Content uploaded by Vasimalai Raja
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Vasimalai Raja on Sep 13, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
A STUDY ON AWARENESS AND ATTITUDE TOWARDS OPEN EDUCATIONAL
RESOURCES IN HIGHER EDUCATION STUDENTS
*G. PRAVEEN KUMAR,
Research scholar- Ph. D,
Department of Education (D.D.E)
Alagappa University,
Karaikudi-630003
Phd17praveen@gmail.com
**Dr. M. VASIMALAIRAJA
Associate Professor in Education
Department of Education (D.D.E)
Alagappa University,
Karaikudi-630003
vasimalairaja@gmail.com
Abstract
This paper analyzed the awareness and attitude towards open educational resources of
higher education students. The sample consisted of 300 students, and the survey method was used
to collect the data. It was found that the level of awareness and attitude towards open educational
resources is moderate among higher education students. It was also found there exists a positive
correlation between awareness and attitude towards open educational resources of higher
education students.
Keywords: Open educational resources, students’ awareness, student’s attitudes.
Introduction
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) first talked about placing learning
materials to free on the internet on 2001 (Goldberg 2001), and soon after the term “Open
Educational Resources” (OER) emerged and was defined as: “educational resources, enabled by
information and communication technologies for consultation, use and adaptation by a community
of user non-commercial purposes” (UNESCO 2002). As the OER movement has gained
momentum, so has the definition expanded to embrace the benefits of providing opportunities for
knowledge transfer and to facilitate the sharing of best practices (The William and Flora Hewlett
Foundation 2010).
Need and Significance of the study
It is of particular interest in developing countries if OER can be utilized to improve the
quality of higher education and give more people the opportunity to receive a higher education
while keeping the total cost for education down. According to UNESCO Open Educational
Resources (OERs) are any educational materials that are in the public domain or introduced with
an open license. It means that anyone can legally and freely copy, use, adapt and re-share them.
OERs range from textbooks to curricula, syllabi, lecture notes, assignments, tests, projects,
audio, video and animation. In our survey we used a more simple definition i.e. OERs are
information and software that are free to download and utilize for educational purposes. Hence the
researcher chose to study an awareness and attitude towards open educational resources of higher
education students.
Objectives of the study
The main objectives of the present study are:
1. To find out the level of higher education students on open educational resource’s
awareness.
2. To find out the level of higher education students on open educational resource’s attitudes.
3. To find out whether there is any significant difference between male and female higher
education students in their open educational resource’s awareness.
4. To find out whether there is any significant difference between rural and urban higher
education students in their open educational resource’s awareness.
5. To find out whether there is any significant difference between male and female higher
education students in their open educational resources attitudes.
6. To find out whether there is any significant difference between rural and urban higher
education students in their open educational resources attitudes.
7. To find out whether there is any significant relationship between awareness and attitudes
of higher education students in their open educational resources.
Method of the Study
In this study the researcher adopted the survey method.
Population
The population of the study was the students’ studying private and government colleges
and universities in Sivagangai District.
Sample
The researcher selected 300 higher education students’ studying in Sivagangai District. For
selecting the students. The researcher used the stratified random sampling technique.
Tools Used
In the study, researcher used the constructed and validated the following tools.
1. Open educational resource’s awareness inventory
2. Open educational resource’s attitude scale
Statistical Techniques Used
Mean, Standard Deviation, t-test and Pearson’s product moment correlation.
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Table -1
The level of higher education students on open educational resources awareness.
Open
Educational
Resources
Awareness.
Low
Moderate
High
N
%
N
%
N
%
51
17
218
72.7
31
10.3
It is inferred from the above table that 17% of the higher education students have low level,
72.7% of the higher education students have moderate level, and 10.3% of the higher education
students have high level of open educational resources awareness.
Table – 2
The level of higher education students on open educational resources
Open
Educational
Resources
Attitude.
Low
Moderate
High
N
%
N
%
N
%
40
13.3
218
72.7
42
14
It is inferred from the above table that 13.3% of the higher education students have low
level, 72.7% of the higher education students have moderate level, and 14% of the higher education
students have high level of open educational resources attitude.
Hypothesis -1
There is no significant difference between male and female higher education students in
their open educational resources awareness.
Table – 3
Open educational resources awareness scores with regard to Gender
Sub-sample
N
Mean
S.D
‘t’ Value
Remarks
Gender
Male
173
44.65
5.652
0.36
NS
Female
127
44.62
6.28
(At 5% level of Significance of the table value of ‘t’ is 1.96)
From the above table reveals that there is no significant difference between male and
female higher education students in their open educational resources awareness, as the calculated
value 0.36 is lower than the table value 1.96 at 5% level of significant. Hence the null hypothesis
“there is no significant difference between male and female higher education students in their open
educational resources awareness” is accepted.
