OEGlobal 2024

The open education (OE) movement and scholarly literature, including UNESCO's (2019) Recommendation on OER, make frequent reference to the importance of developing supportive policy environments to allow OER and other open practices to thrive. In the higher education (HE) context, much of the policy needs to be made at the institutional level, but is this happening?

This presentation will report findings from a doctoral study investigating the relationship between OE and related policies, at the institutional level in HE. The study aims to discover in what ways open educational practices (OEP) are understood, supported or enabled in institutional policy - therefore, the concepts of both OE and policy are considered in a wide sense. OE can be described as a wide umbrella term, which can potentially refer to many practices across formal, informal and non-formal education (Weller et al., 2018). ‘Institutional policy’ is considered to include documented policies, strategies, regulations or guidelines, but also, more informally, usual courses of action, presence of expertise, infrastructure, or funding to support relevant activities (Atenas et al, 2020).

This study is particularly focused on the intentions and effects of institutional policies, in higher education, on the following areas of practice in particular: · use, creation, sharing and adaptation of OER - for example, open textbooks, or other openly licensed and freely available content items such as documents, slides, videos, images, or datasets. · offering of free and/or lower-cost online courses - for example, MOOCs or microcredentials. · opening up of aspects of learning, teaching and assessment to external participants, partners and audiences - for example, open publication of student-generated content as OER. · participating in open professional development communities - for example, using blogs, podcasts or tweetchats for sharing and discussion of practices.

In order to investigate how policy, broadly defined, interacts with a similarly broadly understood range of practices, three research strands have been employed in order to investigate 1) the content of policy texts, 2) the views and experiences of staff members working in institutions, and finally, 3) the particular perspectives of a subgroup of staff who have had a role in developing relevant policy.

The first and second strands have uncovered wide variety in institutional approaches to OE, ranging from the very engaged to those which show little awareness. OER tends to be the aspect most discussed by policies and staff members, but institutions also evidence varying degrees of involvement with the other forms of practice. There is widespread evidence of more informal forms of policy support, but lower prevalence of documented OE policies. If documented policies can be taken as evidence of sustained institutional commitment to enable and support practices, then this low prevalence is perhaps cause for concern. This presentation will focus on findings from the third strand involving policymakers, and the emphasis they place on the specificity of the local, while situated within globalised and national policy contexts.



Included in [Session 6A]: Practice and Policy in OE

References

Atenas, J; Havemann, L; Neumann, J. and Stefanelli, C (2020). Open Education Policies: Guidelines for co-creation. London: Open Education Policy Lab. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4032993

Weller, M., Jordan, K., DeVries, I., & Rolfe, V. (2018). Mapping the open education landscape: citation network analysis of historical open and distance education research. Open Praxis, 10(2), 109–126. https://doi.org/10.5944/OPENPRAXIS.10.2.822

Author Keywords
open education policies, higher education institutions, institutional policies, open educational practices

This talk describes a study into the use of open monographs in teaching and learning, specifically those in the OAPEN global open access book library or listed in the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB). The presenters will also share their methodology, which can be used by others to gather data with which to analyse their own context.

The study initially considered whether OAPEN books – which, by definition, are not textbooks – were being used for the purpose of teaching and learning in Australia and New Zealand. The work originally considered the types of data available to the research team to understand this question. Studying usage of open teaching material is challenging because of the variability of data sources and because organisations deliberately do not track users. The OAPEN and DOAB metadata can be ingested into university library catalogues, and ExLibris provides download data of usage out of the catalogue. OAPEN provides dashboard statistics for supporting libraries based on IP addresses and the physical location of the primary campus. Analysis of these two sets of data indicate that the ExLibris information represented approximately a tenth of the download information, which in itself speaks to where students and staff are sourcing their links.

Analysis of the Open Syllabus Analytics service identified that open resources are currently a small proportion of texts prescribed in syllabi (less than 5% overall). Within that proportion, the open resources originating from DOAB are almost equivalent to those originating from Open Textbook Library. This clearly answered the original question: open monographs *are* being used for the purposes of teaching and learning. However it does reinforce the broader question: what are we talking about when we talk about an open educational resource in an educational setting?

