A Review of Reviews on Open Educational Resources

Building capacity of stakeholders to create, access, re-use, adapt, and redistribute OER

This action area broadly covers supporting OER capacity building, awareness raising, promoting digital literacy skills, use, creation, and sharing at the institutional and national levels, targeting all education sectors and levels. Capacity building for the professional development of teachers in the OER field is important and a key meso-level priority (Aksoy et al., 2025; Farrow et al., 2024). There are several resources available (Butcher, 2011; Butcher & Moore, 2015) to de-mystify the concept. A trainer’s guide on OER (Grégoire & Dieng, 2016) provides the essential competencies to be covered in capacity-building programmes. Nascimbeni et al. (2024) present eight key competencies for promoting OER in higher education. Copyright, open licensing, and a basic understanding of the 5R framework of Wiley (2014) are normally the key components of capacity-building activities.

The successful implementation of OER extensively relied on the adequate capacity of teachers, the core group of OER stakeholders. This reliance is why teacher education is frequently mentioned in the literature (Meng et al., 2020). Koseoglu and Bozkurt (2018) also found that several studies emphasized the criticality of capacity building in promoting open educational practices. Training and education programmes related to OER are organized in higher education institutions to inform members about the use of OER in preparing teaching materials (Li & Wong, 2021). However, Sousa et al. (2023) found that most texts in their study did not mention Wiley’s 5R exactly, but referred to some words related to it, such as share, dissemination, adaptation, copy, and combine. Faculty training is also important to help them adopt OER and mainstream OER as regular teaching activities. Mullens and Hoffman (2023) found that several studies discussed that faculty who adopted OER tended to view OER as similar in quality or higher quality than commercial textbooks. Training programmes should also focus on the attitudes of university teachers towards OER, its use, creation, and the use of local repositories to support teachers’ pedagogical work to support mainstreaming of OER (Rodés-Paragarino et al., 2016). In the African context, Tlili et al. (2022) recommended that in-service OER training and teacher professional development should be a priority. The majority of the institutional training falls within this category. In addition, Khalid et al. (2023) found that the Community of Practice approach adopted by different organizations alongside the use of formal training curricula through apprenticeship and mentorship of new faculty members.

Swain and Pathak (2024) emphasize that innovative teaching methods can be enhanced by using OER. Sharing or uploading faculty-developed OER into different open platforms could lead to feedback from different groups and further help modify these resources. Such practice could also strengthen local capacities to create and adapt OER. In this context, Otto et al. (2021) emphasized that the focus should not just be on how OER are created, used, perceived, or evaluated, or the effects of their use, but steps must be taken to improve the institutional structural environment as well to implement OER successfully. One such aspect that must not be overlooked is students’ capacity, digital skills, and awareness about issues related to the re-use of OER in teaching and learning (Axe et al., 2020).

Developing supportive policy

The UNESCO Recommendations on OER urges countries around the globe to create enabling conditions to promote the creation and use of OER through the development of appropriate policy-level interventions at national as well as institutional levels through a participatory process. This is echoed in the discussion by Iniesto and Bossu (2023) when they emphasized that educational institutions should develop policies and activities to promote OER awareness and clarify issues related to intellectual property and quality assurance. Policy is also a meso-level issue in institutional contexts to support students and teachers and foster collaboration, incentives, and funding (Aksoy et al., 2025).

OER policy making is also an issue for advancing social justice (Tlili et al., 2022). However, in Africa, only 6.6% of OER publications covered policy issues, and according to Tlili et al. (2022), “it might not always be clear which type of policy would work best in a given context” (p.14). A policy could create the necessary environment but may not be sufficient to motivate the faculty members to engage in OER activity. A suitable OER policy may also create the necessary motivating factor by incentivizing OER activity (Lesko, 2013; Farrow et al., 2024). Therefore, it is not surprising to see that a lack of institutional policy has been identified as a barrier to OER in many studies (Adil et al., 2024). While recognizing that policy gaps are barriers to OER adoption, institutional policies for OER are drivers of adoption (Farrow et al., 2024).

