Factors Inﬂuencing Co-creation of Open Education Resources using

Learning Object Repositories

Mulenga Chanda, Elizabeth Chirwa, Mirriam Kamanga, Mwenya Kayula and Lighton Phiri

Department of Library and Information Science, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia

Keywords:

Learning Object Repositories, Open Education Resources, OERs, Repositories.

Abstract:

Open Education Resources (OERs) have been identiﬁed as instrumental in facilitating access to quality teach-

ing and learning materials. However, despite the rapid development of technologies capable of making OERs,

the uptake and co-creation of OERs by educators is still low. This paper outlines a study conducted in order

to investigate the use of Learning Object Repositories (LORs) in co-creation of OERs by educators. Using the

Uses and Gratiﬁcation theory, a survey was conducted with 36 educators in order to identify learning objects

commonly used by educators and, additionally, to determine the factors that can positively inﬂuence educa-

tors to be co-creators of OERs. The results indicate that sharing knowledge, contributing to other people and

intellectual challenge are factors that are highly correleted in motivating educators to be co-creators of OERs.

The results also indicate that the learning objects commonly used by the educators are the course modules and

presentation slides. In conclusion, in order for educators to be co-creators of OERs they need to be intrinsi-

cally motivated and be able to collaborate with others for non-selﬁsh reasons. The results of of this study have

the potential of inﬂuencing how LORs should be design in order to facilitate effective co-creation of OERs.

1 INTRODUCTION

Open Educational Resources (OERs) initiatives

sought to take advantage of evolving technologies to

increase access and enhance transfer of knowledge

from tertiary institutions to a wide range of users.

Alongside the development of OERs has been the

need to ensure that education content remains rele-

vant and not static. This entails both learner and ed-

ucator collaborating to ensure that the learner’s feed-

back, opinions, and intellectual capabilities are inte-

grated alongside institutional resources. This process

has been referred to as value co-creation.

The United Nations Educational, Scientiﬁc and

Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) deﬁnes OERs as

teaching, learning and research materials available in

the public domain or released under an open license

that enables them to be access, used and adapted

with limited or no restrictions. In as much as the

beneﬁts of OERs, such as the ability for individuals

to easily access quality information and their effec-

tiveness in inﬂuencing positive student learning out-

comes(Venegas Muggli and Westermann, 2019) , are

well-known, there are a number of barriers associated

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3582-9866

with the adoption of OERs. Chief among the barrier-

s/challenges is the co-creation of content. Inciden-

tally, one of objectives associated with UNESCO’s

OER recommendations involves building capacity of

stakeholders to create, access, use, adapt and redis-

tribute OERs.

While there are a number of possible solutions

for addressing OER co-creation challenges, a poten-

tially viable approach requires that an effective OER

repository—a type of Learning Object Repository

(LOR)—is in place to facilitate the storage and ac-

cess of co-created of content. LORs are a specialised

type of Digital Library (DL)(Arms, 2001; Phiri, 2013)

speciﬁcally designed to store teaching and learning

resources. In essence, LORs enable educators to ef-

fectively share educational resources. A crucial as-

pect of LOR is the metadata standard that they im-

plement in order to facilitate effective discovery of

learning objects—entities that are used for learning,

education or training(Pavani, 2016).

This paper presents a study conducted in order to

investigate the use of Learning Object Repositories

(LORs) in order to facilitate the co-creation of OERs

by educators. Speciﬁcally, appropriate OER types

to be stored in OER LORs were identiﬁed, through

a user survey. In addition, personal motivating fac-

Chanda, M., Chirwa, E., Kamanga, M., Kayula, M. and Phiri, L.

Factors Inﬂuencing Co-creation of Open Education Resources using Learning Object Repositories.

DOI: 10.5220/0011090300003182

In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2022) - Volume 1, pages 405-412

ISBN: 978-989-758-562-3; ISSN: 2184-5026

405

tors that are capable of encouraging educators to co-

create OERs were determined using the Use and Grat-

iﬁcation theory. Finally, an OER platform was im-

plemented, in order to demonstrate the feasibility of

setting up an OER LOR that is ﬂexible enough to in-

corporate user-centric design inputs. The main con-

tribution of this work are as follows:

• List of OER types that can be stored in OER

LORs

• User personal motivating factors that can be inco-

porated into the design process when implement-

ing OER LORs

• Experimental results of studies conducted

The remainder of this paper is organised as fol-

lows: Section 2 provides a synthesis of literature that

is related to this work; Section 3 describes the re-

search approach and design followed to conducted the

study; Section 4 presents and discusses the ﬁndings of

the studies conducted and, ﬁnally, Section 5 provides

concluding remarks and future work.

