Who are the Open Learners? A Comparative Study Profiling Non-Formal Users of Open Educational Resources

Robert Farrow 1 , Beatriz de los Arcos 1 , Rebecca Pitt 1  and Martin Weller 1
  • 1 Institute of Educational Technology, The Open University, United Kingdom


Open educational resources (OER) have been identified as having the potential to extend opportunities for learning to non-formal learners. However, little research has been conducted into the impact of OER on non-formal learners. This paper presents the results of a systematic survey of more than 3,000 users of open educational resources (OER). Data was collected between 2013 and 2014 on the demographics, attitudes and behaviours of users of three repositories. Questions included a particular focus on the behaviours of non-formal learners and the relationship between formal and non-formal study. Frequency analysis shows that there are marked differences in patterns of use, user profiles, attitudes towards OER, types of materials used and popularity of different subjects. The experience of using OER is fairly consistent across platforms in terms of satisfaction and impact on future behaviour. On the whole, non-formal learners surveyed were highly positive about their use of OER and believe they will continue to use them. With regards to this making formal study more likely some degree of polarization was observed: some believed formal study was now more likely, while others felt it made this less likely. On the whole, while non-formal learners are enthusiastic about using free and online resources, the language and concept of OER does not seem to be well understood in the groups surveyed. A range of findings relating to OER selection and use as well as differences between repositories are explored in the discussion.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Apple (2014). iTunes U. Retrieved from http://www.apple.com/education/ipad/itunes-u/

  • 2. Cohen, E.H. (2007). Researching Informal Education. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology, 93(Jan), 70-88. Retrieved from http://bms.revues.org/529

  • 3. Colardyn, D., & Bjornavold, J. (2004). Validation of Formal, Non-Formal and Non-formal Learning: policy and practices in EU Member States. European Journal of Education, 39(1), 69-89. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0141-8211.2004.00167.x/abstract

  • 4. Cofer, D. (2000). Non-formal workplace learning: Practice application brief, NO 10. US Department of Education: Clearinghouse on Adult, Career and Vocational Education.

  • 5. Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. A systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre. Retrieved from http://www.lsda.org.uk/files/PDF/1543.pdf

  • 6. Conrad, D., Mackintosh, W., McGreal, R., Murphy, A. & Witthaus, G. (2013). Report on the Assessment and Accreditation of Learners using Open Education Resources (OER). Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved from http://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/232

  • 7. Creative Commons (2013). What is OER? Retrieved from http://wiki.creativecommons.org/What_is_OER%3F

  • 8. de los Arcos, B., Farrow, R., Perryman, L.-A., Pitt, R. & Weller, M. (2014). OER Evidence Report 2013-2014. OER Research Hub. Retrieved from http://oerresearchhub.org/about-2/reports/

  • 9. Downes, S. (2007, February 3). What Connectivism Is [Blog post]. Half an hour. Retrieved from http://halfanhour.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/what-connectivism-is.html

  • 10. Emmanuel, E.J. (2013). Online Education: MOOCs taken by educated few. Nature, 503, 342. doi:10.1038/503342a

  • 11. Farrow, R., Pitt, R. de los Arcos, B., Perryman, L-A., Weller, M., & McAndrew, P. (2015). Impact of OER use on teaching and learning: data from OER Research Hub (2013–2014). British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(5), 972–976.

  • 12. Felstead, A., Fuller, A., Unwin, L., Ashton, D., Butler, P., & Lee, T. (2005). Surveying the scene: learning metaphors, survey design and the workplace context. Journal of Education and Work, 18(4), 359–383. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13639080500327857

  • 13. Feldstein, A., Martin, M., Hudson, A., Warren, K., Hilton, J., & Wiley, D. (2012). Open textbooks and increased student access and outcomes. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 15(2). Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=2012&halfyear=2&article=533

  • 14. Friesen, N. (2009). Open Educational Resources: New Possibilities for Change and Sustainability. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(5), 1-13.

  • 15. Glover, I., & Latif, F. (2013). Investigating Perceptions and Potential of Open Badges in Formal Higher Education. In J. Herrington, A. Couros & V. Irvine (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2013 (pp. 1398-1402). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

  • 16. Goligoski, E. (2012). Motivating the Learner: Mozilla’s Open Badges Program. Access To Knowledge: A Course Journal, 4(1). Retrieved from http://ojs.stanford.edu/ojs/index.php/a2k/article/view/381

  • 17. Hewlett (n.d.). Open Educational Resources. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.hewlett.org/programs/education/open-educational-resources

  • 18. Hilton, J. (2014). A Review of Research on the Perceptions, Influence and Cost-Savings of OER: Looking Back and Looking Forward. Paper presented at Open Education 2014. Washington D.C., USA 19th November 2014.

