Open educational resources (OER) are defined as “teaching, learning, and research resources that are free of cost and access barriers, and which also carry legal permission for open use. Generally, this permission is granted by use of an open license (for example, Creative Commons licenses) which allows anyone to freely use, adapt and share the resource—anytime, anywhere.”

This is a broad definition, but it serves an important purpose. OER can encompass any sort of educational resource, from single lesson plans and presentation slides to interactive lab exercises and full textbooks. While open textbooksundefined are the most commonly discussed type of OER, even these materials may differ in appearance. Some open textbooks are direct analogs for print materials, while others primarily contain videos, exercises, and other multimedia projects.

The possibilities for using OER are also wide-ranging. Instructors can adopt existing OER for use in their classes or they can create and share resources that they have developed. For text-based OER, materials may be peer-reviewed (a feature that traditional, commercial textbooks often lack), or they may be piloted in a course without review and adapted later to meet student needs. These practices are not incompatible, either: an instructor can choose to utilize OER in multiple ways in their teaching, if that best meets their pedagogical needs.

Being such a broad category of materials, it is important for those working with OER to consider the level of work involved in creating and teaching with OER and how that work might be acknowledged in traditional promotion and tenure practices. When instructors are working with OER, they are often participating in a type of work known as Open Educational Practices (OEP). There are four ways that instructors typically participate in OEP:

1. The adoption and use of open educational resources (OER). This is often considered part of traditional teaching practices.

2. The adaptation or creation of OER to meet a course’s needs. This work is often time-intensive and may be compensated by grant funding, departmental support, or course release to facilitate the production of open content.

3. The use of open pedagogyundefined or other innovative teaching methods that incorporate OER into the instruction of learners.

4. The study of OER and/or its impact on learners. This might fall under the category of research, Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL), or it may be considered part of traditional teaching practice.

Throughout the rest of this document, we will be discussing ways of interacting with OER, how these practices might meet existing promotion & tenure guidelines at your institution, and how you can advocate for including OER explicitly in your institutional or departmental promotion & tenure guidelines.

Fitting Open Education into P&T Requirements

While institutional guidelines for P&T vary widely, faculty are typically assessed in the areas of research, teaching, and service. OEP can fit into all three categories, and faculty should consider where their own work in open education best fits. For example, using OER in class, revising it to be more relevant to students’ needs and course outcomes, and creating new OER are all activities that could align well with tenure standards for excellence in teaching.

Sometimes research is weighted more heavily in the promotion process than teaching and service. While OEP would seem to fit most naturally under teaching, the creation of new OER, especially peer-reviewed materials, is starting to be counted as research at some institutions, although this is far from common practice.

In a March 2019 report, “A Place for Policy: The Role of Policy in Supporting Open Educational Resources and Practices at Ontario’s Colleges and Universities,” James M. Skidmore and Myrto Provida argue that without institutional support for the recognition of OEP in the tenure process, faculty may be reluctant to undertake the work. They write,

“The largest barrier to participation in OEP is the lack of professional recognition. Tenured and tenure-track faculty members who evince interest in becoming involved in OEP worry about the amount of time needed to do it properly. Those concerns are compounded if the faculty member thinks that the time and effort expended on OEP will not be recognized in the normal career progression processes, namely tenure and promotion.”[undefined]

During a 2019 session of The Rebus Community’s Office Hours, guests discussed the emerging acceptance of OER creation as a scholarly activity. Associate Professor of Mass Communications at Southern Illinois University in Edwardsville, Mark Poepsel, described the need for OER to be recognized as such. “You’re basically bringing brand-new literature as recent as possible to students and then, the final aspect of peer review was everybody who reads the book has the opportunity to open up a little tray on the right side and comment.”[undefined]

Indeed, activities such as contributing to the scholarship of teaching and learning, presenting at conferences, and writing grants for OER support are also beginning to emerge as research activities for the purposes of promotion and tenure. See the list below for some examples of OEP in promotion and tenure policies. You may also consider using the content in Appendix A to see how different types of OEP fit into the three major P&T categories identified.

Examples of existing policies related to Open Education

• University of British Columbia: Guide to Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Procedures at UBC [pdf] (pp. 16, 19, 48)

• University of Massachusetts Amherst: Provost Annual Promotion and Tenure Memo [pdf] (p. 5)

• Miami University: Guidelines for Second Promotion of TCPL Faculty Members

Talking points and stakeholders

In crafting an argument about the inclusion of OER work in faculty promotion and tenure procedures, it’s vitally important to consider the many stakeholders at your institution and to provide compelling evidence. Common stakeholders and their potential roles are listed below, though each institution’s situation is unique.

Tips for talking to stakeholders

1. Clearly demonstrate how OER work aligns with the institution’s strategic plan. For example, OER adoption, modification, and creation can connect with institutional goals related to:

   • student success, including recruitment and retention,

   • diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice,

   • effective and engaging pedagogy,

   • community engagement, and

   • affordability & access to education.

2. Provide clear evidence from the literature and/or local data for the impact of OER on institutional priorities. A few examples are provided below:

   • Students in a course using an open textbook are more likely to do better in the course and less likely to withdraw from the course.[undefined] [undefined]

   • Students of color are less likely to be able to afford college textbooks.[undefined] Additionally, OER can more easily and quickly include diverse representations.

   • OER adoption supports access and affordability, saving students an average of more than $116 per course.[undefined]

   • Leverage any local data, such as student surveys about textbook affordability concerns and the relationship with academic success.

Appendix A: Fitting Open Education into P&T Requirements

The following section compiles types of Open Education work commonly handled by faculty and staff, and separates them into three major categories typically found in promotion and tenure documents: research, teaching, and service. When a type of work may fall under multiple categories, this is noted under the “this may also fall under…” section. In addition to categorizing these works, we have provided descriptions of how you might report on the impact and import of your work, through the collection of data or evidence to support your work’s rigor.

The base for this Appendix was taken from “OER in Tenure and Promotion” by the DOERS3 team, including Amanda Coolidge, Andrew McKinney, and Deepak Shenoy, available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License.

Research

Within promotion and tenure procedures, “Research” is a broad category, encompassing the development and publication of traditional scholarly works (books, journal articles, and conference proceedings), creative works, working documents, patents, and more. The scope and type of works included in this category will likely be influenced by one’s disciplinary norms and expectations.

Teaching

Within promotion and tenure procedures, “Teaching” typically refers to the preparation, execution, and refinement of the formal instruction processes handled by faculty or instructional staff at an institution, though it may also refer to leading professional development or workforce development training for parties external to one’s institution.

Service

Within promotion and tenure procedures, “Service” typically refers to work that is done “in service to” one’s department, college, institution, or scholarly discipline. This may include participation on committees or in public outreach, volunteer work for editorial boards or in administrative agencies tied to one’s discipline, or other aspects of community service.

License:

Appendix A, “Fitting Open Education into P&T Requirements,” was adapted from “OER in Tenure and Promotion” by the DOERS3 team, including Amanda Coolidge, Andrew McKinney, and Deepak Shenoy, available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License.

The preview image used for this Pub is “Boyer’s Scholarship of Engagement” by Guilia Forsythe, available under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License. Her image was, in turn, inspired by Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professorate. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Open Education in Promotion, Tenure, & Faculty Development by Abbey K. Elder, Mahrya Burnett, Anne Marie Gruber, and Teri Koch (through Iowa OER) is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.