Content uploaded by Martin Ebner
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Martin Ebner on Jul 19, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Chapter 8
Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom
Maria Haas, Martin Ebner and Sandra Schön
Additional information is available at the end of the chapter
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452
Provisional chapter
© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,
and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72452
Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom
MariaHaas, MartinEbner and SandraSchön
Additional information is available at the end of the chapter
Abstract
In this research work, we want to follow the idea of using open educational resources
(OER) in a classroom to gather practical experiences. The topic of our choice is English
as a foreign language (EFL), because in our opinion a lot of teaching content should be
available. The preparation of the lectures, as well as the nal lecturing, is described to
understand how OER can be used in the EFL classroom. The feedback of the pupils and
the lessons learned point out that there are more obstacles than expected, mainly because
of the strict copyright law in German-speaking Europe.
Keywords: EFL, language learning, open education, open educational resources
1. Introduction
Despite the fact that open educational resources (OER) movement has been around for
15 years, lile aention has been paid with regard to practical usage in secondary education.
Instead, the focus has been on tertiary education as well as education for developing coun-
tries. Geser [1] points out his benets of using open educational resources in education (p. 21):
• OER oer a broader range of subjects and topics to choose from and allow for more ex-
ibility in choosing material for teaching and learning.
• OER leverage the educational value of resources through providing teacher’s personal
feedback, lessons learned, and suggestions for improvements.
• OER provide learning communities, such as groups of teachers and learners, with easy-to-
use tools to set up collaborative learning environments.
• OER promote user-centered approaches in education and lifelong learning. Users are not
only consumers of educational content but also create own materials, develop e-portfolios,
and share study results and experiences with peers.
© 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Since those early days of the OER movement, dierent publications have pointed out why
OER are highly relevant for higher education [2–4] as well. For example, the necessity of
an own OER strategy is carried out by Schaert [5] and executed for the rst time at Graz
University of Technology [6] in Austria. Despite these initiatives OER is less represented in
secondary education right now, although open educational resources allow teachers to adapt
teaching material in order to suit the needs of their students. Rather than having to worry
about copyright-related issues, more time can be spent on creating quality material.
The author had a personal interest in determining how OER material can be used in second-
ary education in a subject such as English as a foreign language (EFL) where schoolbooks are
said to be the primary material used [7]. Therefore, a study was conducted in an Austrian
middle school with students in their second year of English study. Over the course of 2 weeks,
students were taught using OER material only.
During the study, inuencing factors, such as the time needed to create the material, complex-
ity of licensing, as well as students’ age and feedback, were evaluated.
The goal of this study was to determine how English as a foreign language (EFL) lessons would
look like if exclusively OER material rather than traditional schoolbooks would be used.
2. Research design
The term open educational resources (OER) was rst introduced in 2002 during the UNESCO
Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for Higher Education in Developing Countries [8].
According to the UNESCO websites, OER refer to “teaching, learning or research materials
that are in the public domain or that can be used under an intellectual property license that
allows re-use or adaptation (e.g., Creative Commons)” [9].
This means that OER material can freely be shared, remixed, and reused by both teachers and
students in order to allow for the best learning experience possible. A term often associated
with and seen as the “de facto standard” of OER is Creative Commons (CC) ([10], p. 7).
Creative Commons (CC) is a nonprot organization that was founded in 2001 [11]. It allows
users to release material under a license that is not “all rights reserved.” It should be noted
that Creative Commons licenses do not work against copyright but work together with it and
can be seen as an extension of it [11, 12]. At the moment (July 2017), users are able to license
their works under one of the six licenses as well as a special public domain license. These
licenses are “open” to various degrees. However, on the most basic level, material licensed
under a CC license is allowed to be freely shared, modied, and even sold without restrictions
as long as credit to the original source is provided. Altogether, there are four dierent “mod-
ules” that can make up a Creative Commons license. For the purpose of the study, particular
aention was paid to exclusively use the two most open licenses: BY and BY SA.
In November 2015, a 2-week long study was conducted in an Austrian middle school in order
to determine how lessons using OER material would look like with regard to EFL classes.
Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods124
The middle school was selected because the sta, as well as the students, were open to try-
ing out and using OER material in the future. A class with 30 students in their second year
of English study participated in the study. The students were 11–12 years old, and the class
consisted of 21 female and 9 male students.
As mentioned in the introduction, according to a study regarding schools in Germany,
English is one of the subjects in which textbooks are most frequently used ([7], as cited [13],
p. 36). Similar results can be assumed with regard to Austrian schools. All in all, over the
course of 2 weeks, six lessons were taught focusing on the grammar topics which present
perfect simple as well as comparative forms. The subject taught was English as a foreign
language.
English as a foreign language (EFL) refers to English being taught in a country in which
English is not the primary language and the teacher is a non-native English speaker. In most
cases, both the teacher and students share a common mother tongue that can be used in order
to overcome potential problems and misunderstandings. ESL, or English as a second lan-
guage, on the other hand, refers to English being taught in a country in which English is the
main language, and the lessons are taught by a native speaker of English. In this context, both
students and teachers do not share a mother tongue, and therefore English needs to be used
as a lingua franca. The above paragraph is based on information provided by LinguaServe
Germany [14].
In February 2015, a preliminary study was conducted in the selected middle school. The pre-
liminary study allowed for familiarization with the available equipment and seing of the
classroom and school as well as the students. Each classroom was equipped with a desktop
computer and projector. While the school had two computer labs available, English teachers
do not frequently use these during their regular classes. Therefore, it was decided against
using online material and instead focused on oine material in order to beer simulate how
OER material could be used by EFL teachers in Austria.
In order to increase reusability, the so-called free cultural licenses [15], i.e., BY and BY SA,
were chosen for the material used and created over the course of the study. With the exception
of one audio le that the students listened to, all the material followed the abovementioned
principle [16].
As mentioned previously, 30 students participated in the study. During the course of the
study, one of two English teachers was always present which allowed for consulting the teach-
ers in order to receive feedback with regard to possible changes from students’ regular behav-
ior due to their familiarity with the said students. The students were in their second year of
English study which according to the Austrian curriculum [17] means that their English level
corresponds to the A1 level of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages
[18]. Due to the fact that the students were part of a special class called “English as a work-
ing language,” other subjects such as mathematics, chemistry, and music were also taught
in English. Therefore, it can be assumed that their level is slightly higher compared to other
second year students of English in Austria.
Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452
125
It should be noted that OER is of particular interest for Austrian schools and teachers because,
while Austrian copyright laws permit classroom usage of copyrighted material under certain
restrictions, the law also states that this does not include material explicitly created for teaching
purposes ([19], § 42/6]).
In order to evaluate the results found during the study, an evaluation plan was created. It
consisted of the three criteria briey discussed below:
1. The rst criterion was preparation time. The potential time-saving aspect of using OER
material has been noted on various occasions [20, 21]. In order to evaluate the time needed
to create the material, a time sheet was kept throughout the research process. The time
spent researching the topics and exercises as well as the time needed to adapt and properly
cite pre-existing material was included.
2. The second criterion was feedback. At the end of the research period, students were asked
to evaluate the OER lessons in a special 30-minute feedback session at the end of the study
in order to determine if there were any dierences with regard to course content and stu-
dents’ motivation. In addition to that, feedback was received from the two English teachers
present in order to beer determine how the students’ behavior was compared to their
regular English lessons and whether or not any dierences could be noticed.
3. The nal criterion that was evaluated was the target group. Due to the results of a previ-
ous project seminar regarding OER material for EFL students in Austria, the hypothesis
derived that nding appropriate material for ESL/EFL learners with a relatively low level
of English (A1) would prove to be problematic. Furthermore, due to the fact that OER is
currently predominantly associated with the tertiary sector, and lile research has been
done with regard to secondary education, this is another aspect that needs to be consid-
ered if OER material is supposed to be used in lower-level EFL classes in the near future.
3. Field study
According to the CC website, the best practice for crediting CC material is TASL [22]. Due to
the fact that the material was created to be used oine, diculties arose due to the hyper-
link length of some of the source material. Unlike material created for online usage which
can simply link to the source, the hyperlink of the source material needed to be included in
full. Therefore, it was decided against including the links to the source material on the actual
worksheets. However, the teachers were provided with a separate document containing all
the links to the source material. In addition to that, for a memory game created during one of
the lessons, the title of the source images was omied from the les provided to the students.
