Skip to main content

Quality of OER from the Perspective of Lecturers – Online Survey of Quality Criteria for Quality Assurance

  • 544 Accesses

Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP,volume 430)


The trend of digitization at universities has increased as a result of the Corona pandemic. Universities and teachers were forced to undertake a digital restructuring in a short period of time. Teaching had to be digitized, so interest in digital educational materials continued to grow. Open Educational Resources (OER) offer great potential in this context due to their digital format and usability across universities. When using as well as creating such free educational materials, lecturers have to check the quality of the OER due to individual quality requirements. For this reason, special attention should be paid to how quality assurance can be measured. There are already numerous models for quality assurance, which differ in terms of their complexity and level of detail. Zawacki-Richter and Mayrberger have conducted a comparison of these models and developed an adapted model based on their findings. By including lecturers, as a relevant stakeholder group, this model will be verified. Lecturers can be seen as exporters or importers of OER. Whether something is high quality depends on the needs of each user, their tasks and processes, so quality requirements can vary with the respective role. The aim is to investigate which quality criteria lecturers think OER should fulfill in order to be of high quality. For this purpose, an embedded mixed method (EMM) survey of lecturers was conducted, in which the different roles of a lecturer were also distinguished.


  • Open Educational Resources
  • Quality criteria
  • Quality measurement
  • Higher education
  • Digitalization

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-87205-2_3
  • Chapter length: 15 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-87205-2
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1.


  1. 1.

    Learning Object Review (LORI), MERLOT Rubric, Framework for Assessing Fitness for Purpose in OER, OER Rubric (Achieve Organization), Learning Object Evaluation Instrument (LOEI), Learning Objects Quality Evaluation Model (eQNet), Rubric to Evaluate Learner Generated Content (LGC), Rubric for Selecting Inquiry-Based Activities.


  1. Gulati, S.: Technology-enhanced learning in developing nations: a review. Int. Rev. Res. Open Dist. Learn. 9(1), 346 (2008)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Ebner, M., Köpf, E., Muuß-Merholz, J., Schön, M., Schön, S., Weichert, N.: Ist-Analyse zu freien Bildungsmaterialien (OER) – Die Situation von freien Bildungsmaterialien in Deutschland in den Bildungsbereichen Schule, Hochschule, berufliche Bildung und Weiterbildung, Book on Demand, Norderstedt (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. UNESCO-Kommission: Pariser Erklärung zu OER, Weltkongress zu Open Educational Resources, UNESCO, Paris (2012). Accessed 20 May 2021

  4. Butcher, N., Malina, B., Neumann, J.: Was sind Open Educational Resources? und andere häufig gestellte Fragen zu OER. UNESCO, Bonn (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Zawacki-Richter, O., Mayrberger, K.: Qualität von OER, Sonderband zum Fachmagazin Synergie (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yuan, L., MacNeill, S., Kraan, W.: Open Educational Resources – Opportunities and Challenges for Higher Education, JISC CETIS (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. OECD: Giving Knowledge for Free. The Emergence of Open Educational Resources, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, pp. 30–31 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Butcher, N., Kanwar, A., Uvalić-Trumbić, S.: A basic guide to open educational resources (OER), vol. 2: Commonwealth of Learning; UNESCO, Section for Higher Education Verlag, Vancouver, Paris (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Deimann, M., Neumann, J., Muuß-Merholz, J.: Open Educational Resources (OER) an Hochschulen in Deutschland – Bestandsaufnahme und Potenziale 2015, Whitepaper, (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ehlers, U.-D.: Extending the territory: from open educational resources to open educational practices. J. Open Flexible Dist. Learn. 15(2), 1–10 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brüggemann, H., Bremer, P.: Grundlagen Qualitätsmanagement. Von den Werkzeugen über Methoden zum TQM, Springer Vieweg, Wiesbaden (2020).

  12. DIN EN ISO 9000: Quality management systems - Fundamentals and vocabulary (ISO 9000:2015), German and English version EN ISO 9000 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lin, C., Wa, C.: Managing knowledge contributed by ISO 9001:2000. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 22, 968–985 (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. O´Mahony, K., Garavan, T.N.: Implementing a quality management framework in a higher education organization. A case study. Qual. Assurance Educ. 20(2), 184–200 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Owlia, M.S., Aspinwall, E.M.: TQM in higher education – a review (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Yuan, M., Recker, M.: Not all rubrics are equal: a review of rubrics for evaluating the quality of open educational resoruces. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 16(5), 16–31 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Yu, X., Khazanchi, D.: Using embedded mixed methods in studying IS Phenomena: risks and practical remedies with an illustration. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 34, 555–595 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dhanapati, S.: Explanatory sequential mixed method design as the third research community of knowledge claim. Am. J. Educ. Res. 4(7), 570 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Chyung, S.Y., Roberts, K., Swanson, I., et al.: Evidence-based survey design: the use of a midpoint on the Likert scale. Perform. Improv. 56(10), 15–23 (2017)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Mayring, P.: Qualitative content analysis: theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. SSOAR, Klagenfurt (2014)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carla Reinken .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Reinken, C., Greiff, P., Draxler-Weber, N., Hoppe, U. (2021). Quality of OER from the Perspective of Lecturers – Online Survey of Quality Criteria for Quality Assurance. In: Buchmann, R.A., Polini, A., Johansson, B., Karagiannis, D. (eds) Perspectives in Business Informatics Research. BIR 2021. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 430. Springer, Cham.

Download citation

  • DOI:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-87204-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-87205-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)