Assessing the OER & Textbook Experience at UTSA

Presents UTSA student and faculty feedback collected through the DOERS Student Success Through OER Rubric Grant: Fall 2024-Spring 2025

University College Summary

Respondents

6 faculty from University College responded to the survey.

Appointment

All respondents in this group are Fixed-Term-Track faculty; none are Tenure-Track.

  • 100% (6 respondents) selected Fixed-Term-Track (represented by the red section).
  • 0% selected Tenure-Track (purple is not visible because there were no responses).

Fixed Term Track

Most respondents (half) are Assistant Professors of Instruction, while the remaining are evenly split among Assistant Professor of Practice, Professor of Practice, and Associate Professor of Instruction.

  • Assistant Professor of Instruction: 50% (3 respondents) – largest group (red section)
  • Assistant Professor of Practice: 17% (1 respondent) (blue section)
  • Professor of Practice: 17% (1 respondent) (purple section)
  • Associate Professor of Instruction: 17% (1 respondent) (green section)

Teaching

All respondents teach UTSA Core Curriculum courses exclusively; none teach graduate or non-core courses.

  • 100% (6 respondents) selected UTSA Core Curriculum (represented by the red section).
  • No responses for other options:
    • Doctoral (yellow)
    • Master’s (green)
    • Upper Division Non-core (blue)
    • Lower Division Non-core (purple)
    • Other (orange)

Textbook Decisions

  • For non-core, master’s, and doctoral courses, the Individual Instructor is the primary decision-maker.
  • For UTSA Core Curriculum, decisions are mostly made by a Textbook Committee, though some respondents are unsure.
  • Across all categories, a notable portion of respondents selected Do not know, indicating uncertainty about textbook decision processes.
  • UTSA Core Curriculum:

    • 3 respondents indicated Textbook Committee (blue)
    • 2 respondents selected Do not know (yellow)
    • 1 respondent selected Individual Instructor (red)
  • Lower Division Non-Core Curriculum:

    • 4 respondents selected Individual Instructor (red)
    • 2 respondents selected Do not know (yellow)
  • Upper Division Non-Core Curriculum:

    • 4 respondents selected Individual Instructor (red)
    • 2 respondents selected Do not know (yellow)
  • Master’s:

    • 4 respondents selected Individual Instructor (red)
    • 2 respondents selected Do not know (yellow)
  • Doctoral:

    • 4 respondents selected Individual Instructor (red)
    • 2 respondents selected Do not know (yellow)

OER Awareness and Use

Most respondents (two-thirds) were already familiar with the definition of OER, while one-third were not.

  • 67% (4 respondents) answered Yes (purple section).
  • 33% (2 respondents) answered No (red section).

Use Overall

All respondents indicated high awareness and understanding of how OER can be used in their courses.

  • 100% (4 respondents) selected “I am very aware of OER and how they can be used in my courses” (represented by the red section).
  • No responses for:
    • “I am not aware of OER” (yellow)
    • “I am somewhat aware of OER, but I am not sure how they can be used” (blue)
    • “I am aware of OER and some of their use cases” (purple)

OER Adoption

Most respondents (two-thirds) have used OER in their courses, while one-third have not.

  • 67% (4 respondents) answered Yes (represented by the red section).
  • 33% (2 respondents) answered No (represented by the purple section).

OER Use Number of Courses

All respondents who use OER incorporate them in three or more courses, indicating a high level of adoption among these faculty members.

  • 100% (4 respondents) selected “3 or more of my courses” (represented by the blue section).
  • No responses for:
    • “2 of my courses” (purple)
    • “1 of my courses” (red)

OER as Required and Supplemental

Respondents are evenly split: half use OER only as required material, and half use OER as both required and supplemental material.

  • 50% (2 respondents) selected “OER as required” (red section).
  • 50% (2 respondents) selected “OER as required & supplemental” (purple section).
  • No responses for “OER only supplemental” (blue).

Course Markings Awareness and Use

Legislation

Most respondents (two-thirds) were not aware of SB 810 legislation, while one-third had prior awareness.

  • 67% (4 respondents) answered No (represented by the red section).
  • 33% (2 respondents) answered Yes (represented by the purple section).