A closer analysis of the download data uncovered some interesting observations. In one research intensive institution, it became clear that a significant proportion of the top 25 downloads in 2023 were related in topic and likely all part of a single course. This laid open a secondary consideration which is now being pursued – how much can the uptake of OERs in an institution be attributed to individual practice as opposed to institutional policy?

This prompted a secondary research question: is it possible to detect a discernible difference in uptake of OERs in institutions? At the time of submission, this work is only beginning, but by the conference the research team will have some results to share. This study is intended to provide a method that is reproducible in other geographical settings, to allow comparisons. The team is eager to hear feedback on the approach, and any suggestions for data that could be shared with the community to further shed light on this topic.



Included in [Session 6C]: Repositories, Pedagogy, Practice and Policy in OE

Author Keywords
Open access monographs, Open educational practices, Open education policies

The financial services sector emphases initiatives that empower consumers in an increasingly and diverse financial system. One of the areas of initiative is that of consumer education, which includes the provision of numerous financial education programmes by many stakeholders. Financial education can benefit any age person and irrespective of their income level (OECD, 2005). The changing nature of financial products and their increasing complexity are among the many reasons for financial education becoming increasingly important (FCSA, 2020). In South Africa educating financial consumers and potential financial consumers is legislated in terms of the Financial Sector Regulation Act, 2017 (Act No. 9 of 2017) (FSR Act). In terms of this Act the Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) is responsible for this education. A project is currently underway to develop a South African financial education portal. The aim of the South African financial education portal project is to encourage the financial services industry to work collaboratively to identify opportunities to consolidate existing resources into a sustainable programme. The South African financial education portal is planned to consist of four segments, a repository of financial education content, accreditation of financial education resources (a Quality Mark), certification of financial education providers and an evidence hub. The proposed online platform will be designed through the application of a living lab integrative approach (Mastelic, 2019), underpinned by design thinking. As per the integrative approach, the first step of the research project is in the ‘Problem space phase’ following a sequential multi-method research approach. Empathise is the first stage in design thinking and in living lab research researchers try to gain a deep understanding of the problems and motivations of the end user. The context is researched, to gain an understanding of user behaviours, perceptions, and social practices.

Ramsunder & Mathiva (2020) found in a desk top study, that most programmes offered by institutions are generic in nature, in South Africa. This research aims to answer two questions How can educational resources be shared amongst institutions and how then can a culture of collaboration of financial education materials be encouraged so that potentially limited budgets are utilised more efficiently? This paper will present the exploration of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and open educational resources in the financial service sector and how to encourage a culture of collaboration to enhance the efficiency and quality of the provision of consumer financial education.



Included in [Session 6A]: Practice and Policy in OE

References
FCSA (2020). Discussion Document: Ensuring Appropriate Financial Consumer Education Initiatives. https://www.moonstone.co.za/upmedia/uploads/library/Moonstone%20Library/MS%20Industry%20News/1.%20Discussion%20Document%20-%20Ensuring%20Appropriate%20Financial%20Education%20Initiatives_June2020.pdf Mastelic, J. (2019). Stakeholders’ engagement in the co-design of energy conservation interventions: The case of the Energy Living Lab. OECD (2005). Improving Financial Literacy. Analysis of Issues and Policies. https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/finance-and-investment/improving-financial-literacy_9789264012578-en#page6 Ramsunder, J. and Mthivha, F.(2020). Trends in consumer financial education in South Africa. https://dnaeconomics.com/trends-in-consumer-financial-education-in-south-africa/

Author Keywords
Open educational resources, corporate social responsibility, financial consumer education

The “diamond” model of journal publishing rests on the premise that knowledge should be free for all to disseminate and free for all to read. Diamond Open Access therefore refers to a scholarly publication model in which journals and platforms do not charge fees to either authors or readers. Such an approach offers opportunities for diverse and inclusive participation, giving voice to communities and groups that are otherwise marginalised and underrepresented in mainstream scholarly communications. The diamond model is one where publishing costs can be facilitated not only by academic institutions, but also by community groups and organisations, nonprofits and governments. This potentially makes it possible for communities beyond the Academy to disseminate their ideas freely to all, for open to be everyone’s business.