This was done in order to avoid giving away the correct answers and thus defeating the pur-
pose of the exercise.
One of the benets of OER material is that teachers are able to mix and match various resources
in order to create material best suitable for their students. One of the exercises used as a base
Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods126
for another exercise was released under a CC BY SA 4.0 version. SA stands for share alike
and means that new material containing a SA license material needs to be released under the
same license. The original exercise compared PDAs in order to practice the comparative and
superlative forms. In order to make the exercise useful for students in 2015, it was updated to
compare smartphones instead (Figure 1). While the base exercise as well as the pictures and
texts used were all released under either BY or BY SA, the version numbers of the licensed
material are dierent.
Therefore, some time was spent trying to evaluate what to do in a case like this. Due to the fact
that this seems to be a common problem with SA licenses, the CC website provides a detailed
explanation on how to deal with version numbers of SA licenses that do not match. In a case like
this, the latest SA license included should be used as the license for the entire document [11].
During the study, in addition to being taught about the topics of shopping and vacation
which included exercises for the grammar points present perfect simple and the comparative,
students also received a brief introduction to OER and Creative Commons licenses. The rea-
son for this is that the students are the future generation, and therefore it is important to make
them aware of issues such as copyright infringements and possible solutions, e.g., material
released under CC license.
Furthermore, in order to raise even more awareness for the topic of OER and CC licenses,
the majority of the nal lesson was used to create a class poster together with the students
(Figure 2). For this purpose, the students were asked to bring pictures from their previous
vacations, aach the said pictures to the poster, and write a short sentence about their experi-
ences during the vacation using the present perfect simple which they had learned in one of
the previous lessons. It should be noted that during the study the students were also intro-
duced to the concept of “right to one’s own picture”; therefore, the pictures included on the
poster did not feature people but rather featured objects and landscapes [19].
In the second to the last lesson, the students were introduced to the concept of OER and
CC licenses. During this lesson, the students heard about the various modules that make
up CC licenses, and the benets of OER material compared to copyrighted material were
explained. This was done because the poster of the students created would be released under
a CC licenses. Therefore, it was important to raise students’ awareness.
Due to the fact that the students were underage, a wrien permission by the parents needed
to be obtained before the poster could be released under a CC license. In order to protect the
integrity of the students, the poster was not released under a BY or BY SA license but was
instead released under a BY NC ND license. This means that the poster can be shared but
cannot be modied or resold. Additionally, while explaining the various licensing modules to
the students, it was discovered that they had diculties with the SA concept; therefore, it was
decided against using a license that contained the SA module.
For the future research with older students, it would be benecial to include them in the
license choosing process in order to get them more involved with OER as a whole and start
a possible discussion regarding which license to use and why. However, due to the fact that
Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452
127
Figure 1. Worksheet: smartphone comparison.
Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods128
prior wrien permission needed to be obtained, the license was chosen beforehand. However,
the students were involved in the naming process, that is to say that the class as a whole
chooses the author name under which the poster was released.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Preparation of the lecture
All in all, it took about 39 hours to prepare the lessons. Around 20 hours were spent trying to
nd suitable OER material online that could be used as a base for the lessons. The rst 4 hours
of the research period were spent comparing Austrian EFL schoolbooks as well as nding
material relevant to the Austrian curriculum. This was done in order to get a beer under-
standing of the students’ prior English knowledge and to ensure that the created OER lessons
would be useful and suitable for students in the future. This task would not be necessary for
experienced secondary school teachers. The remaining 15 hours consisted of adjusting the
exercises to suit the students’ needs and licensing material under a CC license.
Throughout the research period, instances such as a website no longer hosting material under
a CC license and a website releasing material under “a Creative Commons license” without
any reference to a particular CC license led to an additional increase in preparation time.
It should be noted that the preparation time cannot be seen as representative for all teachers
due to the limited prior teaching experience and the fact that certain material needed to be
newly created due to the lack of available material for the target group.
