- Find Information
- Research Guides
- Assessing the OER & Textbook Experience at UTSA
Assessing the OER & Textbook Experience at UTSA
Perceptions & Priorities
Summary
Most faculty believe other faculty in their academic department perceive OER either neutrally or favorably (55%), with no respondents reporting very unfavorable perceptions. However, a notable portion is uncertain or unaware of departmental sentiment.
- 30% (17) Neutral
- 28% (16) don't know
- 25% (14) Favorable
- 9% (5) Very favorable
- 9% (5) Unfavorable
Summary
While many respondents are unsure about OER quality, those who have evaluated it mostly rate it as acceptable to good, with relatively few reporting poor or very poor quality.
- 35% (20) Don't know
- 26% (15) Good quality
- 23% (13) Acceptable quality
- 7% (4) Poor quality
- 5% (3) Very poor quality
Summary
Faculty prioritize accuracy, clarity, and appropriateness for course level when evaluating educational resources.
Details
1st Priority
-
24 responded Content Accuracy & Technical Accuracy
- 15 responded Clarity, Comprehensibility & Readability
- 8 said Appropriate for Level of Course/Student
- 6 said Adaptability & Modularity
- 3 said Accessibility
2nd Priority
-
20 responded Clarity, Comprehensibility & Readability
- 16 responded Content Accuracy & Technical Accuracy
- 12 responded Appropriate for Level of Course/Student
- 4 responded Availability of Supplementary Resources
- 3 said Accessibility
3rd Priority
-
14 responded Appropriate for Level of Course/Student
- 13 responded Clarity, Comprehensibility & Readability
- 13 responded Content Accuracy & Technical Accuracy
- 9 responded Adaptability & Modularity
- 5 responded Accessibility
4th Priority
-
17 responded Adaptability & Modularity
- 13 responded Appropriate for Level of Course/Student
- 11 responded Accessibility
- 7 responded Availability of Supplementary Resources
- 7 responded Clarity, Comprehensibility & Readability
5th Priority
-
19 responded Accessibility
- 17 responded Adaptability & Modularity
- 9 responded Availability of Supplementary Resources
- 9 responded Appropriate for Level of Course/Content
6th Priority
-
33 responded Availability of Supplementary Resources
- 16 responded Accessibility
- 6 responded Adaptability & Modularity
Priority Details
Summary
A strong majority (93%) of respondents ranked content accuracy and technical accuracy among their top three priorities, highlighting its critical importance in evaluating educational resources.
- 42% (24) 1st Priority
- 28% (16) 2nd Priority
- 23% (13) 3rd Priority
- 4% (2) 4th Priority
- 2% (1) 5th Priority
- 2% (1) 6th Priority
Summary
31% of respondents consider adaptability and modularity to be a top-three priority when evaluating educational resources, emphasizing the importance of flexibility in course design.
- 30% (17) 5th Priority
- 30% (17) 4th Priority
- 16% (9) 3rd Priority
- 11% (6) 1st priority
- 11% (6) 6th Priority
- 4% (2) 2nd Priority
Summary
Most respondents consider appropriateness for course/student level to be a moderately high priority, with the majority ranking it within their top four considerations when evaluating educational resources.
- 25% (14) 3rd Priority
- 23% (13) 4th Priority
- 21% (12) 2nd Priority
- 16% (9) 5th Priority
- 14% (8) 1st Priority
- 2% (1) 6th Priority
Summary
19% of respondents ranked accessibility (ADA compliance) within their top three priorities,
- 33% (19) 5th Priority
- 28% ( (16) 6th Priority
- 19% (11) 4th Priority
- 9% (5) 3rd Priority
- 5% (3) 2nd Priority
- 5% (3) 1st Priority
Summary
Supplementary resources like test banks and quizzes are largely seen as a lower priority by the majority of respondents.
- 58% (33) 6th Priority
- 16% (9) 5th Priority
- 12% (7) 4th Priority
- 7% (4) 2nd Priority
- 5% (3) 3rd Priority
- 2% (1) 1st Priority