Internationally, interest in the value of this publishing model is increasing with a number of new diamond publishing initiatives, including the DIAMAS and CRAFT-OA projects and the Plan for Diamond Open Access. In 2020 an international diamond OA journals survey was conducted by Science Europe and cOAlition S with a final report released in 2021 and in 2023, the inaugural Global Summit on Diamond OA brought together over 700 international delegates who presented a set of pledges for furthering the diamond model. Yet so far there have been no specific initiatives that comprehensively address diamond publishing in Australasia.

A report by Open Access Australasia into open access initiatives in Australasia, based on data collected at the end of 2022, evidenced significant uptake of the diamond open publishing model in the university sector where more than half of the institutions examined had some form of open publishing, though other sectors showed little involvement. We will present a brief overview of diamond open publishing in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand based on recent updates to this report.

We will then showcase examples of how diamond open access journals can allow diverse communities and underrepresented perspectives to be heard. From Australia, we will present examples from Queensland University of Technology’s Open Press, and from Aotearoa New Zealand we will look at the diverse groups represented on the Tuwhera open access platform hosted by Te Wānanga Aronui o Tāmaki Makau Rau/Auckland University of Technology.

We will conclude by describing the formation earlier this year of a vibrant diamond open access publishing community of practice, a forum where those interested in starting a diamond journal and those already involved in running one can interact to promote best practice and tackle challenges together. We discuss the priorities this CoP is focusing on in 2024 and why, and look at the applicability of the diamond publishing approach to the wider OE community.



Included in [Session 6C]: Repositories, Pedagogy, Practice and Policy in OE

References
Diamas (2023). Developing Institutional Open Access Publishing Models to Advance Scholarly Communication. https://diamasproject.eu/about/ CRAFT-OA (2023). CRAFT-OA (Creating a Robust Accessible Federated Technology for Open Access). https://www.craft-oa.eu/ Ancion, Z., Borrell-Damián, L., Mounier, P., Rooryck, J., Saenen, B. (2022). Action Plan for Diamond Open Access. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6282402 Catterall J, Barbour V. Open access initiatives by research active institutions in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand: a snapshot of the landscape in 2022. Zenodo. June 26, 2023. doi:10.5281/zenodo.8081166

Author Keywords
Inclusion diversity equity and access, Open access publishing, Open licencing, Open practitioners

The current study utilized Lambert's 3R framework of social justice (redistributive, recognitive, and representational justice) to investigate the impact of justice frames and open educational practices in syllabus design on undergraduate students' perceptions. Participants (n=207) viewed several versions of a hypothetical syllabus, with each version increasing in social justice focus. Participants then answered questionnaires on their intent to take the course, student sense of belonging, and instructor evaluation.

We hypothesized that with each consecutive version of the syllabus, reflecting an increased focus on social justice, (1) Student sense of belonging will increase, (2) Instructor evaluation will become more positive, (3) Intent to register for the course will be more likely, and (4) These relationships will be moderated by the number of marginalized identities experienced by participants.

This study underscores the importance of incorporating social justice frameworks into syllabus design to enhance student engagement and perceptions of inclusivity.



Included in [Session 6A]: Practice and Policy in OE

References
Lambert, S. R. (2018). Changing our (Dis)Course: A Distinctive Social Justice Aligned Definition of Open Education. Journal of Learning for Development, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v5i3.290

Author Keywords
Open educational practices, Social justice, Course design, Higher education

Collaboration is pivotal to expanding the reach and adoption of open educational practices, especially when growing the Open movement throughout a region from grassroots. The ASCILITE Australasian Open Educational Practice Special Interest Group (OEP SIG) is a community hub for Open practitioners throughout the Australasian region. One of the OEP SIG’s key activities is the production of the monthly OEP Digest, collaboratively curated by a dedicated team of open education practitioners geographically distributed across Australia.

Since its inception in 2018, inspired by SPARC’s OER Digest, the Australasian OEP Digest has been raising awareness of open education principles and practices in Australasia, providing a vehicle to highlight professional development resources, project opportunities, local learnings and the achievements of pioneering open education practitioners. Published through the OEP SIG website, the Digest takes its cues from the OEP SIG community, continuously evolving to curate resources and updates relevant to the Australasian open education landscape and delivering an easily accessible summary of OEP content straight to the inbox of approximately 200 subscribers.