UTSA Filters

Responses are evenly split between respondents who were aware and those who were not.

Results:

  • Yes: 50% (3 respondents)
  • No: 50% (3 respondents)

UTSA Reporting

Most respondents (over four-fifths) were unaware of the reporting process, indicating a need for increased communication and outreach to faculty.

Results:

  • Yes: 17% (1 respondent)
  • No: 83% (5 respondents)

OER Perceptions and Priorities

Departmental

Perceptions are generally positive or unknown—no respondents reported unfavorable views. However, a significant portion (40%) is unsure, suggesting limited awareness or discussion about OER among faculty.

Results:

  • Favorable: 40% (2 respondents)
  • Neutral: 20% (1 respondent)
  • Don’t know: 40% (2 respondents)
  • Unfavorable: 0%

Quality Perceptions

Most respondents (two-thirds) consider the OER quality acceptable, while one-third are unsure. No one rated the quality as poor or very poor, suggesting overall positive or neutral perceptions.

Results:

  • Acceptable Quality: 67% (4 respondents)
  • Don’t know: 33% (2 respondents)
  • Poor/Very Poor/Good Quality: 0%

Desired Attributes

Readability and clarity are considered the most critical attribute, while accessibility and supplementary resources are viewed as less essential compared to adaptability and accuracy.

  • Top Priority (1st): Clarity, Comprehensibility & Readability was ranked highest by most respondents (4 votes).
  • Second Priority: Adaptability & Modularity and Appropriate for Level of Course/Student were common choices.
  • Lower Priorities: Accessibility and Supplementary Resources tended to rank 5th or 6th.
  • Content Accuracy appeared consistently in mid-level priorities (2nd–4th).

Support and Recognition

UTSA Leadership

Most respondents consider leadership support moderately important, ranking it primarily as a 2nd or 3rd priority rather than a top priority.

Results:

  • 3rd Priority: 50% (3 respondents)
  • 2nd Priority: 33% (2 respondents)
  • 5th Priority: 17% (1 respondent)
  • No votes for 1st, 4th, or 6th Priority

Recognition

Respondents value recognition from higher-level leadership (UT System and UTSA Leadership) and department chairs more than newsletters or performance evaluations. Newsletters are least preferred.

  • Top Priority (1st): UT System (3 votes) and UTSA Leadership (2 votes) are most preferred for primary recognition.
  • Second Priority: Department Chair and Performance Evaluation both received 2 votes.
  • Third Priority: Department Chair leads (3 votes), followed by UT System (2 votes) and Performance Evaluation (1 vote).
  • Fourth Priority: UTSA Leadership dominates (3 votes).
  • Fifth Priority: UTSA Newsletters overwhelmingly ranked last (5 votes).

Improve Support 

Faculty prioritize finding support and funding first, followed by help with adapting material and integrating into the LMS. Training-related options (webinars, tutorials) and student involvement are considered less critical.

  • Top Priority (1st): Finding Support received the most votes (3), followed by Generous Funding (2).
  • Second Priority: Support Adapting/Tailoring dominated (5 votes).
  • Mid Priorities (3rd–5th): Integrating into LMS, funding, and copyright support appear frequently.
  • Lower Priorities (6th–9th): Webinars, Copyright Support, and Involving Students are mostly ranked toward the bottom.

Other Ideas

Respondents value organized access to OER, training and communication, and quality assurance. However, there are concerns about mandatory adoption and textbook quality.

  • Resource Access & Organization

    • Respondents want lists of OER resources tailored to their department.
    • Suggested repositories of OER materials that are sorted and tagged, enabling easy navigation and selection for courses.
  • Training & Support

    • Interest in training videos, ideally available during summer.
    • Emphasis on good communication, clear expectations, and ongoing support for OER adoption.
  • Quality & Maintenance

    • Concern about lack of structure for maintaining and improving OER texts; respondents see this as the next critical step for ensuring high-quality resources.
  • Challenges & Dissatisfaction

    • One respondent expressed frustration with mandatory OER use, citing:
      • Preference for traditional textbooks with supplemental resources.
      • Current OER textbook described as patchwork and error-prone, with a slow correction process.