Figure 2. Class poster.
Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452
129
Initially, it was believed that repositories with EFL and ESL material could easily be found.
The reason for this was that OER material is predominantly produced in English or by institu-
tions situated in either the USA or Europe [23]. However, as mentioned in the introduction,
the OER movement is also mostly focused on the tertiary sector. Therefore, despite the fact
that material is available in English, the students’ level is assumed to be relatively high. While
there are repositories available that provide users with suitable language learning activities,
the beginner activities are mostly focused on Romance languages such as Spanish or French.
Very lile material with regard to EFL/ESL beginner students was found. While it would be
possible to reuse language learning material for other languages, due to the lack of Romance
language knowledge, this was not possible during this study [24].
Due to the fact that a relatively small number of repositories with material for secondary
education as well as EFL material in a suitable level could be found, so-called lile OER were
frequently used throughout the study process [25].
Big OER refers to repositories often hosted by renowned universities that provide users with
material for a variety of subject areas. Since these repositories are backed by abovementioned
universities, users are more likely to trust the provided material [25].
According to Clements and Pawlowski [26], trust is one of the main reasons that determine
whether or not a teacher decides to reuse the material.
Lile OER, on the other hand, are websites that are hosted by individual users. Therefore,
due to the fact that rating systems are often missing, the quality of the material cannot always
be easily determined [25]. Throughout the research process, it was found that teachers often
had their own blogs or websites where they oered material they had created themselves. In
addition to providing the material, some of the websites also included information and ideas
on how to incorporate the material in a classroom seing. Therefore, despite the fact that
according to Weller [25] lile OER are seen to be of lesser quality than big OER, this could not
be conrmed during the study.
One of the reasons why so lile suitable material for English beginner students was found
might be due to the fact that teachers are not openly sharing their material online. This does
not mean that no sharing takes place but rather that this sharing happens covertly, e.g., in
password-protected forums or via email. Due to the fact that teachers are often unaware of
copyright-related issues [27], sharing in this close-knit seing allows them to do so, seem-
ingly without having to worry about possible copyright infringement. In turn, this means
that OER material that could be shared and be useful for a larger group of people is hidden
in password-protected networks ([28], p. 4). Therefore, it is important to make people as a
whole and teachers in particular more aware of the OER movement and the benets it entails.
OER allows teachers to draw from each other’s experiences instead of having to reinvent the
wheel. Due to the fact that material is allowed to be changed and adapted, students can highly
benet from OER material. One of the misconceptions found during Richter and Ehlers’ [27]
study with teachers in Germany was that the interviewed teachers thought that oering and
puing material online were enough in order to ensure that the said material could be shared,
remixed, and reused by their colleagues. Once again, this reinforces the fact that awareness
Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods130
raising and educating about copyright as well as the OER movement is important in order for
more people to benet from material created by others.
One of the diculties found during the research period of the study was that material mar-
keted as OER did not necessarily only include material that was licensed under a Creative
Commons license or material in the public domain. One of the examples was a shopping
dialog. While the text was released under a BY license, the image credit was provided as
“Google images.” Due to the fact that no link to the source images was provided, it could not
be determined whether or not the images were released under an appropriate license.
It should be noted that particularly with regard to pictures, proper credit was not always pres-
ent. Therefore, instead of simply not using the exercises, the parts that were credited properly
were used, while others were omied. However, in order to be able to remove pictures with-
out credit and for reuse to be feasible, it is important that the material is oered in an easily
editable format [23, 29]. An example for this can be providing users with PDF les for easier
printing as well as a Word document if the user wants to edit the provided material.
The pictures used for the exercises were almost always obtained from the Flickr website [30]
which allows users to search for pictures with a varying degree of openness. As mentioned
previously, suitable material for the students’ level could not always be obtained; therefore,
new material is needed to be created. It should be noted that pictures found on Flickr were
also used as a base to create new material for the students.
4.2. Lecturing
The students’ regular English class was predominantly teacher-centered, and the textbook
provided by the teacher was primarily used throughout the lessons. Over the course of the
study, particular aention was paid to use a more student-centered and interactive teaching
approach.