2 RELATED WORK

2.1 Open Education Resources

Rapid advancements in technology and the

widespread use of the Internet has led to the

emergence of several open practices in education

including, online learning, e-learning and distance

education. Coupled with this is the open education

movement, which aims to facilitate access to high-

quality teaching and learning resources. The open

education movement is strongly linked to the OER

movement, which over the last few years has been

endorsed by a number of organisations and funda-

tions, such as UNESCO and the Hewlett Foundation

(Conole, 2012).

Butcher proposes that OERs refer to any edu-

cational material that is designed for use in teach-

ing and learning, is made openly available for pub-

lic consumption and has no associated payment roy-

alties and/or licence fees (Butcher, 2015). Butcher’s

deﬁnition of OERs aligns with UNESCO’s deﬁnition

which classiﬁes OERs as teaching, learning and re-

search materials available in the public domain or as-

sociated with any open license, such that they can be

accessed, used and adapted with little or no restric-

tions. In essence, any material that facilitates teach-

ing, learning and research and, additionally, is made

publicly available without restrictions can be classi-

ﬁed as an OER. It is in fact this broad deﬁnition of

OERs that has initiated debats on whether Massive

Open Online Courses (MOOCS) can be classiﬁed as

OERs (Stracke et al., 2019a; Stracke et al., 2019b).

With the increase in the complexity of digital content

that is currently generated, other researchers have pro-

posed the creation of orchestration appliances, com-

prising of bundles of teaching and learning materi-

als (Parker et al., 2018; Phiri, 2018). Over the last

few years, there are a variety of globally accessi-

ble OER platforms that have been implemented, such

as MIT Opencourseware

. Other examples include

Khan Academy

, OER Commons

, OpenStax

and

Open Culture

. Since OERs stored in these platforms

are published using an open license, such as the Cre-

ative Commons license, they allow the reuse, revision,

remix, redistribution and retention of materials, mak-

ing use of OERs easy and ﬂexible. For those creat-

ing OERs, this allows a creator to easily specify per-

mission while still sharing the work with other co-

creators.

The beneﬁts of OERs in facilitating access to

quality educational resources are well-documented

(Hyl

en, 2021). Hilton et al. report on cost savings

that was a direct result of college students’ adoption

open textbook OERs (Hilton III et al., 2014). A study

carried out Kay and Knaack on the impact of learning

objects in secondary school examined the impact of

learning objects from the perspective of 850 students

and 27 teachers of science, mathematics or social sci-

ences(Kay and Knaack, 2008). According to the ﬁnd-

ings of the study, teachers typically spend one to two

hours ﬁnding and preparing for learning objects based

lessons plans that focused on the review of previ-

ous concepts. Both teachers and students are positive

about the learning beneﬁts, quality and engagement

value of learning objects, although teachers are more

positive than students. Student’s performance in-

creased signiﬁcantly when learning objects were used

in conjunction with a variety of teaching strategies.

It is reasonable to conclude that learning objects are

a viable teaching tool in a secondary school environ-

ments. More signiﬁcantly, the potential of OERs in

fostering development in the so-called Global South

has been highlighted (Hodgkinson-Williams and Ar-

into, 2017).

Despite the widespread availability of informa-

tion about OERs there still remain a number of chal-

lenges(Hyl

en, 2021) that hinder their adoption. In this

work, we argue that a well-designed OER LOR that

https://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm

https://www.khanacademy.org

https://www.oercommons.org

https://openstax.org

https://www.openculture.com

CSEDU 2022 - 14th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

406

takes into account user needs has the potential of en-

couranging the wide adoption of OERs.

2.2 Motivating Factors for Co-creation

of OERs

A number of studies have been conducted in order to

determine factors that affect the adoption of OERs.

A qualitative study by Cox and Trotter at three uni-

versities in South Africa suggests that adoption is in-

ﬂuenced by multiple factors, ranging from infrastruc-

tural access, legal permission, conceptual awareness,

technical capacity, material availability, and individ-

ual or institutional volition (Cox and Trotter, 2017).

In this paper, a similar argument to individual volition

is made: it is argued that personal motivating factors

have the potential to encourage co-creation of OERs.

