An analysis of the awareness, offering, and adoption of OER and MOOCs in Japan

Katsusuke Shigeta (Hokkaido University)Hiroyuki SAKAI (Kyoto University)Yasuhiko TSUJI (Open University Japan)Rieko INABA (Tsuda College)Naoshi HIRAOKA (Kumamoto University)

Overview

• The purpose of this research is to grasp the current status in Japan of – the awareness of OER and MOOCs– the purposes for offering and adopting OER and MOOCs

• Detailed survey for administrators in every universities and colleges in Japan

• Compared survey results between 2013 and 2015– This survey and research are conducted by researchers in AXIES

(an regional organization to promote ICT education in Japan)

Background (1)Spreading recognition and usage about OER in the globe (UNESCO 2012)

• OER activity is conducted through initiatives by institutions and engaged individuals across the regions including Africa, Asia and Pacific and Europe

• OER activity in tertiary institution (22.4%) is relatively higher compared to primary, secondary institutions

• About half of respondents reported that OER strategy and policy exists

• Learning materials were publicly funded, although this was less so in Europe and North America

Background (2)Development and utilization of OER and MOOCs

• One-third of the faculty aware of OER, desired to take advantage of it, and recognized it as substantially the same in quality as traditional educational resources (Allen & Seaman, 2014)

• There were more than 4500 MOOCs available in the world as of the beginning of 2016 (Online Course Report, 2016)

• 81 of the top 100 universities ranked in Times Higher Education in 2015 offered MOOCs (Open Education Laboratory, 2015)

Background (3)Development and utilization of OER in the US

• OER and MOOCs have been recognized as effective tools and offered as online courses by major universities

• A study revealed that approximately half the institutions of higher education were involved in OER activities (Allen & Seaman, 2014)

• The most significant barrier to wider adoption of OER remains faculty perception of the time and effort required to find and evaluate (Allen & Seaman, 2014)

Background (4)Development and utilization of OER in Canada (Jhangiani et al., 2016)

• Two-thirds of the organizations believe that students can learn without spending money by using OER

– Research-intensive schools did not feel barriers to OER and used them compared to other types of institutions

– Two-thirds of the institutions did not recognize a policy on the use and encouragement of OER, especially for education-intensive schools and colleges

• The main reasons for using OER are preparation for classes, ideas and inspiration, complementing existing classes regardless of institution type

• Differences between the type of institutions

Background (3)Development and utilization of OER and MOOC in Japan (AXIES 2013)

• The Ministry of Education conducted in 2013 for every Japanese higher institutions

– The degree of recognition and assignment of future value of OER was low

– Among institutions, relatively high in national universities and technical colleges

– relatively low in public universities and two-year institutions

• The adoption and offering of MOOC was very low in 2013

Purpose of this researchGrasp the current status of Japan universities

• From 2013 surveys, at this point, the spread of OER and MOOCs has been delayed in Japanese higher institutions compared with other regions

• Importance to grasp the conditions of the recognition and utilization of OER and MOOCs in Japan to find characteristics and establish future plan suitable to the situations in this region

• Based on these results of surveys conducted in 2013, we conducted a continuing survey in 2015 to investigate to what degree the situation has changed

• The purpose of this research is to reveal the current status of awareness, offering, and adoption of OER and MOOCs in Japan from these surveys

About the 2015 survey

• Conducted by AXIES (Academic eXchange for Information Environment and Strategy) from November 2015 to February 2016

– AXIES is a regional organization to contribute to education and academic research by promoting advancement of education and research using information communication technology at higher education

• Survey requests were delivered to the administrative offices of the respective institutions of higher education by mail

• The responses were collected on the Internet form

• The object of the study was 1215 universities and colleges in Japan (including 516 four-year institutions, 222 two-year institutions, and 54 technical colleges)

Response to the survey

• The overall response rate was 65.2%

• The analysis was conducted to grasp the tendencies

• Statistically analyzed by the type of higher institutions

1. Four-year institutions classified by the source of funding1. Public institutions supported by the national government2. Public institutions supported by local governments3. Private institutions