During the rst lesson, students were provided with a shopping dialog in order to act as an
awareness-raising activity [31] for the comparative and superlative forms. They were asked
to read the dialog together with a partner and form concepts about the new grammar point.
This allowed students to actively contribute to the grammar explanation process rather than
merely receiving information from the teacher. Additionally, the dialog provided students
with a guideline for creating their own shopping dialog during the lesson.
The second lesson was used to reinforce the comparative and superlative forms. Students
were asked to read a text about a raccoon trying to nd the ideal car and highlight the appro-
priate comparative forms. The text was chosen because it was seen as an interesting read that
still included grammar points from the last lesson. Afterward, a game was played in order to
practice the grammar formation. For this purpose, the class was divided into two teams, and
students had to race to the board and add the comparative and superlative forms to words
provided on the board.
Lesson 3 was the last lesson to deal with comparisons. Prior to this lesson, students had never
directly compared people or objects, e.g., “Lisa is taller than Tim.” Therefore, as a warm-up
Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452
131
activity for the lesson, students were asked to compare the two English teachers present. The
class enjoyed the exercise, and a few students even asked to volunteer when talking about
criteria such as height, age, and hair length. Afterward, students were asked to nd the best
smartphone for one of the English teachers. They received a worksheet which included infor-
mation about three dierent smartphones as well as comprehension questions. At the end of
the lesson, the answers to the questions were compared, and students were asked to vote for
their favorite smartphone.
In order to incorporate the upcoming Halloween holiday, students were asked to create and
write about a “superpet” as their homework. The worksheet included images of superheroes
as well as sentences and useful words and phrases. In addition to writing about their super-
pet, students were asked to draw a picture. This part was included to allow students to be
more creative and to make their texts more visible.
The fourth lesson was created to give students an overview of the dierences between
British and American English. In Austrian schools, students are predominantly taught British
English, and often times they are not aware of the dierences between the two language varia-
tions. In addition to providing an overview of some of the main dierences between British
and American English, the lesson also acted as an introduction for the topic of vacation and
traveling to other countries.
Pictures of various objects with dierent terms in British and American English were used as
a stimulus for the students. The pictures were stuck to the chalkboard located in class, and
index cards with the corresponding terms were randomly distributed on the teacher’s desk.
Students were then asked to come to the front of the class and work together in order to add
the correct terms to the pictures. Other dierences with regard to spelling and pronunciation
were discussed in class. Later, students were provided with the pictures and terms located
on the chalkboard. They were then asked to cut the worksheet in order to create their own
memory game. This activity not only reinforced the vocabulary but also allowed students to
create the material themselves, an activity that would not easily be possible with a textbook.
The last two lessons introduced the present perfect tense. As mentioned previously, the last
lesson predominantly consisted of students creating a class poster using sentences with the
present perfect alongside vacation pictures. Prior to that, a worksheet as well as a listening
comprehension was used to familiarize the students with the present perfect tense.
4.3. Feedback
At the end of the study, a 30-minute feedback session was held with the students. Prior to
the study, a preliminary study was conducted in which it was discovered that the students’
feedback had mostly focused on the teacher rather than on the material itself. Therefore, the
students were provided with some guiding questions during the feedback session in order to
ensure that feedback regarding the OER material was received.
The students’ feedback was overwhelmingly positive, with only 2 of 30 students noting that
they did not like the OER material but preferred using the schoolbook. The others noted that
the material was as good as or beer than the material they used during their regular classes.
Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods132
Additionally, they positively mentioned the games and activities that were incorporated in the
lessons. According to an email received by the two English teachers, the students were more
engaged and motivated than usual, and one of the teachers noted that she thought that this was
due to the fact that the material was created specically for the students which made the exer-
cises more “authentic” rather than, e.g., simply telling students to open the book on page 45.
One of the complaints the students frequently mentioned was the number of worksheets they
received. In order to decrease the amount of paper used for student copies, as well as to speed
up the communication process, email was supposed to be used. However, during the prelimi-
nary study, only about one-third of the students made use of the email feature. This is why it
was decided against using it for the main study. Additionally, the school website had recently
been restructured, and students were not allowed to use mobile devices in class. Therefore,
the material was provided only in hardcopy format.
