Students as Co-Authors: Achievement Emotions, Beliefs About Writing, and OER Publishing Decisions

	DECISION TO PUBLISH	N	MEAN RANK
Writing Self-Efficacy Total	Yes	42	36.76
	No	26	30.85
	Total	68
Dislike of Writing Subscale	Yes	42	31.74
	No	26	38.96
	Total	68
Enjoyment of Writing Subscale	Yes	42	*38.12
	No	26	28.65
	Total	68
Confidence Subscale Score	Yes	42	37.65
	No	26	29.40
	Total	68
Pride Subscale Score	Yes	42	*39.73
	No	26	26.06
	Total	68
Anxiety Subscale Score	Yes	42	32.49
	No	26	37.75
	Total	68
Shame Embarrassment Subscale Score	Yes	42	29.55
	No	26	*42.50
	Total	68
Enjoyment Subscale Score	Yes	42	*38.35
	No	26	28.29
	Total	68

[i] Note: This table depicts the mean ranks for all dependent variables between the students who did and did not decide to publish their work. *p < .05.

Table 2

Mean ranks of decision to publish for dependent variables by class.

	COURSE	N	MEAN RANK
Writing Self-Efficacy Total	PSYC 405	46	34.26
	PSYC 308	22	35.00
	Total	68
Dislike of Writing Subscale	PSYC 405	46	35.22
	PSYC 308	22	33.00
	Total	68
Enjoyment of Writing Subscale	PSYC 405	46	30.60
	PSYC 308	22	*42.66
	Total	68
Confidence Subscale Score	PSYC 405	46	34.40
	PSYC 308	22	34.70
	Total	68
Pride Subscale Score	PSYC 405	46	33.37
	PSYC 308	22	36.86
	Total	68
Anxiety Subscale Score	PSYC 405	46	33.01
	PSYC 308	22	37.61
	Total	68
Shame Embarrassment Subscale Score	PSYC 405	46	36.18
	PSYC 308	22	30.98
	Total	68
Enjoyment Subscale Score	PSYC 405	46	30.24
	PSYC 308	22	*43.41
	Total	68

[i] Note: This table depicts the mean ranks for all dependent variables between the students who did and did not decide to publish their work between the courses. *p < .05.

Table 3

Frequency of themes for why students chose to publish their work.

THEME	THEME DESCRIPTION	FREQUENCY
Not Good Enough	Mentions feeling their work was not quality enough to publish	6
Easier Not To	Mentions feeling that it was easier to not publish	3
Stress	Mentions not wanting the extra work and stress that might come from publishing	1
No Preference	Mentions not having a preference, but other group members chose not to publish	3
Lack of Consensus	Mentions lack of consensus among group members around publishing	6
Did Not Want To	Mentions not wanting to publish but not providing any specific reasons	2

Table 4

Frequency of themes for why students chose not to publish their work.

THEME	THEME DESCRIPTION	FREQUENCY
Help Others	Mentions publication being helpful to others in the future	11
Proud	Mentions group members being proud of their work	8
Why Not	Mentions publishing simply because they had no reason not to	10
No Preference	Mentions not having a preference and publishing only because other group members chose to	2
Publication Credit	Mentions liking the opportunity of publishing and having their name on something	6
Resume	Mentions publication being good for a resume or CV	6
Miscellaneous	Other unlisted reason	3

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.17.1.745 | Journal eISSN: 2304-070X

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 21 - 33

Submitted on: Sep 18, 2024

Accepted on: Jan 15, 2025

Published on: Apr 15, 2025

Published by: International Council for Open and Distance Education (ICDE)

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Keywords:

open pedagogy,

open educational resources,

achievement emotions,

control-value theory,

writing self-efficacy,

writing apprehension,

OER publishing,

student co-creation,

open textbooks,

college student writing

© 2025 Alison E. Kelly, Brittany N. Avila, Alissa C. Schell, published by International Council for Open and Distance Education (ICDE)
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 17 (2025): Issue 1