Otto et al. (2021) recommend that more research should be carried out on how the conditions for OER use can be created or improved on a structural level or how implementation strategies or policies can be developed or implemented. Swain and Pathak (2024) found numerous case studies that emphasized the advantages of institutional OER policies, showing a variety of favorable outcomes, mostly connected to raised OER knowledge. Policies also created an environment for dialogue among the members of the community and supported and guided the members to act on using and adopting OER. The review of OER in China highlighted that various institutional, governmental, and organizational policies and initiatives have been launched to facilitate the adoption of OER in the country (Tlili et al., 2019). The Brazilian review indicated that only five doctoral studies covered discussions on national public policies on the role of OER in the teaching and learning process (Lauermann & Mallmann, 2023). In terms of OER repositories, there is considerably less research on policies (Clements et al., 2015). Studies have also covered the need for policy support from governments and institutions to fund OER activities and cover the costs associated with making educational materials available with an open license (Li & Wong, 2021). Creating structured policies would help develop incentive programmes, such as faculty stipends, funding for OER integration, and course and faculty promotion (Luo et al., 2020).

The literature indicates that while the importance of policies is mentioned in many publications, research on policy and actual policy implementation in practice are limited. This is also possible due to the low uptake of OER policies (Wang & Mishra, 2025).

Encouraging effective, inclusive and equitable access to quality OER

The focus of this area of the action plan is very broad and directly aligned to Sustainable Development Goal 4: ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all (United Nations, 2015). The emphasis here is on equity as well as the quality of OER for all, irrespective of age, gender, physical ability, socio-economic status, etc. The question that needs to be addressed is how to make knowledge products more accessible to people in multiple languages and how OER can help in different conflict zones and during natural disasters. The research focus has been more on quality than on equity and accessibility of OER. Equity must address intergenerational barriers and historical legacy affecting communities’ access to educational opportunities. In this context, embracing openness, equal participation, and nurturing ownership would deepen open practices (Iniesto & Bossu, 2023).

While access to persons with disabilities and providing accessible OER are covered less in the literature, adopting accessible guidelines helps everyone access digital learning materials. Several papers have discussed issues around designing accessibility guidelines, specifications, best practices, strategies, and standards (Moreno et al., 2018; Zancanaro et al., 2015). Most authors discuss system design to increase accessibility and usability of students with disabilities. Some others also focus on the use of appropriate and sufficient metadata for easy retrieval of OER (Zhang et al., 2020). Reusability and accessibility are also considered key quality attributes, followed by operability, user interface aesthetics, and appropriateness recognizability (de Oliveira, et al., 2021). The review by Moon and Park (2021) finds that OER implemented according to the principles of Universal Design for Learning may foster learner engagement as OER with accessibility could also address the usability of interaction with the resources. Quality issues related to OER dominate the literature. Over the years, the focus has shifted from OER development to the quality of OER developed (Meng et al., 2020). Many quality indicators and guidelines are already available for assuring OER quality (Kawachi, 2014; Mishra & Kanwar, 2015; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2023). Tlili et al. (2023b) argue that by simply changing the license of a given text from proprietary to open, we can’t expect to improve the quality and improvement in learning achievements. High-quality OER is characterized by accurate and up-to-date content, clear learning objectives, appropriate instructional design, adaptability, licensing, etc. (Aksoy et al., 2025).

Swain and Pathak (2024) found that OER has been discussed widely to support improving instructional quality by inviting faculty to rethink their teaching strategies and adopting novel approaches to promote collaborative learning and knowledge creation. This is also at the heart of the OEP, and open pedagogy practices discussed in the literature to improve quality (Adil et al., 2024). Students using digital learning resources and collaboration to create OER appreciate the value of peer review and feedback in the learning process, which deepens trust with fellow students and teachers (Axe et al., 2020).

A narrative review of OER by Clinton (2019) indicates that OER offers comparable quality and learning opportunities at a much lower financial cost than commercial materials. Despite the student outcomes being equivalent when using OER versus traditional course materials, there are still perceptions of OER as inadequate compared to traditional textbooks (Luo et al., 2020). Faculty trusts the quality of OER produced by celebrity authors and prestigious institutions. Quality assessment of OER is also grounded in the teacher’s beliefs related to what constitutes quality, the relevance of the OER to their teaching, benefits to their students such as reducing the cost of education, and compatibility of the materials to their pedagogical practice (Mullens & Hoffman, 2023). In the African context, Tlili et al. (2022) emphasized that culture might also play a role in OER adoption, as most teachers believe that high-quality educational resources should not be free and must be developed by only expert teachers.