Over the course of the six lessons, the students were provided with nine worksheets each.
This means that all together over the course of 2 weeks or six lessons around 420 copies were
produced. This not only meant a huge amount of paper usage but also led students feeling
frustrated because they needed to hole punch each sheet and loose sheets could easily get lost.
While it would have been possible to decrease the number of copies by printing double sided,
it was decided against it in order to increase exibility.
5. Conclusion
Open educational resources are a great opportunity for teachers to increase the quality and
enjoyment of students. As could be seen throughout the study, the students enjoyed working
with the material and were eager to learn. This suggests that students would not be opposed
to using OER material in class instead of using their schoolbooks.
However, the study also showed that while it is possible to exclusively use OER material in
an EFL seing in an Austrian school, at the moment there are certain challenges encountered
when doing so. Therefore, in order for OER material to be used on a regular basis in an EFL
classroom in Austria, certain changes need to occur.
While it is possible to use OER material in an oine seing, there are certain drawbacks asso-
ciated with it. In addition to the paper used to create hardcopies, citing Creative Commons
material became more dicult and confusing due to the oine seing. Further research
needs to be conducted in order to determine if measurements such as providing material
online could decrease the time needed to prepare the lessons.
Furthermore, it is important to spread awareness of the OER movement as a whole in order to
make teachers aware of its benets. Doing so will stop teachers from sharing material in a pri-
vate seing and allow a larger audience to benet from the material created by others. Therefore,
the author suggests implementing a course with regard to OER usage as a requirement in the
curriculum for teacher training in order to allow the future generation of teachers to learn about
the benets associated with using OER material and provide an introduction to OER usage.
Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452
133
Author details
Maria Haas1, Martin Ebner1* and Sandra Schön2
*Address all correspondence to: martin.ebner@tugraz.at
1 Educational Technology, Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria
2 Innovation Lab, Salzburg Research, Salzburg, Austria
References
[1] Geser G. Open Educational Practices and Resources – OLCOS Roadmap 2012. Salzburg.
2007. Available from: hp://www.olcos.org/english/roadmap/ [Accessed: November
2017]
[2] Caswell T, Henson S, Jensen M, Wiley D. Open educational resources: Enabling uni-
versal education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning.
2008;9(1):1-11
[3] Hylén J. Open educational resources: Opportunities and challenges. Open. Education.
2006:49-63
[4] Johnstone SM. Open educational resources serve the world. EDUCAUSE Quarterly.
2005;28(3):15-18
[5] Schaert S. Strategic integration of open educational resources in higher education.
Objectives, case studies, and the impact of Web 2.0 on universities. In: Ehlers U-D,
Schneckenberg D, editors. Changing Cultures in Higher Education – Moving Ahead to
Future Learning. New York: Springer; 2010. pp. 119-131
[6] Ebner M, Stöckler-Penz C. Open educational resources als lifelong-learning-strategie
am Beispiel der TU Graz. In: Tomaschek N, Gornik E, editors. The Lifelong Learning
University. Oldenburg: Waxmann; 2011. pp. 53-60
[7] Neumann D. Bildungsmedien Online. Kostenloses Lehrmaterial aus dem Internet:
Marktsichtung und empirische Nuungsanalyse. Julius Klinkhardt: Bad Heilbrunn;
2015
[8] UNESCO promotes new initiative for free educational resources on the Internet.
February 17, 2016. Available from: hp://www.unesco.org/education/news_en/080702_
free_edu_ress.shtml
[9] Open Educational Resources|United Nations Educational, Scientic and Cultural
Organization. February 11, 2016. Available from: hp://www.unesco.org/new/en/
unesco/themes/icts/open-%5C%20educational-resources
[10] Kreuer T. Open Educational Resources (OER), Open-Content Und Urheberrecht. 2013.
Available from: hps://irights.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Kreuer_Studie_OER-
Open-Content-Urheberrecht.pdf
Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods134
[11] Creative Commons. Home. January 15, 2016. Available from: hps: //creativecommons.
org/
[12] Klimpel P. Folgen, Risiken und Nebenwirkungen der Bedingung “nicht-kommerziell“ – NC.