In this session, join the OEP Digest curators for a reflection on: - The origins, philosophy and development of this community-centric newsletter - Navigating the process, challenges and unanticipated benefits of working as a cross-institutional team of academic librarians from four Australian higher education institutions, each with open education programs at varying levels of maturity - Strategies for using a publication such as the Digest to advance open education in your institution

The Digest team makes Open everyone’s business by providing a platform that invites, elevates and celebrates community voices, curates a diverse range of readings, resources and professional development opportunities, and promotes the latest open textbooks relevant to Australasian educational institutions.

While the Digest has an Australasian focus, highlighting locally developed resources, many international resources and opportunities are included to ensure readers understand and remain connected with the global nature of open education. In a field where practitioners can often feel isolated and unsure of how to move forward, the OEP Digest brings us together, celebrates us, and reminds us we’re not doing this alone. Because Open is everyone’s business.



Included in [Session 6A]: Practice and Policy in OE

Author Keywords
Open access publishing, Open educational practices, Open education policies and strategies, Open practitioners, Open textbooks

The ability to create engaging learning experiences is key to the effective delivery of education and the development of lifelong learners. Globally, we are seeing the growth of learning design practices, which are influencing and enhancing traditional teaching and education practices. Yet adoption is hampered by the lack of a system of design practices, language and shared approaches. Is there space for more open systems and practices to help share experiences and practices? Are there ways that we can create bespoke experiences that suit specific learners, locations and situations rather than embrace the restrictions of a templated approach? This presentation will introduce an approach based on the concepts of ‘learning patterns’ that sets the groundwork for an open approach to creating a learning design system that can be adopted across sectors, languages, technologies and systems. While still very much in development, this system has already been used in South America and Europe. It has the potential to form a foundation for open practices around learning experience design.

Laurillard (2002, 2012) introduced a set of learning types in her work around a Conversational Framework. Using this formed the basis for our system, and the initial work was on converting the types of learning to adjectives and expanding some of the ideas and explanations to apply more broadly. This process also led us to move away from being framed around the teacher's conversation to a model that was focused on the learner and their actions. Through this process, the team developed a set of seven Learning Types: Assimilative, Investigative, Formative, Discursive, Productive, Evaluative and Social.

The Learning Types help define the overall learning experience, but they become less useful as you begin to develop individual lessons and activities. A missing piece was required to aid the development of a sequence of learning, so the idea of 'Learning Patterns' was introduced. Based on the concept of a Pattern Language (Alexander, 1977), Learning Patterns are a reusable scaffold to aid the design of a learning experience. They provide a superstructure or way of thinking that can be reused and recombined to suit different contexts and topics. The Patterns developed (Klapdor, 2022) act like Lego, simple shapes that fit together to create unique student experiences. Their usefulness comes from the fact that sequences can be adapted to suit the lesson's purpose and scaffolding provided to help author that aspect of the course.

This system has been used across several programs at the University of Adelaide and in various other institutions to help support their learning design efforts. This presentation aims to introduce these concepts and test the appetite for such a system on a more global scale by going open and developing shared resources and practices across a broader community.



Included in [Session 6C]: Repositories, Pedagogy, Practice and Policy in OE

References
Alexander, Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. (1977). A pattern language : towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press. Klapdor, T. (2022) Learning Patterns Library, retrieved from https://learning-patterns.com/ July 2023 Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: a conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies (2nd ed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer. Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. London: Routledge.

Author Keywords
learning design, design system, design for learning

The University of Technology, the Learner Experience Design team adopted a strategy to make Open Educational Practices (OEP) integral to everyone's role by emphasising professional development. In higher education, professional development is described as the process of enhancing the skills and competencies of staff necessary for facilitating and enhancing the student learning experience. According to Havea & Mohanty (2020) professional development contributes to sustainable development by improving the skills and competencies of individuals, which in turn enhances workforce quality and productivity. This is also in alignment with the sustainable development goals under 2030 Development agenda, which underscores the importance of building higher education staff capacity in content, pedagogical and technological knowledge (Mishra and Koehler, 2006). At its core, the UTS strategy of sustainable partnerships fosters a culture of engagement and collaboration within UTS and the external community (n.d, UTS). While the impact of engaging in OEP has primarily been realised through cost-cutting with open textbooks, at UTS, we see that OEP can further enhance the student learning experience. This is achieved not only by reducing costs of textbooks but also by promoting inclusivity, engaging our learning and teaching community, and building capacity in open education. In this presentation, I’ll highlight the efforts made by a learning and teaching central team at UTS to advocate for OEP through professional development. Our efforts were focused on the following six areas: Resources and Blogs: We curated a resource collection where academics can openly share their teaching approaches. Additionally, our blog series dedicated to open education serves as a platform to advocate for OEP

