At this year’s Open Education Conference in Vancouver, Canada, there were several sessions on how the use of OER led to”better” learning outcomes for students than the use of “paid-for” textbooks and other materials. Needless to say, this is certainly a nice conclusion for supporters of the open education movement! However, is it really true that materials created specifically for public sharing are better (i.e. more effective) than materials produced for sale? The conference presenters compared classes of students that used OER with classes in which the students had to purchase textbooks (same course, different materials). Student could self-select themselves into courses that did not require them to purchase textbooks (often in the $200 or $300 price range) and those that did. Aside from self-selection and other biases, why did OER fare better?
One possible answer emerged when probing more deeply how OER usage was put into practice. Instructors who decided to adopt OER spent a fair amount of time reviewing their content and existing materials, and identifying the learning objectives they wanted students to achieve. This then informed the selection and modification of OER content in preparation for the courses as well as encouraged the instructors to refine their teaching practices since they could not rely on a pre-existing textbook.
In other words, the instructors actually stopped to think about their teaching and their students’ learning – they applied good pedagogical principles in the organization of their courses and the selection of OER materials. Now that is sure to lead to better teaching and learning with or without “free” content! So, while the original intent was not necessarily to redesign the courses, the adoption of OER did require a certain degree of redesign, which brought welcome results to the students!