  • 19. Hilton, J., & Laman, C. (2012). One college’s use of an open psychology textbook. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 27(3), 265–272. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02680513.2012.716657

  • 20. Hilton, J., Murphy, L., & Ritter, D. (2014). Open Educational Resources to College Credit: The Approaches of Saylor Academy. Open Praxis, 6(4), 365-374.

  • 21. Illeris, K. (2003). Towards a contemporary and comprehensive theory of learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 22(4), 396-406. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02601370304837#.VmWgiF6pLm4

  • 22. Järvelä, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2014). Designing for learning: Interest, motivation, and engagement. In D. Keith Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (2nd ed.), (pp. 668-685). New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • 23. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

  • 24. Latchem, C. (2014). Non-formal Learning and Non-Formal Education for Development. Journal of Learning for Development, 1(1). Retrieved from http://www.jl4d.info/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/6/6

  • 25. Laurillard, D. (2014, June 26). What is the problem for which MOOCs are the solution? [Blog post]. #ALTC Blog. Retrieved from https://newsletter.alt.ac.uk/2014/06/what-is-the-problem-for-which-moocs-are-the-solution/

  • 26. Law, P., Perryman, L-A., and Law, A. (2013). Open educational resources for all? Comparing user motivations and characteristics across The Open University’s iTunes U channel and OpenLearn platform. Proceedings of the Open and Flexible Higher Education Conference 2013, 23-25 October 2013, Paris, France, European Association of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU), 204–219. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/39102/1/eadtu%20annual%20conference%202013%20-%20proceedings.pdf

  • 27. Malcolm, J., Hodkinson, P., & Colley, H. (2004) Informality and Formality in Learning: A Summary of the Report to the Learning and Skills Research Centre. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre. Retrieved from https://kar.kent.ac.uk/4647/

  • 28. McAndrew, P., Farrow, R., & Cooper, M. (2012). Adapting online learning resources for all: planning for professionalism in accessibility. Research in Learning Technology, 20(4), 345–361.

  • 29. McGreal, R., Conrad, D., Murphy, A., Witthaus, G., & Mackintosh, W. (2014). Formalising non-formal learning: Assessment and accreditation challenges within disaggregated systems. Open Praxis, 6(2), 125-133. Retrieved from http://openpraxis.org/index.php/OpenPraxis/article/view/114

  • 30. Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2013). Interaction Equivalency in an OER, MOOCS and Non-formal Learning Era. Journal of Interactive Media in Education 2013(2), 9. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/2013-09

  • 31. Mozilla Foundation (n.d.). OpenBadges. Retrieved from http://openbadges.org

  • 32. OERRH (2013). OER Research Hub. Retrieved from http://oerresearchhub.org

  • 33. OpenLearn (2014). OpenLearn – Explore. http://www.open.edu/openlearn/about-openlearn/explore

  • 34. OpenLearn (2015). OpenLearn. Retrieved from http://www.open.edu/openlearn/

  • 35. Perryman, L.-A., Law, P., & Law, A. (2015). Sustainable business models for OER revisited: researching changes in OpenLearn users’ motivations and experiences.

  • 36. Pitt, R. (2015). Mainstreaming Open Textbooks: Educator Perspectives on the Impact of OpenStax College open textbooks. The International Review of Research in Open And Distributed Learning, 16(4). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2381

  • 37. Saylor Academy (2015). Saylor Academy. Retrieved from http://www.saylor.org

  • 38. Sangrà, A., & Wheeler, S. (2013). New Non-formal Ways of Learning: Or Are We Formalising the Non-formal? Universities and Knowledge Society Journal (RUSC), 10(1), 286-293. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v10i1.1689

  • 39. Schmid, L., Manturuk, K., Simpkins, I., Goldwasser, M., & Whitfield, K. E. (2015). Fulfilling the promise: do MOOCs reach the educationally underserved? Educational Media International, 52(2), 116-128. doi:10.1080/09523987.2015.1053288

  • 40. Sfard, A. (1998). On Two Metaphors for Learning and the Dangers of Choosing Just One. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4-13.

  • 41. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10. Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/journal/jan_05/article01.htm

  • 42. Weller, M. (2014). Battle for Open: How openness won and why it doesn't feel like victory. London: Ubiquity Press. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/bam

  • 43. Wiley, D., Hilton, J. Ellington, S., & Hall, T. (2012). A preliminary examination of the cost savings and learning impacts of using open textbooks in middle and high school science classes. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 13(3), 261-276.

  • 44. Yang, J. (2015). Recognition, Validation and Accreditation of Non-formal and Non-formal Learning in UNESCO Member States. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002326/232656e.pdf


Journal + Issues