Hypothesis -2
There is no significant difference between rural and urban higher education students in
their open educational resources awareness.
Table – 4
Open educational resources awareness scores with regard to Locale of the students
Sub-sample
N
Mean
S.D
‘t’ Value
Remarks
Locale of
the
Student
Rural
164
43.98
5.92
2.14
S
Urban
136
45.43
5.381
(At 5% level of Significance of the table value of ‘t’ is 1.96)
From the above table reveals that there is no significant difference between rural and urban
higher education students in their open educational resources awareness, as the calculated value
2.14 is greater than the table value 1.96 at 5% level of significance and hence the null hypothesis
“there is no significant difference between rural and urban higher education students in their open
educational resources awareness” is rejected.
Hypothesis -3
There is no significant difference between male and female higher education students in
their open educational resources attitudes.
Table – 5
Open educational resources attitudes scores with regard to Gender
Sub-sample
N
Mean
S.D
‘t’ Value
Remarks
Gender
Male
173
80.53
12.62
0.263
NS
Female
127
80.22
7.81
(At 5% level of Significance of the table value of ‘t’ is 1.96)
From the above table reveals that there is no significant difference between male and
female higher education students in their open educational resources attitudes, as the calculated
value 0.263 is less than the table value 1.96 at 5% level of significance and hence the null
hypothesis “there is no significant difference between male and female higher education students
in their open educational resources attitudes” is accepted.
Hypothesis -4
There is no significant difference between rural and urban higher education students in
their open educational resources attitudes.
Table – 6
Open educational resources attitudes scores with regard to Locale of the students
Sub-sample
N
Mean
S.D
‘t’ Value
Remarks
Locale of
the
Student
Rural
164
78.03
12.09
4.432
S
Urban
136
83.26
8.28
(At 5% level of Significance of the table value of ‘t’ is 1.96)
From the above table reveals that there is no significant difference between rural and urban
higher education students in their open educational resources attitudes, as the calculated value
4.432 is greater than the table value 1.96 at 5% level of significance and hence the null hypothesis
“there is no significant difference between rural and urban higher education students in their open
educational resources attitudes” is rejected.
Hypothesis -5
There is no significant relationship between awareness and attitudes of higher education
students in their open educational resources.
Table – 7
Significance relationship between awareness and attitude of open educational resources of higher
education students.
N
∑X
∑Y
∑XY
∑X2
∑Y2
Correlational
co-efficient
Remarks
300
36570
12063
441143910
1337364900
145515969
0.372
S
(At 5% level of significant for 298 df, the table value is 0.072)
From the above table reveals that there is no significant relationship between awareness
and attitudes of higher education students in their open educational resources, as the correlation
coefficient 0.372 is greater than the table value 0.074 at 5% level of significance and hence the
null hypothesis “there is no significant relationship between awareness and attitudes of higher
education students in their open educational resources” is rejected.
Findings of the study
The following are the important findings of the present study.
The higher education students have moderate level of open educational resources
awareness and attitude.
There is no significant difference between male and female higher education students in
their open educational resource’s awareness.
There is significant difference between rural and urban higher education students in their
open educational resource’s awareness.
There is no significant difference between male and female higher education students in
their open educational resources attitudes.
There is significant difference between rural and urban higher education students in their
open educational resources attitudes.
There is significant relationship between awareness and attitudes of higher education
students in their open educational resources.
Conclusion
The study has thrown light on the present status of student’s awareness and attitude towards
open educational resources. The students were unfamiliar with the term open educational
resources, it was rather self-explanatory, and this should ease the promotion of further training and
activities. We conclude that the student’s attitude is of critical importance for the utilization of
OER and that staff development needs to address awareness about OER as an important step in
the process of making higher education accessible to growing numbers of students. In order to
facilitate computer -assisted education at low cost we strongly advocate a wider use and production
of OER in developed countries as well.
Acknowledgement
This article has been written with financial support of RUSA – Phase 2.0 grant sanctioned
vide Letter No. F. 24-51/2014-U, Policy (TNMulti-Gen), Dept. of Edn. Govt. of India, Dt.
09.10.2018.
References
Butcher, N. (2015). A basic guide to open educational resources (OER). UNESCO.
Retrieved from http://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/36.
Jhangiani, R. S. (2017) Pragmatism vs. idealism and the identity crisis of OER advocacy.
Open Praxis 9(2): 141.
Rolfe, V. (2012). Open educational resources: staff attitudes and awareness. Research in
Learning Technology, 20. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v20i0.14395.
Reed, P. (2012). Awareness, attitudes and participation of teaching staff towards the open
content movement in one university. Research in Learning Technology, 20.
https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v20i0.18520.