Mishra reports on a study conducted to identify

factors that can encourage the use, reuse, creation,

sharing or adaptation of OERs. The study was aimed

at understanding the motivations of higher education

educators to use and adapt OERs. The study revealed

that participants were highly motivated to use, create

and share OER for different academic, professional

and individual purposes (Mishra, 2017). While most

respondents expressed their desire to receive addi-

tional support to use and adapt OERs and, were for

the most part not aware of OERs, they were also in-

trinsically motivated to use and adapt OER.

A quantitative survey was developed to measure

the use, creation, and attitudes towards OERs. The

sample of the study composed of academic, profes-

sional and administrative staff at Athabasca Univer-

sity. According to the ﬁndings of the study, evidence

of intrinsic motivation aligns with Pawlowski’s emo-

tional ownership model of OERs creation and use

(Pawlowski, 2012). Academic quality is the highest

factor for both use and creation this has to do with

emotional investments and the factors identiﬁed are

as follows: Academic quality, time to ﬁnd, review,

select, knowledge about OERs, desire to reduce cost

of student’s hardware/software to facilitate use, envi-

ronmental concerns, support from administration and

course team support recognition. The participants

were all involved in designing learning and they want

their students to succeed. Knowledge of OERs is also

high on the list for both creation and use. This could

be because in the higher education environment, there

is an intrinsic component to acquiring new knowl-

edge. Possible limitations to the study include self-

selection: faculty and staff at Athabasca University

could naturally be interested in OERs and feel conﬁ-

dent in their knowledge in this area and may be early

adopters of educational innovation.

2.3 Learning Object Repositories

While there are a number of possible solutions for

addressing OER co-creation challenges, a poten-

tially viable approach requires that an effective OER

repository—a type of Learning Object Repository

(LOR)—is in place to facilitate the storage and access

of co-created content. LORs are a specialised type

of Digital Library (DL) (Arms, 2001; Phiri, 2013)

speciﬁcally designed to store teaching and learning

resources. In essence, LORs enable educators to ef-

fectively share educational resources. A crucial as-

pect of LOR is the metadata standard that they im-

plement in order to facilitate effective discovery of

learning objects—entities that are used for learning,

education or training (Pavani, 2016).

In order to facilitate the co-creation of useful OER

content, such as so-called virtual orchestration appli-

ances (Phiri, 2018; Parker et al., 2018), it becomes

necessary to design and implement OER repositories

that are effective and, additionally, third-party tools

for facilitating the creation of OERs. More signiﬁ-

cantly, it is also important to take into account learn-

ing objects to be deposited into the LOR and, addi-

tionally, potential motivating factors associated with

co-creation of OERs.

3 METHODOLOGY

This study was conducted using a mixed methods ap-

proach involving a comprehensive literature review

and a user survey. The literature review was con-

ducted in order to identify an appropriate theory for

identifying motivating factors that positively inﬂu-

ence co-creation of OERs and, additionally, to under-

stand how learning object repositories are designed

and implemented. The survey was conducted in or-

der to determine learning objects commonly used by

educators and, more importantly, to empirically deter-

mine the motivating factors that have the potential to

positively encourage educators to co-create OERs.

3.1 Factors Inﬂuencing Co-creation of

OERs

3.1.1 Uses and Gratiﬁcation Theory

As earlier mention in Section 1, one of the main ob-

jectives of this study was to determine the factors that

can positively inﬂuence educators to be co-creators

of OERs using LORs. The Uses and Gratiﬁcation

theory (Katz et al., 1973; Blumler, 2019) was used

Factors Inﬂuencing Co-creation of Open Education Resources using Learning Object Repositories

407

due to its widespread use and success when examin-

ing how users consume media(Shao, 2009) and digi-

tal content(Rafaeli et al., 2009) in order to understand

how the use of digital content gratiﬁes user needs.

While the original Uses and Gratiﬁcation tend

to focus on ﬁve aspects—cognitive needs, affective

needs, personal needs and diversion needs—, this

study adopted the congnitive and integrative motiva-

tion factors proposed by Rafaeli et al. in their study

that was aimed at understanding Wikipedians’ mo-

tivations for contributing Wikipedia content(Rafaeli

et al., 2009). Personal motivation is determined by

seven key aspects:

• Reputation—Desire to increase their reputation in

a speciﬁc ﬁeld

• Discussion—Desire to initiate and/or participate

in discussions

• Contribution—Desire to contribute to existing

content

• Intellectual Challenge—Intellectual challenging

resulting from content contribution

• Pleasure—Derive pleasure from contribution

• Sharing Knowledge—Desire to share knowledge

with others

• Learning—Desire to learn new things

3.1.2 Study Design

Random sampling was employed to recruit study par-

ticipants from a target population comprising of Col-

lege/University Lecturers, Secondary School Teach-

ers and Student Teachers. The assumption made is

that individuals that have been trained to teach are

best suited to identify OERs that should be stored in

LORs.

