An empirical framework for mainstreaming OER in an academic institution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose There is immense potential in open educational resources (OER) for encouraging systemic change within academic institutions toward increasing access and equity in education. The purpose of this paper is to propose an empirical framework and a checklist for mainstreaming OER in an academic institution. Design/methodology/approach The empirical framework and the mainstreaming checklist is formulated based on an extensive review of literature and case studies strengthened by the author’s personal experience as an academic, researcher, practitioner, policymaker and international development expert in the field of OER. Findings The proposed empirical framework and OER mainstreaming checklist identifies several processes to be completed by key stakeholders for successful mainstreaming of OER in an academic institution. Practical implications The proposed framework assumes that the institution which is undergoing mainstreaming of OER follows the principles of outcomes-based education and that it has an established mechanism for measuring the mastery of learning outcomes and the role of OER in accreditation. Originality/value One key feature of the framework is its horizontal structure where stakeholders take a team-based approach to completing the required tasks for mainstreaming OER. This, in turn, increases ownership of the mainstreaming process leading to higher success rates and sustainability. Second, the mainstreaming checklist breaks down each process into several achievable tasks and assigns them to the relevant team. Third, the framework supports continuous quality improvement which encourages institutions to periodically revisit the processes to make necessary course corrections and enhancements.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".