Acceptance and Barriers of Open Educational Resources in the Context to Indian Higher Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to highlight the role and awareness of and barriers to Open Educational Resources (OERs) in Indian higher education, specifically in the State of Uttarakhand. This study further investigates the factors that hinder the progress of OER acceptance in the teaching and learning process of higher education and suggests ways to overcome these barriers. Acceptance and barriers of OERs in Indian higher education have been analyzed with the help of responses received from 204 participants (students) through questionnaire, who are either enrolled in ODL or the conventional system of education in the state of Uttarakhand (India). This study found that post-graduate programme learners are more aware of access to OERs and the majority of learners reported that training/workshops based on OERs are beneficial for them. Findings from this study will be helpful in understanding the obstacles and hindrances faced by the learners and respective institutions in the process of offering OERs. This study was conducted during the COVID-19 lockdown period.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".