An online Google Forms

question was used to

collect survey responses data. The questionnaire in-

cluded a section used to capture participants’ demo-

graphic details, another section used by participants to

ranking learning objects that would prefer to be stored

in an OER LOR and, ﬁnally, a section dedicated moti-

vating factors aligned with the Uses and Gratiﬁcation

theory, outlined in Section 3.1.1.

3.2 OER LOR and Implementation

In order to demonstrate the feasibility of implement-

ing a scalable and useful OER LOR, the Islandora

open source digital asset management framework

(Leggott, 2009) was used to setup a prototype OER

https://www.google.com/forms/about

LOR. Islandora was selected as a candidate frame-

workdue to its scalability and ﬂexibility. Fundamen-

tally, the Islandora framework base architecture, com-

prising of Fedora

, Drupal

and Apache Solr

, which

result in a ﬂexible and scalable platform capable of

facilitating effective discoverability of digital objects.

Drupal provides the user interface and additional ser-

vices that is used by end users to interact with repos-

itory objects. The storage of the repository objects

are performed by highly available and scalable Fe-

dora component. Apache Solr provides a search and

indexing service that ensures effective discoverability

of repository objects.

The resulting platform can further be easily ex-

tended through Drupal’s extensible architecture—

extensibility of the platform would ensure that the

platform is customised to suit requirements for an

OER LOR. Speciﬁcally, Islandora 2.1.1, conﬁgured

with Fedora 5 and Drupal 8, was used. A typical

OER LOR should be designed to scale due to the the

diversity nature and quantity of OERs that would ul-

timately be ingested into the platform. The scalability

aspect was informed by survey responses—outlined

in Table 1, in Section 4—which clearly indicate that

most educators would beneﬁt from a platform that is

able to store different types of OERs.

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Educator Survey

4.1.1 Participants’ Demographics

A total of 42 educators were recruited and success-

fully responded to the survey. Table 1 shows the de-

mographic details of the survey participants. While

there was an equal distribution for the gender demo-

graphic, the majority of participants (65%) has less

than one year teaching experience. More signiﬁ-

cantly, 70% of participants were Student Teachers—

individuals with experience teaching but still under-

going training.

4.1.2 Preferred OERs to Store in LOR

In order to determine appropriate OER learning ob-

jects to be stored in to the LOR, survey participants

were required to indicate and ranking types of OERs

that they would prefer to be stored into the LOR. Fig-

ures 1 and 2 show participants’ ratings of preferred

https://duraspace.org/fedora

https://www.drupal.org

https://solr.apache.org

CSEDU 2022 - 14th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

408

Table 1: Summary of Participants’ Demographic Results

From Use and Gratiﬁcation Survey.

Demographic

Aspect

Count

Gender

Male 20

Female 23

Teaching Experience

> 1 Year 28

1–5 Years 7

5–10 Years 2

10–15 Years 5

15–20 Years 1

Level of Teaching

Junior Secondary 1

Senior Secondary 7

College/University 5

Student Teacher 30

OERs and participants’ willingness to create types of

OERs, respectively.

As shown in Figure 1, the most preferred OER

resource is of type “Assessment Questions”, where

79% of participants indicated that they “Agreed ” or

“Strongly Agreed” that they would desired learning

objects of that type to be made available in the LOR.

Following “Assessment Questions” are OERs of type

“Lecture Notes”, “Course Modules” and “Presenta-

tion Slides”, each of which had 76%, 76% and 67%

participants positively rate them, respectively. Inter-

estingly enough, the least preferred OER was of type

“Sound Clips”, which saw only 21% of participants

preferred to have the resources of that type available

in the LOR.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Number of Participants

Assessments

Images

Lectures

Modules

ReadingLists

Slides

SoundClips

TextPassages

Timetables

Videos

OER Materials

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Figure 1: Participants’ Preferred Learning Objects to Store

in LOR.

