Across 2002-2018, OER efficacy research consistently shows that OER does not harm student learning, with a small positive impact.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · checked against its sources 2026-10-29 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across 25 peer-reviewed OER efficacy studies (184,658 students) published by the end of 2018, the consistent trend is that OER does not harm student learning, with a small positive impact. → Hilton 2020

Evidence¶

Hilton 2020¶

Hilton, J., III. (2020). Open educational resources, student efficacy, and user perceptions: a synthesis of research published between 2015 and 2018. Education Tech Research Dev, 68, 853-876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09700-4

q2 · i? · review · r2

The synthesis's aggregate finding across all 25 efficacy studies published through 2018, combining its own 16 studies with the 9 identified in the prior 2016 synthesis.

"A consistent trend across this OER efficacy research (spanning from 2008 to 2018) is that OER does not harm student learning. Although anecdotal reports that OER are not comparable to CT exist, the research does not bear this out with respect to student learning. While the impact of OER on student learning appears to be small, it is positive."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The commentary offers a practice-based perspective on Hilton's (2016) OER efficacy review in the context of the COVID-19 pivot to remote instruction — related
• The number of published OER efficacy and perceptions studies rose rapidly between 2015 and 2018, with more studies published in those 3 years than in the previous 15. — related
• OER efficacy research methodology improved between 2015 and 2018, with more studies controlling for student and teacher variables. — related
• Common weaknesses in OER efficacy studies include reliance on non-standard learning measures and challenges with randomization. — related
• Students achieve the same or better learning outcomes when using OER compared to commercial textbooks, while saving significant amounts of money. — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Future OER research should examine disaggregated data for specific student populations, conduct quantitative meta-analyses, and compare specific OER materials and subject areas. — related
• The majority of faculty and students who have used OER had a positive experience and would do so again. — related
• In studies comparing ratings from separate groups of OER users and CT users, results were mixed: two studies favored CT, two favored OER, and one showed similar ratings. — related
• Open textbooks appear to offer financial benefits to students without decreasing learning outcomes in higher education — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Synthesized studies of OER in college courses found academic outcomes comparable to traditional textbooks and positive perceptions among students and instructors — related
• OER efficacy studies are frequently confounded by simultaneous changes in pedagogy or delivery method. — related
• Substituting OER for traditional textbooks does not appear to decrease student learning outcomes in higher education. — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Students using OER save significant amounts of money compared to purchasing commercial textbooks. — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Students and faculty are generally positive regarding OER across a variety of settings. — related
• OER adoption is expected to save students money and close the achievement gap in the short term, but this benefit will likely disappear over the longer term — related
• Most U.S. higher education faculty believe OER are a good idea but few actually use them — related
• Relative advantage of OER alone will not lead to rapid adoption, especially if framed as cost savings — related