Publications also focus on the quality criteria and instruments used to assess the quality of OER. Some common criteria used are the accuracy of content, the learning goal alignment, relevance, aesthetics, comprehensibility, and content quality (de Oliveira et al., 2021; Otto et al., 2021). Clements et al. (2015) reviewed several papers that identified instruments for quality assurance of learning objects. However, Yuan and Recker (2015) emphasized that many of the rubrics available to evaluate OER quality lack scales, scoring guides, and empirical testing data, raising concerns about the utility of these tools. There is no consensus on a particular criterion in the literature for assessing the quality of OER. The review by dos Santos et al. (2023) identified 24 quality dimensions and considered the content quality dimension as the most relevant and predominant as that increases the possibility of revising and/or remixing OER.

Quality continues to be a major concern in the context of OER. While aligning OER strategies in the context of access, cost, and quality could be challenging for institutions, adopting a quality review process during OER production, using accessible technologies, and using multilingual approaches could improve equitable access to quality OER (Farrow et al., 2024).

Nurturing the creation of sustainability models for OER

Nurturing of sustainability models for OER needs different approaches, including funding support, new business models, government structures and processes related to the procurement of learning materials, partnerships, and collaboration of OER community building and sharing, appropriate policies, etc. The macro-theme of sustainability in the literature covers discussion around different business models and financing OER initiatives (Zancanaro et al., 2015). However, not much research is available in these areas. In reviewing African OER literature, Tlili et al. (2022) found that only 3.68% of papers covered sustainability issues. Tlili et al. (2023a), through a review as well as expert consultation, identified 10 different OER sustainability models, such as public funding, institutional funding, endowment/donations, collaborating in networks, offering services to learners, dependence on author contributions, community-based model, producing on-demand OER, sponsorship/advertisements, and offering learner data to companies.

Reviews covered a range of issues around sustainability models. For the long-term sustainability of OER, Adil et al. (2024) consider that having flexible and extendable technology infrastructure helps in mitigating the challenges associated with the evolving nature of the Web. Arimoto and Barbosa (2012) reported that most of the studies covered learning object metadata and the Sharable Content Object Reference Model for content packaging and associated metadata. The technology used is also associated with the discoverability and accessibility of OERs (Swain & Pathak, 2024). Yet another issue identified for sustainability is the quality of the metadata content (dos Santos et al., 2023). Interoperability, though a major concern, has lost importance since 2006 due to technological developments that help non-experts also to produce and share OER (Chiappe & Arias, 2015). However, despite the benefits associated with OER, the free availability of tools and resources is considered inadequate in many institutions in the developing world (Mishra et al., 2022).

For OER content creation, a wide understanding of reusability should lead to proper and sustainable processes that achieve more use of the OER created (Chiappe & Arias, 2015). Digitization and reuse of OER also increase the sustainability of huge savings for students as well as institutions. (Farrow et al., 2024).

The potential of OER for cost reduction helps in sustainability. Findings indicate that there are cost savings in terms of student finances and in course withdrawal (Clinton, 2019). A review by Hilton (2020) found that “students achieve the same or better learning outcomes when using OER while saving significant amounts of money” (p.853). However, few successful examples have focused on the OER development’s financial model, and OER’s sustainability continues to be a challenge (Sousa et al., 2023). The availability of funding support to set up a platform for publishing course materials and hiring staff for OER work helps in sustainability (Li & Wong, 2021). Farrow et al. (2024) also indicate that new models, such as zero textbook cost and national funding for OER, play a critical role in sustainability.

Taking a broader perspective of sustainability, Aksoy et al. (2025) highlighted the institutional context and role of regulatory mechanisms. Institutional issues of recognition for the development of OER toward academic credit improve OER sustainability in the long run (Khalid et al., 2023). Also, OER sustainability is not just about resources, but also about how they are used and reused (Meng et al., 2020). In this context, learners’ digital skills and their OER awareness also have implications for OER sustainability (Aksoy et al., 2025).

Considering sustainability’s overarching role, it is important to encourage more research on sustainability mechanisms for OER projects (Meng et al., 2020).