Community Engagement: UTS Learning Design Meetup has been instrumental in starting the conversation on OE. This initiative has inspired various university units and academics to publish OER focusing on Learning Design and Sustainability. Furthermore, we have successfully encouraged academics to create their own open textbooks and apply for open textbook grants. Projects for Scalable Impact (Central Team): We formed specialised squads focusing on Open Education (OE) and H5P OERHub, facilitating collaborative efforts towards impactful outcomes. Moreover, in partnership with the UTS library, we were able to contribute to the development of open-access policy procedures addressing technological infrastructure needs and OEP in learning and teaching. Workshops: Our OEP workshops have been instrumental in raising a culture of sharing educational materials within and outside UTS. Global Events: UTS proudly hosted Open Education Week in both 2023 and 2024, showcasing our institution's global presence and commitment to open education initiatives. Creative Commons Licensing: Two members of our central team completed Creative Commons certificate for educators, contributing to capacity-building efforts within our organsation. The impact of our efforts is clear in how the OEP community at UTS has grown. We made sure that people who used to work alone now work together through partnerships. Keeping OEP going has been hard, but by helping people learn and grow professionally, we brought everyone together, got important people involved, and made UTS a leader in open education.



Included in [Session 6A]: Practice and Policy in OE

References
Havea, P. H., & Mohanty, M. (2020). Professional development and sustainable development goals. In Quality Education (pp. 654-665). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)?. Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 60-70. UTS. (n.d.). Sustainable partnerships. In UTS 2027 strategy. Retrieved May 20, 2024, from https://www.uts.edu.au/about/uts-2027-strategy/sustainable-partnerships

Author Keywords
Professional development, Open education advocacy, Partnerships, Institutional strategies

One missing piece to the conversation around the impact of OER on student success metrics is a discussion about implementation quality. Are instructors just substituting an OER textbook for an expensive, commercial text, or are they going through a faculty fellowship, supported by their institution that includes conversations around pedagogy? OER implementation spans a continuum with one-to-one replacement of textbooks with OER textbooks at one end and thoughtful integration of OER in ways that enhance pedagogy at the other end. We believe these differences in OER implementation quality are a primary reason for the “muddy waters” surrounding OER and student success.

Furthermore, the potential differences in the support, training, and incentives instructors receive when implementing OER in their classrooms may impact the quality of that implementation. If instructors are not provided with adequate resources and guidance on best practices for adapting, remixing, and aligning OER with learning objectives, they may struggle to implement OER into their courses in a meaningful way. Lack of incentives, such as compensation or recognition for the time and effort required to implement OER, can also be a barrier to quality implementation. Understanding effective ways in which institutions can provide support for instructors implementing OER is crucial to advancing OER initiatives.

AAC&U is embarking on a large-scale study on OER and student success to advance the conversation on the effectiveness and impact of OER beyond affordability. Our multi-institutional study brings together 17 U.S. colleges and universities spanning all six primary higher education institution categories officially recognized in the United States, and features key minority-serving designations including Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Tribal Colleges, and Hispanic-Serving Institutions. From these institutions, we are collecting historical data on student success in courses that implemented OER within the past 10 years. As part of this study, we will be conducting focus groups with faculty from these institutions about their OER implementation and what characteristics indicate higher quality OER implementation. These results will allow us to understand and codify quality, leading to the creation of a framework outlining quality OER implementations.

In this session, we will present the findings from our focus group research and share the implementation quality framework we are developing. We will discuss the process of developing the framework; characteristics that indicate quality and the impact that support, training, and incentives (or lack thereof) have on OER implementation quality; and how we intend to share this framework to enhance OER implementation quality on a broader scale. Finally, we will reveal the next stage of this research—our incorporation of this framework into an instructor survey that will be disseminated to additional faculty at each of our partner campuses. The purpose of the instructor survey is two-fold: first, to determine if higher quality is positively associated with student success and second, to examine the extent to which OER implementation differs within and across institutions. These additional pieces of the study will further extend the conversation around the impact of OER on student success.