2. Two-year institutions

3. Technical colleges

Results

1. Awareness of OER

2. Adoption and offering of OER and MOOCs

3. Purposes for offering OER and MOOCs

4. Comparison of 2013 and 2015 surveys about the progress of offering MOOCs

1. Awareness of OER

Tech. College （ n ＝ 54 ）

Two-year Institution （ n ＝ 222 ）

Four-year Institution （ n ＝ 516 ）

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

5.6

6.8

18.6

53.7

40.1

38.6

31.5

32.4

33.1

1.9

12.6

4.8

7.4

8.1

4.8

Very Aware Aware Somewhat Aware Not Aware Don't Know

• Positive response slightly increased from the previous survey in all institutions

• The largest percentage of the affirmative response of “not aware” was among two-year institutions

• But this had declined in comparison with the previous survey

1. Awareness of OER

• By the source of funding, the percentages of affirmative responses to “well aware” and “aware” were

– 68.1% for public institutions supported by the national government

– 51.8% for public institutions supported by local government

– 56% for private institutions

• All responses exceeded 50 percent

– Improved 5-10% from the previous survey

2. Offering and adoption of OER and MOOCs

Tech. College(n=54)

Two-year Institution(n=222)

Four-year Institution(n=516)

0% 10% 20%

11.1%

0.5%

2.3%

14.8%

8.6%

13.4%

3.7%

2.3%

13.6%

1.4%

5.6%

OER Offering OER Adoption MOOCs Offering MOOCs Adoption

• Four-year institutions accounted for the highest percentage of institutions offering OER

• Technical colleges accounted for the highest percentage among institutions planning to offer OER

2. Offering and adoption of OER• By the source of funding, institutions established by the national

government accounted for the largest percentage offering OER (27.5%, 19 institutions)

• The rate of OER adoption was low for all organizations

– Technical colleges had the highest percentage (14.8%)– four-year institutions (13.4%)

• By source of funding, national public universities accounted for the highest percentage adopting OER (24.6%)

– also accounted for the highest percentage among universities planning to adopt OER in the future (46.4%).

2. Offering and adoption of MOOC• Four-year institutions accounted for 5.6%

• Two-year institutions accounted for 1.4%

– Very low, but increase compared with the previous survey

• Type of institutions

– Four-year institutions accounted for 20.1% (104 schools)– Two-year institutions accounted for 10.3% (23 schools)– Technical colleges accounted for 14.8% (eight schools)– Large increase compared with the previous survey

• Only a single course was available at most universities and colleges

Comparison of reasons for offering

Collaboration among universities

Faculty Development

Collection of learning data for educational improvement

Social contribution as a higher education institution

Promote educational information

Wider selections of educational opportunities

Improve learning environment for students

Service for alumni

Support for lifelong learning

Support professional development

Support for job change

Recruiment of domestic graduate students

Recruiment of domestic students

Recruitment of foreign students

Recruiment for highschool stundents

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%16.3%

22.1%

20.2%

52.9%

48.1%

43.3%

48.1%

21.2%

49.0%

31.7%

3.8%

27.9%

34.6%

27.9%

50.0%

16.4%

27.1%

24.9%

49.2%

50.3%

44.1%

65.0%

23.2%

39.0%

23.7%

5.1%

20.3%

33.9%

20.3%

46.3%

OER MOOCs

*

* : p<0.05

Comparison the two groups about MOOCs offering• Follow-up surveys of 108 institutions who planned to offer

MOOCs in the previous survey to determine how their efforts on MOOCs changed during the intervening two years