In order to determine participants’ willingness to

create OERs, OERs that require signiﬁcantly more ef-

fort were presented to the participants as options. Par-

ticipants were generally willing to create “Syllabii”

(69%), “Videos”, “Images” (57%) and (52%), how-

ever, there was a lack of willingness to create anima-

tions (21%), likely due to the relative effort required

to create such OERs.

Videos

Images

Animations

Syllabus

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Figure 2: Participants’ Willingness to Co-Create OERs in

LOR.

4.1.3 Uses and Gratiﬁcation Motivating Factors

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Number of Participants

Challenge

Contributing

Discussions

Learning

Pleasure

Reputation

Sharing

Motivating Factors

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Figure 3: Participants’ Ratings of Uses and Gratiﬁcation

Motivating Factors.

In addition to the seven Use and Gratiﬁcation personal

motivation items, participants were asked to provide

an optional open-ended statement regarding their sub-

jective view on what could potentially inspire and/or

inﬂuence educators to participate in the co-creation of

OERs. A thematic analysis of the responses is sum-

marised in Table 2. Of the 41 responses with feed-

back, 80% of the responses are aligned with either

one of the seven aspects of the Uses and Gratiﬁcation

theory outlined in Section 3.1.1, with the majority as-

sociated with the “Sharing Knowledge” and “Learn-

ing New Things’ and “Reputation” aspects. These

results have the potential to inform design consider-

ations to be taken into account when implementing

OER LORs; for instance, the LOR could be imple-

mented in such a manner that co-creators of OERs are

awarded points after successfully contributing con-

tent.

Factors Inﬂuencing Co-creation of Open Education Resources using Learning Object Repositories

409

Table 2: Summary of Participants’ Feedback on What In-

spires Co-Creation of OERs.

Classiﬁcation Motivating Factor Count

Use & Gratiﬁcation

Contribution 1

Discussion 4

Intellectual

Challenge

Learning 7

Pleasure 3

Reputation 5

Sharing Knowledge 9

Unclassiﬁed

Content 1

Incentives 4

Obstacles 1

Technology 3

The feedback from participants that was not asso-

ciated with the Use and Gratiﬁcation theory were cat-

egorised into comments linked to “the need for incen-

tives to encourage contributions”, “technological ap-

proaches that could potentially encourage more con-

tributions” and “identiﬁcation of obstacles that hinder

contributions”. Some example comments for the un-

classiﬁed themes are presented below

“IF A FINANCIAL INCENTIVE IS PRO-

VIDED” (Incentives) [Participant #10]

“Provision of enough resources and mate-

rials” (Incentives) [Participant #34]

“Recognition of one’s works in terms

of rewards and awards” (Incentives)

[Participant #39]

“What can inﬂuence them, is the techno-

logical advancements happening across the

globe , they have to move in line with tech-

nology” (Technology) [Participant #18]

“Adopting technology in their teaching

methods, possessing necessary knowledge on

OERs” (Technology) [Participant #20]

“Providing interactive learning objec-

tives” (Technology) [Participant #42]

“I believe the obstacles which deter people

to do more of physical learning interactions”

(Obstacles) [Participant #24]

4.2 Learning Object Repository

Islandor 8

was installed and conﬁgured on an

Ubuntu 18.04.6 LTS

operating system, which was

https://islandora.github.io/documentation

https://releases.ubuntu.com/18.04

preconﬁgured with all the pre-requisit software com-

ponents. Figure 4 shows a screenshot of the install

Islandora 8 framework, conﬁgured with the Bootstrap

8.x-3.23 Drupal theme. Due to Islandora’s ﬂexibility,

implementation of extensions for incoporating feed-

back from the user survey outlined in Section 4.1

could potentially be accomplished. In addition, it is

also possible to customise the OER LOR in such a

manner that appropriate metadata schemes, such as

the Learning Object Metadata (LOM) scheme(Barker,

2005) are used.

5 CONCLUSIONS

This paper presented a study conducted to investigate

the use of LORs in co-creation of OERs by educa-

tors. A user survey, described in Sections 3.1 and 4.1,

was conducted in order to identify appropriate OER

types to store in LORs and , additionally, to ascertain

educators’ willlingness to co-create OERs. In order

to determine appropriate factors that have the poten-

tial to positively inﬂuence educators to be co-creators

of OERs, the Use and Gratiﬁcation theory was em-

ployed by focusing on personal motivating factors.