Included in [Session 6A]: Practice and Policy in OE

Author Keywords
OER Implementation Quality, Focus Groups, Instructor perceptions

In southwest Arkansas lies UA Cossatot, a small community college whose inspiring story resonates with themes of determination, collaboration, innovation, and the transformative power of open educational resources (OER). Cossatot Community College has four campuses with an average enrollment of about 1,300 and is a part of the University of Arkansas System. We lead the state in OER usage, but we didn’t get there overnight. We faced some challenges along the way to becoming the state leader in OER adoption, but commitment to our students and collective determination fueled our journey.

In 2015, UA Cossatot addressed the financial hardships textbook expenses created for its diverse student population. As the sole Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) in a state with a 17% poverty rate, the nation’s seventh highest poverty rate, the imperative to remove financial barriers to higher education assumed paramount importance. In our initial research, it became clear that establishing an OER initiative was not only a viable economic alternative, but also the right thing to do for students.

With a mission statement emphasizing our commitment to improving the lives of those in our region by providing quality education and outstanding services while embracing diversity, it was obvious that the belief in equal educational opportunities for all demanded that we build an internal textbook rental and OER program, so we did.

Despite initial hesitations among faculty members apprehensive about departing from traditional textbooks and widespread sentiment that what we were attempting to do was impossible, UA Cossatot persisted, understanding that OER embodies a collective responsibility to nurture student achievement. The college diligently sought inclusive pathways for all stakeholders, ensuring that proponents of conventional textbooks could seamlessly transition to affordable alternatives. The collaborative effort between college administration, faculty, and staff underscores that OER is not merely about finances but a shared moral responsibility to ensure student welfare and academic success.

Open education is crucial to the future of education and addresses the challenges and needs of contemporary and future learning environments. For community colleges transitioning to OER, it doesn’t matter how big or small the college is, higher education leaders can step up to eliminate some of the financial barriers that students face. Recognizing that we can value traditional culture while embracing modern ways of thinking teaches us to respect both perspectives and know that we’re not bound by either. At UA Cossatot, we’ve learned a lot about open resources and Creative Commons and we’re eager to share that experience. UA Cossatot’s journey from OER novices to leading Arkansas with 76 percent of our courses using open resources exemplifies our commitment to the changing landscape that is education and illustrates a balanced approach to tradition and innovation within the future of learning in a constantly evolving educational landscape.



Included in [Session 7E]: Practice and Policy in OE (workshops)

Author Keywords
Inclusion diversity equity and access, Open educational practices, Open education policies and strategies, Open textbooks

In 2021-2024, The European Network of Open Education Librarians (ENOEL) developed, enhanced and maintained the OE Benefits Toolkit to help advocate for OE, consistently with Action Area 1 of the UNESCO OER Recommendation. The ENOEL Toolkit was initially designed to assist educational professionals in articulating the tangible benefits of Open Education—ranging from increased access to educational resources and improved learning outcomes to fostering a culture of co-creation and shared knowledge.

Members of the ENOEL invite participants to a collaborative wildcard activity aimed at discussing how to further promote the widespread adoption and understanding of Open Education (OE) by identifying and discussing the benefits for librarians in particular and above all the lessons learnt to date: discussing its applications and advocacy experiences that underscore the critical role of different stakeholders, especially librarians, in the OE movement.

Exploring the Benefits of OE on cards, participants will engage in structured discussions to identify and elaborate on specific benefits, fostering a deeper understanding of how these can be articulated in advocacy efforts, in line with the findings of SPARC Europe’s Report “Open Education in European Libraries of Higher Education 2023”. Attendees will examine and expand the evidence base supporting OE benefits by integrating both research and personal anecdotes, utilising tools and templates to document these insights. Participants are encouraged to share their own experiences and challenges in advocating for OER, discussing how the identified benefits can address existing barriers and enhance their advocacy strategies.

