Project Team
Brendan Riggin, Recreation and Leisure Studies
Donna Kotsopoulos, Faculty of Education, Western University
Boba Samuels, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto
Brandon Dickson, Research Assistant, Doctoral Student at The Balsillie School of International Affairs
(Project timeline: September 2023 - August 2024)
Project Summary
The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disability Act (AODA) made a bold commitment to make Ontario fully accessible by 2025. The aim of this project was to evaluate how Open Educational Resources (OERs) can support accessibility, thus impacting student success, within Recreation and Leisure Studies (RLS). To achieve this, three RLS courses were delivered in-person by the applicant, and all instructional materials were housed on the Learning Management System (LMS). Learning analytics from the LMS (e.g., student log data) formed the basis of the data collected to illustrate preference for materials and tools. Students completed a learning preferences inventory (https://vark-learn.com/the-vark-questionnaire/) and engaged in reflective writing/narrations to document their experiences and the impact on their learning. The accessibility tools available at https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/resources/accessibility-teaching-0 were used as guides for the assessment of the OERs.
Questions Investigated
- How can OERs support student accessibility?
- What impact can OERs have on the student experience and learning?
Findings/Insights
Most students found that using Open Educational Resources (OERs) was beneficial to their learning and had a positive impact on their overall experience. They appreciated that the OERs offered a variety of tools to accommodate different learning styles, which helped keep them engaged. However, some students noted that certain aspects of the OERs felt redundant or "obvious" at times. Conversely, they praised some resources for incorporating "real-world situations", emphasizing the importance of not only the accessibility of the content but also its relevance and practicality.
Students also valued the accessibility features of the OERs, such as transcripts, closed captions for videos, and the use of large, easy-to-read fonts. The elements identified as most engaging and useful were the charts, figures, and clipart, which made the resources more interactive and helped students follow along and retain key information. They also appreciated the diversity of content formats, including multimedia elements like interactive graphics, audio, videos, and links to supplemental materials. Most students expressed a desire to see these types of resources used in future courses. One student remarked, "I could see OERs being an effective format in many other courses, as it is more engaging and visually appealing than many of the other formats I have experienced so far."
The quantitative analysis indicated that the students who viewed the OERs were more likely to be successful in the course. For example, in one the courses, there was a strong correlation (r = .69) between the number of OERs accessed and the student’s overall course grade. Although completing assigned readings and success in a course may be intuitive, and not necessarily unique to OERs, it does demonstrate the important role of these resources in the students’ experience. A limitation of the current study was a lack of access to previous student data (i.e., frequency logs and student grades prior to the implementation of OERs). Future research could compare the relationship between traditional course resources and OERs to determine which type of resource may have a greater impact on student success.
References
Al-Areibi, I., Dickson, B., & Kotsopoulos, D. (2022). An analysis of synchronous and asynchronous online undergraduate learning during the COVID pandemic. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education / Revue Internationale Du E-Learning Et La Formation à Distance, 37(1). https://doi.org/10.55667/ijede.2022.v37.i1.1213
Arora, K., & Wolbring, G. (2022). Kinesiology, physical activity, physical education, and sports through an Equity/Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Lens: A scoping review. Sports, 10(4), 55.
Bracken, S., & Novak, K. (Eds.). (2019). Transforming higher education through universal design for learning: An international perspective. Routledge.
Barneva, R. P., Brimkov, V. E., Gelsomini, F., Kanev, K., & Walters, L. (2018). Integrating open educational resources into undergraduate business courses. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 47(3), 337-358. doi:10.1177/0047239518818406
Coffman, S. & Draper, C. (2022). Universal design for learning in higher education: A concept analysis. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 17(1), 36-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.teln.2021.07.009
Hilton III, J. L., & Wiley, D. (2011). Open access textbooks and financial sustainability: A case study on Flat World Knowledge. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(5), 18-26.
Husmann, P. R., & O'Loughlin, V. D. (2019). Another nail in the coffin for learning styles? Disparities among undergraduate anatomy students’ study strategies, class performance, and reported VARK learning styles. Anatomical sciences education, 12(1), 6-19.
Hutchings, Pat. (2000). Introduction: Approaching the scholarship of teaching and learning. In Pat Hutchings (Ed.), Opening lines: Approaches to the scholarship of teaching and learning (pp. 1-10). Menlo Park, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Jaarsma, E. A., Dijkstra, P. U., Geertzen, J. H. B., & Dekker, R. (2014). Barriers to and facilitators of sports participation for people with physical disabilities: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 24(6), 871-881.
Jhangiani, R. S., Dastur, F. N., Le Grand, R., & Penner, K. (2018). As good or better than commercial textbooks: Students’ perceptions and outcomes from using open digital and open print textbooks. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2018.1.5
Knoll, A. R., Otani, H., Skeel, R. L., & Van Horn, K. R. (2017). Learning style, judgements of learning, and learning of verbal and visual information. British Journal of Psychology, 108(3), 544-563.
Miao, F., Mishra, S., & McGreal, R. (Eds.). (2016). Open educational resources: Policy, costs and transformation. France/Burnaby, BC: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)/Commonwealth of Learning (COL).
Rose, D. (2001b). Universal Design for Learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(4), 64-67. doi:10.1177/016264340101600411
Seaman, J. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Freeing the textbook: Educational resources in U.S. higer education. Oakland, CA: Babson Survey Research Group.
Somerset, S., & Hoare, D. J. (2018). Barriers to voluntary participation in sport for children: a systematic review. BMC pediatrics, 18(1), 1-19.
Stringer, E. T. (2008). Action research in education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Wiley, D., Bliss, T. J., & McEwen, M. (2014). Open educational resources: A review of the literature. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 781-789.