Evaluation of Open Educational Resources for an Introductory Exercise Science Course
While open educational resources (OER) have gained popularity, nearly three quarters of faculty are not aware they are available for use. However, when used, they are well received and do not negatively impact quality of learning. OER can be used within a variety of platforms, including software that aims to be more interactive and engage students in active learning and assessment. One such platform is Top Hat, which was used by the authors of this study to develop a textbook for an introductory exercise science course. We assessed student’s perceptions of Top Hat and barriers to use for reading their textbook and for class assessments over the course of two years. A total of 486 students were registered for this course. Although two thirds of students had previous experience with Top Hat and half of those used the textbook feature, students (n = 39, 38%) were apprehensive about reading their textbook online via Top Hat. However, these feelings resolved as students became comfortable with the platform’s features. Nearly 80% of students have sometimes or never acquired their textbooks before the start of the semester, despite 96% who expressed the importance of having their materials accessible online and available on or before the first day of the course. This indicated that students understood the importance of having their materials for the start of the semester, however they perceived the barriers of purchasing books to be greater. Therefore, using OER and Top Hat removed student learning barriers and had potential to increase course participation and success.
Allen, G., Guzman-Alvarez, A., Molinaro, M., & Larsen, D. S. (2015). Assessing the impact and efficacy of the open-access ChemWiki textbook project. Educause Learning Initiative. https://library.educause.edu/-/media/files/library/2015/1/elib1501-pdf.pdf
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2014). Opening the curriculum: Open educational resources in U.S. higher education, 2014. Babson Survey Research Group. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED572730
Allen, N., Browne, D., Forward, M. L., Green, C., & Tarkowski, A. (2015, November 18). Foundations for OER strategy development (Version 1.0). http://www.oerstrategy.org/home/read-the-doc/
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x
Bliss, T. J., Hilton, J., III, Wiley, D., & Thanos, K. (2013). The cost and quality of online open textbooks: Perceptions of community college faculty and students. First Monday, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v18i1.3972
Bliss, T. J., Robinson, T., Hilton, J., III., & Wiley, D. (2013). An OER coup: College teacher and student perceptions of open educational resources. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2013(1), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.5334/2013-04
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brooks, D. C., & Pomerantz, J. (2017). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2017. EDUCAUSE Research, 41.
Business Wire. (2018, August 2). Ohio University and Top Hat partnership saves students more than $1 million in textbook costs. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180802005149/en/Ohio-University-Top-Hat-Partnership-Saves-Students
Feldstein, A., Martin, M., Hudson, A., Warren, K., Hilton, J., III, & Wiley, D. (2012). Open textbooks and increased student access and outcomes. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 2. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ992490
Galanek, J. D., Gierdowski, D. C., & Brooks, D. C. (2018). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2018. EDUCAUSE Research, 47. https://library.educause.edu/-/media/files/library/2018/10/studentitstudy2018.pdf?la=en&hash=C590C1F6C62B77792711BFAC1F642254A5618590
Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: Where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 503–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902989227
Hewlett Foundation. (2013). Open educational resources [White Paper]. http://www.hewlett.org/programs/education/open-educational-resources
Higher Education Opportunity Act, H.R. 4137, 110th Cong. (2008). https://www.congress.gov/bill/110th-congress/house-bill/4137
Hilton III, J. L., Gaudet, D., Clark, P., Robinson, J., & Wiley, D. (2013). The adoption of open educational resources by one community college math department. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(4), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i4.1523
Hilton, J., III., & Laman, C. (2012). One college’s use of an open psychology textbook. Open Learning, 27(3), 265–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2012.716657
Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2009). Millennials rising: The next great generation. Knopf Doubleday.
Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001
Lovett, M., Meyer, O., & Thille, C. (2008). The open learning initiative: Measuring the effectiveness of the OLI statistics course in accelerating student learning. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. 2008(1), pp. 1-16. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ840810
Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004
Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581
Nusbaum, A. T., Cuttler, C., & Swindell, S. (2020). Open educational resources as a tool for educational equity: Evidence from an introductory psychology class. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00152
Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. L. (Eds.). (2005). Educating the net generation. EDUCAUSE. https://www.educause.edu/research-and-publications/books/educating-net-generation
Ohio University. (2016). Textbook initiative. Instructional innovation initiative. https://www.ohio.edu/instructional-innovation/initiatives/textbook-initiative.html
Ozdemir, O., & Hendricks, C. (2017). Instructor and student experiences with open textbooks, from the California open online library for education (Cool4Ed). Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(1), 98–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9138-0
Pawlyshyn, N., Bradlee, B., Casper, L., & Miller, H. (2013, November 4). Adopting OER: A case study of cross-institutional collaboration and innovation. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/11/adopting-oer-a-case-study-of-crossinstitutional-collaboration-and-innovation
Pierard, C., Svihla, V., Clement, S. K., & Fazio, B.-S. (2020). Undesirable difficulties: Investigating barriers to students’ learning with ebooks in a semester-length course. College & Research Libraries, 81(2). https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.81.2.170
Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. McGraw Hill Professional.
Vitez, K. (2018). Open 101: An action plan for affordable textbooks. Student Public Interest Research Groups. https://studentpirgs.org/2018/01/25/open-101-action-plan-affordable-textbooks/
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. The copyright of all content published in IRRODL is retained by the authors.
This copyright agreement and use license ensures, among other things, that an article will be as widely distributed as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific and/or scholarly archive.
You are free to
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms below:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.