OER efficacy research methodology improved between 2015 and 2018, with more studies controlling for student and teacher variables.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Of the 13 efficacy studies published between 2016 and 2018, seven controlled for student variables and nine for teacher variables, compared with two and four respectively among the nine studies published prior to 2016. → 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 comparison of methodological rigor in earlier versus later efficacy studies, counting how many controlled for student and teacher variables in each period.

"Of the thirteen efficacy studies published between 2016 and 2018, seven controlled for student variables and nine controlled for teacher variables. This is significant improvement in research rigor, an encouraging trend particularly given that three of the five 2018 efficacy studies controlled for both teacher and student variables."

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
• Across 2002-2018, OER efficacy research consistently shows that OER does not harm student learning, with a small positive impact. — 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 outcome studies that lack a hypothesized explanatory mechanism are license comparison studies prone to finding no significant differences — related