Students achieve the same or better learning outcomes when using OER compared to commercial textbooks, while saving significant amounts of money.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 2 review r1–r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across 16 efficacy studies (114,419 students), students using OER achieve the same or better learning outcomes than those using commercial textbooks. → Hilton 2020 q2 i? Students using OER save significant amounts of money compared to purchasing commercial textbooks. → Hilton 2020

q2 i? OER can help decrease college students' textbook spending without undermining student learning effectiveness, per the review the article cites. → Tang 2021

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 · r3

The synthesis's summary statement of its central finding across the 16 efficacy studies, based on the abstract's characterization of the collective results.

"Results across these studies suggest students achieve the same or better learning outcomes when using OER while saving significant amounts of money."

Tang 2021¶

Tang, H. (2021). Implementing open educational resources in digital education. Education Tech Research Dev 69, 389–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09879-x

q2 · i? · review · r1

The editorial reports, citing Hilton's (2016) review, that "OER can help decrease college students' textbook spending without undermining student learning effectiveness." The review's own design is not described here; this is a second-hand synthesis reported by the editorial.

"Hilton's review article (2016) provides synthesized evidence stating that OER can help decrease college students' textbook spending without undermining student learning effectiveness."

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
• In direct comparisons of OER and commercial textbooks, a strong majority of participants report OER are as good or better. — related
• Across 2002-2018, OER efficacy research consistently shows that OER does not harm student learning, with a small positive impact. — a broader claim this one bears on
• Open textbooks appear to offer financial benefits to students without decreasing learning outcomes in higher education — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• 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
• 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
• Synthesized studies of OER in college courses found academic outcomes comparable to traditional textbooks and positive perceptions among students and instructors — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• 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. — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Concerns about whether OER decrease the effectiveness of student learning remain unsolved — reports the opposite
• 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
• OER outcome studies that lack a hypothesized explanatory mechanism are license comparison studies prone to finding no significant differences — related
• Hilton's reviews find OER equally efficacious to and less expensive than commercial textbooks — a broader claim this one bears on
• Relative advantage of OER alone will not lead to rapid adoption, especially if framed as cost savings — related