• Results– 17.6% of the organizations actually provided MOOCs and 2.8%

advanced planning

– 19.4% same status

– 4.6% delayed and 25.9% of the organizations decided not to offer

– 29.6% unknown

Comparison between active group and negative group

Recruiment for highschool stundents

Recruitment of foreign students

Recruiment of domestic students

Recruiment of domestic graduate students

Support for job change

Support professional development

Support for lifelong learning

Service for alumni

Improve learning environment for students

Wider selections of educational opportunities

Promote educational information

Social contribution as an higher education institution

Collection of learning data for educational improvement

Faculty Development

Collaboration among universities

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%100.0%

80.0%

46.7%

46.7%

26.7%

6.7%

46.7%

93.3%

13.3%

26.7%

73.3%

73.3%

100.0%

13.3%

20.0%

0.0%

57.7%

42.3%

50.0%

46.2%

3.8%

19.2%

38.5%

15.4%

61.5%

38.5%

42.3%

50.0%

23.1%

23.1%

19.2%

Negative (Delayed + Not offer) Active (Offer + Advanced)

**

*

**

*

* : p<0.05 ** : p<0.01

Observations

• Awareness of OER increased compared to the previous survey

– The awareness of open education rose with the spread of the concept of MOOCs during this period in Japan

• Offering and adoption of OER are quite low

– Japanese universities and colleges have not faced the necessity to introduce open textbooks due to the moderate prices of textbooks

– No governmental or foundation support for open education activities, self-sustaining

Observations

• Higher percentage of technical colleges adopting OER and MOOCs

– All technical colleges in Japan share a single common curriculum

– Standardization of the education system is considered to make it imperative to adopt OER and MOOCs on their campuses

• Private institutions scored lower on offering and adopting OER and MOOCs compared to public institutions

– Fiscal management of private schools is more self-sustaining than that of public schools supported by governmental budgets

– This situation makes for a perspective on open education that is strict and fair in evaluating its effect on investment

Observations

• To compare the reasons for offering OER and MOOC, some differences are found

– Institutions find incentives to apply OER as an assortment of educational materials available according to students’ circumstances

– MOOCs appear to accentuate lifelong learning and public relations more than OER

• Regarding the follow-up to the previous survey, the percentage of higher education institutions that planned to offer MOOCs or were in the advanced planning stages was only about 20%

– The year of the previous survey, 2013, was the year of a MOOC boom and indeed was called “The Year of the MOOC,” when many universities began to consider offering them

– Over the next two years, concerns about the practical effect of MOOCs and the high cost of providing them were discussed in Japan, too

– This circumstances would be the reason that the number of universities offering MOOCs has been limited

Observations

• The difference in the purposes of the “active group” and “negative group”

• The “active group” aims to provide MOOCs for society as a whole, not only for themselves

• They are oriented towards providing MOOCs for students at our school

• The provision of MOOCs also has public relations benefits for the university, and also makes it possible to provide university lectures as a “showcase” outside the university, leading to social contributions of the university and attracting more candidates

• As MOOCs are offered at a certain cost level, the emphasis of certain agencies on publicity intensified the formation of a consensus within the university that led to the offering of MOOCs

Limitations

• Among the institutions that have planned to offer MOOCs or had them under consideration in the previous survey, the current status of about 30% of them is unknown– needed to investigate and grasp the situation of each institution in more

detail

• To better understand their actual usage, future studies are required to analyze the status of the adoption of OER and MOOCs by faculty

• To clarify the differences in the reasons for offering MOOCs between “global MOOCs” and “regional MOOCs,” we must distinguish these two types of MOOCs on the submission form for respondents

Conclusion

• The purpose of this research to grasp the current status in Japan of – the awareness of OER and MOOCs

– the purposes for offering and adopting OER and MOOCs

– Compared survey results between 2013 and 2015

• Awareness of OER raised, but the offering and adoption of OER is quite low

• Comparison the reason of the offering of OER and MOOCs, some differences are found

• Comparison the active group and passive group of MOOCs offering, some differences are found

An analysis of the awareness, offering, and adoption of OER and MOOCs in Japan

Katsusuke Shigeta (Hokkaido University)Hiroyuki SAKAI (Kyoto University)Yasuhiko TSUJI (Open University Japan)Rieko INABA (Tsuda College)Naoshi HIRAOKA (Kumamoto University)

Contact: Katsusuke Shigetashige@iic.hokudai.ac.jp