OpenER: A Dutch Initiative on OERResults and future

Fred Mulder

Robert Schuwer

2

Agenda

Characteristics Outcomes Results Lessons learned Future strategy

3

Main characteristics

OpenER is time- and place independent Easy accessibility (standard PC, Internet access,

web browser are sufficient) The content is self-contained. No materials have

to be bought Almost all learning material offered is in the Dutch

language

4

Intended outcomes (1)

16 courses of 25 study hours each (= 1 EC) or > 16 courses (= 400 hours)

a user-friendly on-line delivery system user-friendly on-line facilities for selfassessment substantial marketing and PR to create

awareness with the Dutch population about OpenER and the OUNL

5

Intended outcomes (2)

opportunities for formal assessment and certification as a starting point for a Higher Education study

knowledge on the effectiveness of open content delivery for stimulating participation in Higher Education

6

Financials

The OpenER-experiment received grants from The Directorate Learning and Working,

established by the Dutch Ministery of Education, Culture and Science and the Ministery of Social Affairs

The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation To a total of approx. €660,000.

7

Measurements

Main question:

Did OpenER had any effect on participation in formal Higher Education?

8

Measurements, sources

Feedbackforms Linked to a course Two types: A (Short) and B (Extended)

Two surveys Among registered users of the site Among regular OU students

Electronic order form for regular OU courses Question: Was taking a free OpenER course a

cause to order this course?

9

Some figures

Launch on December 5, 2006 generated a lot of publicity

Several 100,000’s unique visitors 12% returning 24 courses online (4 – 45 hours / course) 5700 users registered voluntarily Costs for creation €3000 - €30,000

10

Examination

Five courses offered the possibility to do a formal examination, earning a certificate.

This service costs €50 for a user. 85 learners applied for a formal examination. 32 actually took the test, 29 of them passed

11

Examination (2)

Reasons for the low number of applicants Courses were offered free, without any

guidance, support or intervention Reported by users:

Certificate not important for me I am retired The course I studied did not have this possibility Employer did not find that important

12

Proof of the pudding

Question on electronic order form for regular OUNL courses:

Was taking a free OpenER course a cause to order this course?

During period of 13/2/2008 to 30/6/2008: 9,3% of about 1600 buyers answered yes.

Deze sheet integreren met resultaten surveys en zo

13

Results of surveys and feedbackforms

Registered users: 5769 sent 980 returned (17%); 327 < HE education

Among OU students 8223 sent 1073 returned (13%); 359 < HE education

Feedback forms Type A: 1839 Type B: 429; 143 < HE education

Web statistics

14

Results (1)

Age distribution

15

Results (2)

Visit length

16

Influence on study plans

Did OpenER had any influence on your study plans?

OU Registered users

17

Subscription for formal education

Yes at the OUNL

Yes at another university

Yes at a polytechnic

Yes at a commercial institute

No

Not answered

18

Reasons for not starting

Financially (‘training is expensive’) Time (‘study takes too much time with my fulltime

job’) Type of knowledge (‘other interests, more on skills

than cognitive’) No goal (‘I consider this supplementary’) Age (‘No ambitions anymore. I am 79 years old.’)

19

Some other results

From feedback forms 93% reported the courses to be satisfactory Does offering these free courses affect your

study plans? Yes, I know I want to start some form of higher

education: 49% Yes, I know I will NOT start some form of higher

education: 3%

20

Lessons learned (1)

For some users another language than the Dutch language is a barrier.

Courses of 4 hours were considered too short to get a good idea of what it means to study a subject on this level of education.

For courses that were fully webbased and did not offer the possibility to print out the course text, users asked for a printed version.

Errors in the courses were reported by the learners. Read aloud versions were hardly used. Main cause

reported was the automatic generation of a read aloud version of a webpage (using Readspeaker) with errors in pronunciation.

21

Lessons learned (2)

Change of attitude to open courses within OUNL Objectives for publishing open courses for

faculties The courses should give a good picture of the

main subject areas in our faculty. The courses should show how entertaining

learning can be The courses should also be attractive for our

own students.

22

Lessons learned (3)

Rely on quality awareness of authors Authors are already used to making self study

material Support of top management is crucial Producing open courses should be a regular task

at faculties Higher delivery reliability Not dependant on few enthusiastic people

23

Future strategy (1)

Continuation with modest extension Additional perspective: OER is basis for

development of National LLL Network Open Polytechnics (blended learning)

Extra: Spinoza series: Hall-of-Fame of Dutch scientists (Spinoza Prize Winners) (launched 19 November)

Taskforce OER OUNL

24

Future strategy (2)

Debate on free schoolbooks in secondary education to be converted in OER. OUNL as advocate and expert in OER Focus on reuse/rework/remix

New market: secondary schools

25

Main question remaining

Sustainability: business model for offering free courses Can it ever be without grants? Someone has to pay for it (the tax payer?)