The ENOEL-designed Toolkit can become an essential resource for effectively communicating the value of Open Education. By outlining the diverse benefits for key stakeholders—including students, teachers, librarians, institutions, and citizens at large, —it provides a foundation for robust advocacy efforts. For the participants in this session, the Toolkit highlights their unique role in advocating for and advancing OE through its benefits.

This session offers the opportunity to share practical strategies for overcoming common challenges in the field and champion OE within their institutions and beyond, advocating for policies and practices that support OE. ENOEL members invite participants to collaboratively discuss the benefits collected in the toolkit, drawing from both evidence-based research and anecdotal experiences, to focus on a diverse range of contributions and take this opportunity to learn from peers coming from different geographical, historical, and social backgrounds. Participants will engage with the recently enriched list of benefits, evidence-based references, and templates for capturing anecdotal evidence. More specifically, attendees will review existing benefits, choose those that fit their context and discuss their implications. Using the Rolfe et al. reflective model, participants will be invited to articulate and record anecdotal benefits, enriching the evidence base with personal insights. Participants will also choose in parallel those benefits that they would see fit their context but are not there yet, and discuss with peers how to make them part of it, starting from their experiences.

This activity will use a dynamic, card-based discussion format to stimulate thought and facilitate the exchange of ideas.



Included in [Session 7E]: Practice and Policy in OE (workshops)

References
European Network of Open Education Librarians (2024), An ENOEL Toolkit: Open Education Benefits. Version 4. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5568482
Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D., Jasper, M. (2001). Critical reflection in nursing and the helping professions: a user’s guide. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Treadway, J., Corti, P., & Proudman, V. (2024). Open Education in European Libraries of Higher Education 2023. Zenodo. https://zenodo.org/records/10889503

Author Keywords
Benefits of Open Education, Enhanced OE Toolkit resources, Lifelong and informal learning, Open educational practices, Open practitioners

In Spring 2018, KPU embarked on a groundbreaking mission: to eliminate textbook costs for students. With support from BCcampus, KPU pioneered Canada's first ZTC Initiative, introducing 75 ZTC sections and a flexible 1-year Certificate in Arts credential. Since then, the initiative has flourished, transforming the educational landscape. Now, just six years later, KPU offers an impressive average of 22% course section offerings with ZTC, along with eight known ZTC credentials, including two four-year Baccalaureate degrees. This commitment to accessible education remains unwavering. Today, KPU boasts a diverse ZTC landscape, spanning multiple disciplines and degree levels. The commitment to accessible education remains at the forefront. But the journey hasn't been without challenges, and in this presentation, we will share a recent project KPU underwent in order to overcome one of our challenges and to move our ZTC Initiative forward in a strategic way.

While individual course tracking has improved through integration into the registration system, a critical challenge persists: identifying potential ZTC pathways at the credential level. Historically, KPU relied on manual cross-referencing between degree frameworks and lists of ZTC course data. However, this process was time-consuming and lacked comprehensive insights.

In 2024, KPU embarked on a transformative project: digitizing the ZTC credential mapping process. The goal was to create a systematic approach that would facilitate strategic planning and provide comprehensive analysis.

Phase 1 of this project involved importing 177 degree frameworks from the KPU Academic Calendar website into MS Excel. These frameworks were organized into separate files for each Faculty. Next, each framework was cross-referenced against a list of historic ZTC courses extracted from the registration system. The initial data analysis yielded valuable insights, revealing the percentage of ZTC courses within each degree. This information allowed KPU to pinpoint degrees that were close to offering ZTC pathways.

Building on Phase 1, KPU dug deeper into the data in Phase 2. Which specific courses could strategically enhance ZTC pathways? Which ones were missing? The team identified key courses that, if converted to ZTC, would significantly expand the number of ZTC degree options available to students. To communicate these findings effectively, KPU developed data visualizations and a user-friendly dashboard using Power BI.

Armed with a clearer picture of ZTC opportunities, KPU Open is now poised for strategic growth. The "OER Advancement Grant" was created specifically to fund the conversion of courses to ZTC and offer more ZTC credentials. By focusing on degrees or programs that are on the cusp of ZTC readiness, KPU aims to increase student access to affordable education.



Included in [Session 7E]: Practice and Policy in OE (workshops)

Author Keywords
open education research, zero textbook cost, open education policies and strategies