination of teaching roles and administrative responsibilities, varying levels of teaching experience, a preference for blended or hybrid teaching styles, significant awareness of OER, ease in searching for OER, and a strong intention to use OER in the future. The results emphasize the importance of addressing concerns related to institutional support, intellectual property policies, recognition of contributions, and creating a supportive environment to enhance faculty engagement with OER. Furthermore, the study highlights the attributes associated with OER, the challenges faced by faculty members, and the need for targeted strategies and initiatives to promote OER adoption and integration. These findings provide valuable insights that can inform efforts to foster a more inclusive, innovative, and accessible educational environment.
The study implications suggest that institutions should take a comprehensive and targeted approach to support faculty members in adopting, integrating, and utilizing OER effectively. By addressing the specific needs and challenges identified in the study, institutions can promote a more inclusive, innovative, and accessible educational environment. To do so, the study implies that:
-
Institutions should strive to create an equitable environment that supports and empowers all faculty members regardless of their gender.
-
Efforts should be made to enhance the ease of adopting and utilizing OER by providing appropriate resources, training, and support to faculty members.
-
Institutions should consider the impact of workload when providing support and resources for OER adoption, particularly for faculty members with administrative responsibilities.
-
Institutions should recognize the differences among faculty members based on their teaching experience and provide targeted support, training, and resources to meet their specific needs and challenges.
-
Institutions should understand the unique characteristics and demands of different teaching environments and provide targeted support, professional development, and resources to facilitate OER adoption and integration based on teaching styles.
-
Institutions should actively promote the benefits, opportunities, and resources related to OER to cultivate a culture of OER adoption and utilization among faculty.
First, the small sample size and demographics may limit the generalizability of the findings to a broader population. Future research could involve larger and more diverse samples, including faculty from different disciplines, institutions, and geographic locations, to enhance the representativeness of the findings.
Second, while the study primarily utilized quantitative methods, future research could incorporate qualitative approaches such as interviews or focus groups to gain more in-depth insights into faculty experiences, motivations, and challenges related to OER adoption.
Third, the study only explored faculty perceptions of OER. Future research could investigate the pedagogical impact of OER adoption on student learning outcomes, engagement, and satisfaction. This would provide a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness and benefits of OER from both faculty and student perspectives.
Data will be made available on reasonable request.
The author declares that no financial support or funding was received.
- Abri, M. H. A., & Dabbagh, N. (2018). Open Educational Resources: A Literature Review. Journal of Mason Graduate Research, 6(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.13021/g8jmgr.v6i1.2386
- Contrada, C., & Good-Schiff, K. (2021). Ladders in the orchard: What’s next for OER? College & Research Libraries News, 82, 132. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.82.3.132
- David. (2014, March 5). The Access Compromise and the 5th R. https://opencontent.org/blog/archives/3221
- Green, C., & Vézina, B. (2020). Education in Times of Crisis and Beyond: Maximizing Copyright Flexibilities. Creative Commons. https://creativecommons.org/2020/03/31/education-in-times-of-crisis-and-beyond-maximizing-copyright-flexibilities/
- Hilton, J. (2020). Open educational resources, student efficacy, and user perceptions: a synthesis of research published between 2015 and 2018. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 853-876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09700-4
- Hodgkinson-Williams, C., & Arinto, P. B. (2017). Adoption and impact of OER in the Global South. Cape Town & Ottawa: African Minds, International Development Research Centre & Research on Open Educational Resources. https://doi.org/DOI:10.5281/zenodo.1005330
- Hoosen, S., & Butcher, N. (2019). Understanding the Impact of OER: Achievements and Challenges. The UNESCO IITE. https://iite.unesco.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Understanding_the_impact_of_OER_2019_final.pdf
- Lantrip, J., & Ray, J. (2021). Faculty Perceptions and Usage of OER at Oregon Community Colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 45(12), 896-910. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2020.1838967
- Marín, V. I., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Bedenlier, S. (2020). Open Educational Resources in German Higher Education – An International Perspective. EDEN Conference Proceedings, 85-94. https://doi.org/10.38069/edenconf-2020-rw0010
- Marín, V. I., Zawacki-Richter, O., Aydin, C. H., Bedenlier, S., Bond, M., Bozkurt, A., . . . Zhang, J. (2022). Faculty perceptions, awareness and use of open educational resources for teaching and learning in higher education: a cross-comparative analysis. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 17(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-022-00185-z
- Martin, T., & Kimmons, R. (2019). Faculty’ Lived Experiences with Choosing Open Educational Resources. Open Praxis, 12(1), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.12.1.987
- Nagashima, T., & Hrach, S. (2021). Motivating Factors among University Faculty for Adopting Open Educational Resources: Incentives Matter. Journal of Interactive Media in Education (19), 1-10. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.678
- Nusbaum, A. T., Cuttler, C., & Swindell, S. (2020). Open Educational Resources as a Tool for Educational Equity: Evidence From an Introductory Psychology Class [Original Research]. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00152
- Otto, D. (2021). Driven by Emotions! The Effect of Attitudes on Intention and Behaviour regarding Open Educational Resources (OER). Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2021(1)(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.606
- Perryman, L.-A., & Arcos, B. d. l. (2016). Women’s empowerment through openness: OER, OEP and the Sustainable Development Goals. Open Praxis, 8, 163-180. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.8.2.289
- Senn, L. G., Heim, A. B., Vinson, E., & Smith, M. K. (2022). How Do Undergraduate Biology Instructors Engage with the Open Educational Resource Life Cycle? [Original Research]. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.835764
- Spilovoy, T., Seaman, J., & Ralph, N. (2020). The Impact of OER Initiatives on Faculty Selection of Classroom Materials. Bay View Analytics. https://www.wisconsin.edu/opid/download/The-Impact-of-OER-Initiatives-on-Faculty-Selection-of-Classroom-Materials.pdf
- Tillinghast, B. (2020). Developing an Open Educational Resource and Exploring OER-Enabled Pedagogy in Higher Education. IAFOR Journal of Education, 8(2), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.8.2.09
- Todorinova, L., & Wilkinson, Z. T. (2020). Incentivizing faculty for open educational resources (OER) adoption and open textbook authoring. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(6), 102220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102220
- UNESCO. (2023). Open Educational Resources. https://www.unesco.org/en/open-educational-resources
- Van Allen, J., & Katz, S. (2020). Teaching with OER during pandemics and beyond. Journal for Multicultural Education, 14(3/4), 209-218. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-04-2020-0027
- Wickline, H. (2016). Open Educational Resources: Breaking the Lockbox on Education. Hewlett Foundation. https://hewlett.org/open-educational-resources-breaking-the-lockbox-on-education/
No competing interests reported.