2012. Available from: hps://irights.info/wp-content/uploads/userles/CC-NC_Leitfaden_
web.pdf
[13] Ebner M, Köpf E, Muuß-Merholz J, Schön M, Schön S, Weichert N. Ist-Analyse zu freien
Bildungsmaterialien (OER). Norderstedt: Books on Demand; 2015
[14] LinguaServe Germany. Dierence between EFL and ESL. February 17, 2016. Available
from: hps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYWBBNkC6o
[15] Understanding Free Cultural Works – Creative Commons – Creative Commons. July 2,
2016. Available from: hps://creativecommons.org/freeworks/
[16] Creative Commons. ShareAlike Compatibility. February 7, 2016. Available from: hps://
wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/%20ShareAlike_compatibility
[17] Bundesministerium für Bildung und Frauen. Lehrplan. July 20, 2015. Available from:
hps://www.bmbf.gv.at/schulen/unterricht/lp/ahs8_782.pdf
[18] Council for Cultural Co-operation, editor. Common European Framework of Reference
for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (10. Printing). Cambridge: Cambridge
Univ. Press; [u.a.] 2016. Available from: hps://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/
Framework_EN.pdf
[19] RIS. Gesamte Rechtsvorschrift für Urheberrechtsgese – Bundesrecht konsolidiert,
Fassung vom 17.02.2016. February 17, 2016. Available from: hps://www.ris.bka.gv.at/
GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Geseesnummer=10001848
[20] Hanna A, Wood D. Bridging the gap between OER initiative objectives and OER
user needs in higher education. ASCILITE. 2011. Available from: hp://www.
researchgate.net/profile/Denise_Wood/publication/264856532_Bridging_the_Gap_
between_OER_Initiative_Objectives_and_OER_User_Needs_in_Higher_Education/
links/5400be610cf2c48563aeaa43.pdf
[21] Sinclair J, Joy M, Yau JY-K, Hagan S. A practice-oriented review of learning objects. IEEE
Transactions on Learning Technologies. 2013;6(2):177-192. DOI: 10.1109/TLT.2013.6
[22] Best practices for aribution – Creative Commons. February 11, 2016. Available from:
hps://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Best_practices_for_aribution
[23] Amiel T. Identifying barriers to the remix of translated open educational resources. The
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2013;14(1):126-144.
Available from: hp://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1351
[24] Winchester S. Repurposing Open Educational Resources: Creating Resources for Use and
Reuse. Dublin Ireland: Research-publishing.net; 2013. DOI: 10.14705/rpnet.2013.000110
[25] Weller M. Big and lile OER. In: 2010 Proceedings. Barcelona: UOC, OU, BYU; Available
from: hp://openaccess.uoc.edu/webapps/o2/handle/10609/4851
Practical Usage of OER Material in the EFL Classroom
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72452
135
[26] Clements K, Pawlowski J. User-oriented quality for OER: Understanding teachers’
views on re-use, quality, and trust: User-oriented quality for OER. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning. 2015;28(1):4-14. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00450.x
[27] Richter T, Ehlers UD. Barriers and motivators for using open educational resources in
schools. In: Proceedings. Barcelona: UOC, OU, BYU; 2010. Available from: hp://openac-
cess.uoc.edu/webapps/o2/handle/10609/4868
[28] Sawyer RK. Optimising learning implications of learning sciences research. Innovating
to learn, learning to innovate. OECD/CERI International Conference “Learning in the
21st Century: Research, Innovation and Policy” 2008:45 hp://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/
40805146.pdf
[29] Richter T, Kretschmer T, Stracke CM, Bruce A, Hoel T, Megalou E, Sotirou S. Open edu-
cational resources in the context of school education: Barriers and possible solutions.
European Scientic Journal. 2014;10(19):1-19. Available from: hp://eujournal.org/index.
php/esj/article/view/3782/3598
[30] Flickr. February 11, 2016. Available from: hps://www.ickr.com/
[31] Awareness-raising|TeachingEnglish|British Council|BBC; 2016. February 14, 2016. Available
from: hps://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/awareness-raising
Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods136