I have completed new research on Equitable Access and its impact on course completion rates at a 4-year institution. The study was a pre/post implementation analysis of course completion rates with the purpose of understanding if an Equitable Access course materials model had an impact on course completion rates when comparing pre and post implementation populations. The University of Southern Mississippi provided data for the study. Pre-implementation terms for the study were Fall 2020 and Spring 2021 and the post-implementation terms were Fall 2021, Spring 2022, and Fall 2022. The study population was 48,967. I will cover a few highlights of the study in this blog.

Population Characteristics

This study had some unique populations characteristics, some of which were in line with other studies I have completed. Female students dominated this study as they made up 63% of the total populations. This is in line with my 2-year Equitable Access study and about 8% higher than my and Dr. Brad Piazza’s Waukesha Inclusive Access study. White students were the racial majority at 56% of the total population. This percentage is in line the 2-year EA study and 18% lower than the Waukesha IA study. However, for the first time in any study I have conducted, Black students made up over 20% of the population. Black students made up about 33% of the total study population. Traditional aged students, those 24 and younger made up over 89% of the total study population. I think this 24 and under population percentage is expected at a 4-year institution when compared to a 2-year institution.

Completion Rate Change

I am not going to give away the whole study because I want you to go check it out, but there were some interesting results when looking at the +/- change in course completion rates between the populations. Underrepresented student populations experienced a 2.5-40x greater benefit with Equitable Access than the White student racial majority. Again, White students made up over 56% of the population so, to me, this is an interesting point. It also validates the other research that I have completed showing increased benefit for underrepresented student populations. The percent change experienced by the post-implementation population is not as exaggerated as we saw in the 2-year EA study. However, if we put it into context of real students, the use of an Equitable Access program is changing the lives of nearly 300 students. Interestingly, Hispanic students had a decrease in course completion rate of -1.66% in the post-implementation population. This is the second of four studies where Hispanic students have had a negative interaction with the course materials intervention model. This population is the only one that has shown a decrease in even one of my studies. For any aspiring researchers, this may be an area to focus future research.

Statistical Significance

For statistically inclined readers, 7 of the 12 categories analyzed were found to be statistically significant. I used a p-value of .05 for this study and the 7 statistically significant category p-values ranged between .019 and .001. While all categories analyzed, except for Hispanic students, had an increase in course completion rate in the post-implementation population, the increases were not enough for four of them to be statistically significant.

 Wrap Up

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact on student course completion rates when four-year university students are provided their required course materials on or before the first day of class as part of an equitable access program, compared to students who had the responsibility to source their own required course materials (pre-implementation). As you work through the study, I challenge you to reflect on what the real, practical impact is of this study may represent. While you may not jump at the percentage change, there is real impact on changing the academic outcomes and fortunes for students. Regardless of your position on the use of Equitable Access, these models are impacting student access to course materials and improving student outcomes. My new favorite line from this paper is, “Course materials intervention research isn’t rocket science, but course materials intervention adoption could help someone become a rocket scientist”.  As always, thanks for checking in and I’ll see you next time.

-MM

Reference Citation: Moore, M. (2023). Equitable Access: A Course Completion Rate Analysis from a 4-Year Institution. Retrieved from https://edarxiv.org/g3wt4/.

In light of my recent article reflecting on Dr. David Wiley’s blog post, I thought discussing OER would be the most logical next article on what I consider the main drivers of the current course materials revolution.  Most of my research is focused on Inclusive Access and Equitable Access, but there is another intervention with a promise to increase affordability and access to course materials for students across higher education. This intervention is called Open Educational Resources or OER. Admittedly, I do not have a lot of personal experience with OER, but you cannot talk about course materials interventions or course materials intervention research without recognizing the potential impact of OER.

OER Defined

According to Creative Commons, Open Educational Resources are defined as “teaching, learning, and research materials that are either (a) in the public domain or (b) licensed in a manner that provides everyone with free and perpetual permission to engage in the 5R activities”. The 5R activities are retain, reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute.  OER may be defined differently by different organizations, but what doesn’t change is that OER is mostly accessible for free online.

Content Creation

Open Educational Resources differs from Inclusive Access in how the content is created. OER content is independently created and curated by higher education faculty or subject matter experts rather than publishing companies. These faculty and subject matter experts may be highly qualified to author these materials, but there is question as to whether free Open Educational Resources receive the same rigorous peer-review as publisher content. Another challenge to OER content is a potential lack of supplemental/support material. Most publisher content includes test/quiz banks, student performance tracking, and interactive material. These may not be widely available with Open Educational Resources material.

Delivery Mechanism

Inclusive Access shares similarities in the delivery mechanism of content. Because OER is largely digital, links to the content, or the content itself, can be loaded in the Learning Management System (LMS) or posted in the faculty member’s syllabus. Like Inclusive Access, this removes the student from the acquisitions process and provides access on or before the first day of class.

OER Costs

This is another area where Inclusive Access differs from Open Educational Resources. The main benefit espoused of OER is that the course material content is free to students. Students are, mostly, not required to pay for OER is because the content is largely grant funded. Faculty or institutions that want to develop OER apply for grant funding from third parties to develop this content. With OER, if students want physical copies of the book, they can pay extra to get a physical copy. While OER is generally free, if grant funding for these materials dry up, the content may no longer be free.

Wrap Up

It may seem as if I am opposed to Open Educational Resources because of some of my criticisms. However, I strongly believe that Open Educational Resources have a rightful place in the current course materials revolution. I think OER has the ability to change the lives of students in the same way Inclusive Access can. What I am concerned about is the scalability of OER. Inclusive Access by design and implementation mechanism are much more scalable and can immediately impact millions of students. Open Educational Resources and Inclusive Access advocates are privately and publicly dueling and feuding unnecessarily. Both paradigm shifting models can coexist if they recognize their missions are the same: save students money and help students succeed in the classroom. To learn more about OER, you can visit OER Commons. As always, thanks for checking in and I’ll see you next time.

-MM

There were some recent developments in course materials that I wanted to share some thoughts on. The first was the National Association of College Stores (NACS) released a new Student Watch Report and the second was Student Monitor announcing they were adding questions to their semi-annual trends report about Inclusive Access.

Student Watch News

NACS recently released their Student Watch™: Attitudes and Behaviors toward Course Materials: 2022 Report. The report included responses from 39 campuses and over 11,800 students. Interestingly, the report indicated that the average student spending for course materials in 2021-2022 was at its lowest point since NACS began tracking the data in 1998. I wanted to highlight some responses from the report that pertain to Inclusive Access:

• The report indicated that 39% of respondents received their course materials through Inclusive Access(IA), up from 15% in 2018-2019.
• Over 50% of responses indicated that Inclusive Access would be better than the traditional course materials acquisitions process.
• About 54% of those who obtained their course materials through Inclusive Access were at least somewhat satisfied with the program and another 30% were neither satisfied no dissatisfied.
• Of students who were satisfied with the Inclusive Access program, over 70% said they were satisfied with the program because they had the materials on the first day of class, didn’t have to shop around for course materials, and/or they knew they would have all of the materials and the correct editions.
• Over 40% of students who indicated they were satisfied with the program said they were satisfied because their materials cost less, and they had the ability to pay later or through tuition.
• Over 30% of respondents reported accessing free downloadable materials.

Student Monitor News

Student Monitor produces a national, syndicated market research study focused on trends at four-year institutions. In their reports they have found that student attitudes towards digital textbooks have shifted positively. As such, they want to explore how students feel about Inclusive Access. In their article they said, “IA is here to stay, and we are excited to introduce IA research as a new component in our Fall 2022 report…”. This is an interesting development to learn more about how Inclusive Access is perceived at four-year institutions. My research on Inclusive and Equitable Access has been more two-year focused, so I am interested to see Student Monitor’s Fall 2022 report.

Wrap Up

While Inclusive Access is just one program to reduce the cost of and increase access to course materials, it is gaining traction. I am interested to see how the results from Student Monitor match up to the responses NACS received from their report. Regardless of your personal opinion of programs like IA, the more we can learn about their effectiveness and student perceptions, the more we will be able to adjust them to meet the needs of students. As always, thanks for checking in and I’ll see you next time.

-MM

In the simplest terms, Inclusive Access is a course material acquisitions model that provides students with their required course materials on or before the first day of class. Inclusive access is a paradigm shift away from the traditional course materials acquisitions model that requires students to independently figure out which course materials are required, figure out how and where to source them, and then figure out how to afford to pay for them.

Content Delivery

Inclusive Access course materials can be delivered to students digitally through the campus learning management system (LMS) or physical pick-up/delivery. However, Inclusive Access may be most beneficial through digital delivery via the LMS because it completely removes the student from the acquisitions process. Students can log into the LMS and instantly have access to their course materials. These ‘digital first’ programs mostly rely on publisher courseware or digital products – the same publishers of the traditional, physical textbooks many are familiar with using.

Costs

Before the current effectiveness research became available, Inclusive Access’ only proposition to students, faculty, and campus administrators was cost savings. By design, Inclusive Access programs reduce the cost of course materials to students by 30-80% off the cost of purchasing a new physical textbook. Instead of paying upfront in the campus bookstore or from an online marketplace for their course materials, students are charged for their course materials through a fee or as part of tuition. Students are not required to pay upfront for their course materials because the billing mechanism of Inclusive Access charges their Bursar account. By charging a student’s Bursar account, students with financial aid can use their aid towards the cost of materials without waiting for the financial aid to post or waiting for a refund.

Who is Involved?

Shifting your campus to an Inclusive Access course materials model involves a couple of internal and external stakeholders. For campuses who lease their bookstore operations, speaking to your bookstore manager is a great place to start the conversations about Inclusive Access. If your campus is self-operated, speaking to one of your publisher representatives will get the conversation started. I do not specialize in the backend process of Inclusive Access, but my time in the bookstore industry provides a good foundation to help point those interested in learning more about the implementation process in the right direction.

Future

This is the first blog in a series to highlight what I think are the current drivers of a course materials revolution. These blogs are a part of my new endeavor to serve as a new voice in course materials intervention research. In future blogs, I plan on sharing my research with you and providing commentary on issues affecting course materials and higher education. I would love for you to click subscribe below to receive notifications of future blogs. I have also launched a Zoomcast series where I will speak with pioneers and innovators in the course materials field. If you would like to reach out, please feel free to email me or connect with me on LinkedIn. I look forward to seeing you again.

-MM