The OERAsia study (http://www.oerasia.org/oerasiasurvey) was conducted to explore the
use of Open Educational Resources (OER’s) in the Asian region especially with
the view to encouraging the development of an OER community that would share
learning resources across institutions and nations. Several regions representative of South, South East and East Asia, which
show sparks of enthusiasm in OER, were selected as subjects for study. However,
as the study was conducted both online and offline, the respondents weren't
necessarily limited to these few regions. The scope of the survey was clearly defined to include the broad topics
covering learning content, tools and implementation resources. The topics were
then sub divided into smaller areas resulting in a comprehensive survey
instrument consisting of seventy plus independent items aimed specifically at
individuals and institutions. There were
several objectives which the study aimed to achieve by the end of its 27 month
lifespan. All of these objectives fall under the broader categories of awareness,
use, re-use, policy and legal environment in the regions.
Out of 576 responses
received from academics who have been exposed to OER, 420 responses from
individual OER users and 98 responses from institutional representatives were
identified as valid (Figure 1). The analysis of the data mainly concentrated on
the key regions, namely Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, India, Philippines,
Japan, China, Hong Kong China and South Korea, which were identified at the
outset. However it also took note of the responses from other countries such as
Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka as well. The respondent profile
showed a good mix of senior, mid-career and junior academics from public,
private not-for-profit as well as private for-profit institutions. The
responses also captured both undergraduate as well as post graduate academics
in a ratio representative of typical Higher Education institutions.
Figure 1 Participant Profile
Before
probing the practice with respect to OER, the survey tried to identify the
extent of the practice with respect to digital resources which forms the
superset of OER. A clear definition of Digital Resources was provided to the
respondents to ensure that a broad canvas is covered pertaining to a set frame.
Looking at the use of digital resources, it was found that text based resources
were the more widely used types in the region. It was also encouraging to see
that digital film and video were used by half of the respondents. This trend
will possibly pickup more in the future due to video sharing portals such as
YouTube and Vimeo offering large volumes of quality video material. News and
other media sources have also become important suggesting that students are
exposed to the latest trends in the world. Among the digital resources which
weren’t that widely used, simulations and animations are worth noting as there
are large volumes of rich resources of this type available especially for
science education. One possible reason for this low use could be the lack of
technical skills required to use and re-use them. Audio materials were also not
widely preferred. This could be due to the substitution of audio material with
audio/video material. Another interesting trend identified was that OER
repositories and course packs were not very widely used in Asia even though
generous amounts of funding have been spent on the creation of these resources.
When looking at how users locate digital resources, generic search engines such
as Google and Yahoo! take precedence. Although these search engines are quite
apt at locating digital resources, it is somewhat doubtful whether the average
user would have the capacity to conduct advanced searches to locate openly
licensed content.
The
study further suggests that one of the more important areas to focus on with
respect to policy would be to provide more support for the use of digital
resources. Among the areas which show a lack of support; locating resources,
accessing the quality of the resources and copyright concerns play a major
role. However, it seems that the practice of using or creating digital
resources is not seen as a career move but a social responsibility of an
educator to share knowledge. This in turn creates a sense of community among
the academics and students. As far as barriers are concerned, three key points
stand out in the responses indicating that a lack of access to software tools
and a lack of technological infrastructure at the students’ end still inhibit
the wider use of digital resources. These barriers should be of special
interest to policy makers at a national level as public infrastructure would
need to be upgraded to facilitate the wider use of digital resources.
OER
were defined as “educational
materials and resources offered freely and openly for anyone to use and under
some licenses to re-mix, improve and redistribute” in
the survey. The data suggests that the use of
OER is widespread in Asia contrary
to the general understanding among advocates. This then begs the questions
whether advocates are preaching to the
converted or whether there is still a sense of confusion with respect to what OER really are. The
research team believes that there is some truth to the first question as many
of the respondents were exposed to the Open University community which is somewhat
knowledgeable about OER. They also believe that there is a considerable amount
of confusion among academics with respect to the difference between digital
resources and OER. However, comparing the publication with use, it seems that a
majority haven’t published OER in their careers. Nevertheless it is promising
to see that about 60% of the respondents are willing to publish their work as
OER in the future.
Resources feely
downloaded from the internet seem to be the favoured choice for academic use
(Figure 2). OER produced by self are also widely used in teaching. It is also
worth noting that the use of OER repositories such as Connexions is only
popular in countries such as Vietnam where there is a strong national OER
presence. 74% of the respondents indicated that they have produced OER in one
form or the other at some point in their career. This again could be a result
of the Open University influence on the respondents and the confusion regarding
the concept of OER.
Figure 2
Sources of OER
Relating
to the models discussed in literature for sustaining OER efforts, it is
apparent that institutions need to collaborate with each other to harness the
full potential of OER through partnerships and exchanges. However, the data
suggests that institutions are not collaborating in the production or exchange
of OER. This again is a wakeup call to the policymakers at institutional level
to include collaboration as a significant component in their OER policies.
Lack
of awareness, skills and time still impedes the OER movement among academics
suggesting a need for more capacity building. It is however encouraging to see
that technological infrastructure is no longer a barrier at least at the
institutional level. This is especially true in the case of open universities
as many of them have established robust technological infrastructure. The data
suggests that there are still concerns with respect to copyright and the legal
use of OER. Awareness of repositories is also mentioned as a major concern.
This is affirmed by the lack of use of repositories to locate OER. These
concerns again hold true with respect to the publication of OER. However, it is
apparent that a large majority of the individuals and institutions are aware of
current copyright laws. As such it can be concluded that the concerns regarding
copyright and legalities in the use and publication of OER are not due to a
lack of awareness but a possible confusion in the understanding of what is
permitted and what is not in the realm of OER. This point is further confirmed
as a majority of the individuals and institutions are yet to use a licensing
scheme such as the Creative Commons to express and exercise the 4R’s of OER. Therefore, the data suggests that policy makers should
pay special attention to furthering awareness regarding copyright and the
adoption of widely used licenses such as Creative Commons when setting policies
at institutional and national level. The respondents agree that the use of open
educational resources will have great impact with respect to the reduction of
costs for both students and institutions promoting a win-win situation. It is
also encouraging to see that OER are seen as a movement which can potentially
improve the standards of living for many developing countries in Asia.
In
conclusion, the study suggests four points for action: (i) further support and
capacity building in the use of digital resources and OER; (ii) fostering a culture of collaboration among
institutions; (iii) raising
awareness and capacity building in open content licensing; and (iv) the
establishment of institutional policies to facilitate the wider use of OER.
These four points need to be taken into consideration
when contemplating the future of the whole OER movement in Asia.
The
trends identified from the overall data were compared and verified against the
trends in the individual regions during the third OERAsia workshop held in Hong
Kong (April 2012). Further statistical analysis of the data will be conducted
in the future. For more details on the survey instrument, methodology, list of
collaborating researchers and institutions; results and data visit (http://www.oerasia.org/oerasiasurvey). This research project is funded through the Grant (# 102791) generously
made by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) of Canada through
an umbrella study on Openness and Quality in Asian Distance Education and is
anchored at Wawasan Open University, Penang, Malaysia.
OER in Asia: Trends and Issues is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
