instructor & student experiences with open textbooks, from the california open online library...

INSTRUCTOR AND STUDENT

EXPERIENCES WITH OPEN TEXTBOOKS,

FROM THE CALIFORNIA OPEN ONLINE

LIBRARY FOR EDUCATION (COOL4ED)

Christina Hendricks – University of British Columbia-Vancouver

Ozgur Ozdemir – Indiana University

Open Education Conference, Nov. 2016

1

California Community CollegesCalifornia State University

University of California

3

http://coolfored.org/

Research Questions• Faculty motivations for adopting OT or other OER• Cost savings for students• Student perceptions/attitudes (as reported by

faculty)• Impact on student learning and retention• Other benefits and drawbacks

3

Methods

Data collection

51 Faculty ePortfolios• About the (1) book, (2) course,

(3) open textbook adoption, and (4) faculty bio

• 30 Postsecondary Institutions• 7 Disciplinary Areas

Data analysis Content Analysis• Open Coding

4

Findings: RQ1

5

Note: N=51

Cost Saving Content Repurposing Accessibility

80%

44%

24%

20%

Motivating Factors

Findings: RQ2• Typical costs for new textbooks reported by faculty: $50 to over $275 per book, average $140

• 32 faculty members reported how many students teach/year

• Estimated total cost savings: $706,740 per year, for 5733 students ($123/student)

6

#textbookbrokebc image, by UBC undergraduate student society

Findings: RQ3

Note: N=40Cost Saving Content Accessibility

97%

43%

40%

0%

15%

0%

Students Attitude

Positive Attitude Negative Attitude

7

Findings: RQ4

Note: N=51

Yes, Improved Stayed the Same Declined Not Assessed/Unsure

39%

16%

0%

45%

16%

12%

0%

72%

Learning & Retention

Student Learning Improved? Student Retention Improved?

8

Findings: RQ5

Note: N=519

Collaborated more with other faculty?

Used wider range of materials?

Drawbacks of using OER?

61%

86%

14%

39%

14%

86%

OTHER BENEFITS OR FRAWBACKS

Yes No

Some conclusions• Cost savings: most prominent concern for faculty (80%)

& students (93% of those that reported student views)

• Content: only 4% of portfolios showed negative views by faculty, 12% by students

• Adaptability: noted as important on 40% of portfolios

10