Finally, the feasibility of implementing an OER LOR

was demonstrated through the implementation of an

Islandora platform, outlined in Sections 3.2 and 4.2.

Systematically determining user-centric factors to

be used as design and implementation input has the

potential of ensuring that the resulting system is ef-

fective, usable and useful, all of which are key soft-

ware attributes. While the architecture of the system

and services integrated with it heavily inﬂuence its ef-

fectiveness and usability, the usefulness of the system

is ultimately dictated by user factors. In this work,

we identify personal motivating factors that have the

potential of ensuring that the resulting OER LOR is

ultimately useful to end users.

As part of future and on-going work, a production

quality Islandora platform is being extensively cus-

tomised with plans to deploy it for public use. In

addition to this, future work could involve the im-

plementation of third-party ofﬂine tools capable of

not only synchronising content with OER reposito-

ries, but with the ability to operate ofﬂine.

CSEDU 2022 - 14th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

410

Figure 4: Collection View: Open Education Resources Learning Object Repository.

REFERENCES

Arms, W. Y. (2001). Digital libraries. MIT press.

Barker, P. (2005). What is ieee learning object metadata/ims

learning resource metadata. CETIS Standards Brieﬁng

Series, JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee of

the Universities’ Funding Councils).

Blumler, J. G. (2019). Uses and gratiﬁcations research.

The International Encyclopedia of Journalism Stud-

ies, pages 1–8.

Butcher, N. (2015). A basic guide to open educational re-

sources (OER). Commonwealth of Learning (COL);.

Conole, G. (2012). Designing for learning in an open

world, volume 4. Springer Science & Business Me-

dia.

Cox, G. and Trotter, H. (2017). Factors shaping lecturers’

adoption of oer at three south african universities.

Hilton III, J. L., Robinson, T. J., Wiley, D., and Ackerman,

J. D. (2014). Cost-savings achieved in two semesters

through the adoption of open educational resources.

International Review of Research in Open and Dis-

tributed Learning, 15(2):67–84.

Hodgkinson-Williams, C. and Arinto, P. (2017). Adop-

tion and impact of OER in the Global South. African

Minds.

Hyl

en, J. (2021). Open educational resources: Opportuni-

ties and challenges.

Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., and Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and

gratiﬁcations research. The public opinion quarterly,

37(4):509–523.

Kay, R. H. and Knaack, L. (2008). An examination of the

impact of learning objects in secondary school. Jour-

nal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(6):447–461.

Leggott, M. A. (2009). Islandora: a drupal/fedora reposi-

tory system. Georgia Institute of Technology.

Mishra, S. (2017). Promoting use and contribution of open

educational resources.

Parker, N., Valentyn, M., Suleman, H., Meinel, C., and

Phiri, L. (2018). Reusable and shareable orchestra-

tion packages. Technical report, University of Cape

Town.

Pavani, A. M. (2016). An overview of repositories of learn-

ing objects. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(6):174–179.

Pawlowski, J. M. (2012). Emotional ownership as the key

to oer adoption: From sharing products and resources

to sharing ideas and commitment across borders. In

EFQUEL Innovation Forum.

Factors Inﬂuencing Co-creation of Open Education Resources using Learning Object Repositories

411

Phiri, L. (2013). Simple digital libraries. Master’s thesis,

University of Cape Town.

Phiri, L. (2018). Investigating the impact of organised

technology-driven orchestration on teaching.

Rafaeli, S., Hayat, T., and Ariel, Y. (2009). Knowledge

building and motivations in wikipedia: Participation

as “ba”. In Cyberculture and new media, pages 51–

67. Brill.

Shao, G. (2009). Understanding the appeal of user-

generated media: a uses and gratiﬁcation perspective.

Internet research.

Stracke, C. M., Downes, S., Conole, G., Burgos, D., and

Nascimbeni, F. (2019a). Are moocs open educa-

tional resources? a literature review on history, deﬁni-

tions and typologies of oer and moocs. Open Praxis,

11(4):331–341.

Stracke, C. M., Downes, S., Conole, G., Burgos, D., and

Nascimbeni, F. (2019b). Can massive open online

courses (moocs) be considered as open educational re-

sources (oer)? In Open Education Global Conference

(OE Global).

Venegas Muggli, J. I. and Westermann, W. (2019). Ef-

fectiveness of oer use in ﬁrst-year higher education

students’ mathematical course performance: A case

study. International Review of Research in Open and

Distributed Learning, 20(2).

CSEDU 2022 - 14th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

412