Promoting and reinforcing international cooperation

Recognizing that the promotion and use of OER for the global public good would require massive efforts at national and international levels, the UNESCO Recommendation on OER emphasized collaboration at bilateral and multilateral levels. Such collaboration could cover capacity building, technology and repositories, communities of practice, and joint research. Interestingly, despite regular efforts from international organizations like UNESCO and the Commonwealth of Learning, there is limited literature on this action area. While teachers generally prefer to work autonomously rather than collaboratively (Tlili et al., 2022), it is important to focus on nurturing collaboration for OER as this will also lead to increased funding and research. While fostering collaboration, it is necessary to consider cultural practices and multilingual problems in OER practice (Meng et al., 2020). A review by Ramirez-Montoya (2020) also highlighted the need for more work on mobilizing resources and practices through international cooperation.

Farrow et al. (2024) recognize that effective international collaboration can be challenging. Involving various stakeholders, including non-profit organizations, could improve collaboration for OER implementation.

Research gaps identified

The analysis of the reviews based on the UNESCO Recommendation on OER reveals some key insights. Most research focus has been on action area 3 covering issues around effective, inclusive, and equitable access to quality OER followed by research on nurturing sustainability models for OER. Research related to capacity building of stakeholders and developing appropriate policy to promote OER are also covered to some extent but need more work in these areas. However, action area 5 covering collaboration and international cooperation is the least discussed in literature. There are very limited number of studies covering cost of OER and business models in practice, and how international cooperation could be further fostered to promote international collaboration in the field.

Systemic and structural challenges

Lack of institutional support in terms of policy and incentives for creating and using OER has been highlighted by several reviews (Adil et al., 2024; Farrow et al., 2024; Koseoglu & Bozkurt, 2018; Li & Wong, 2021; Luo et al, 2020; Mullens & Hoffman, 2023; Otto et al., 2021; Tlili et al., 2022). The lack of policy for using open licenses creates barriers to establishing authoring rights and how the contents could be distributed and used (Arimoto & Barbosa, 2012). Teachers’ workload is also a major problem in many parts of the world, including Africa (Tlili et al., 2022), and the resistance of teachers to use material developed by other institutions (Tlili et al., 2023b). Other barriers include concerns about student privacy, skepticism about the quality of OER, and attitudes of teachers (Clinton-Lisell, 2021; Rodés-Paragarino et al., 2016).

Pedagogical practice

Integration of OER in teaching and learning, including issues related to teacher capacities and skills to create, remix, and reuse OER, are significant challenges discussed in the literature. Teachers find it difficult to judge the quality of OER available in a range of formats and platforms (Adil et al., 2024; Farrow et al., 2024; Swain & Pathak, 2024). Many teachers are also skeptical about the quality of OER and hence do not use them (Clinton-Lisell, 2021). However, in the context of nursing education, Connolly and Svoboda (2023) indicated a lack of adequate OER compared to other disciplines. They also found that studies do not mainly focus on addressing barriers to OER in nursing education.

Lack of skills related to finding relevant OER also stems from a lack of digital skills and understanding of the compatibility of open licenses (Otto et al., 2021; Tlili et al., 2022). Learning design issues are considered a significant barrier to the adoption of OER in higher education institutions (Li & Wong, 2021). “The design of OER may place additional strain on students’ cognitive load by providing ample distractions under the guise of additional resources” (Mullens & Hoffman, 2023). According to Farrow et al. (2024), curricular integration, educator engagement, and localization of OER remain key challenges, too.

Teachers’ limited familiarity with assistive technologies is a critical issue in the context of using OER for teaching and learning (Moon & Park, 2021). Tlili et al. (2019) highlighted that the most pressing issue in developing countries is a lack of skills for developing and publishing OER. Sanabria-Z et al. (2024) emphasized the need for developing holistic competencies covering ICT skills and teaching-learning strategies to help teachers effectively integrate OER into their professional practice.

In addition to a range of pedagogic issues, Swain and Pathak (2024) highlighted that a major barrier is the lack of interest in creating and uploading content to online platforms. In this context, Rodés-Paragarino et al. (2016) emphasize that sharing the benefits of collective collaboration with peers may increase teachers’ engagement with OER.

Information and awareness

UNESCO’s recommendation on OER significantly emphasizes creating awareness and capacity building of all stakeholders, as it is considered the key to mainstreaming OER in teaching and learning. Mishra et al. (2022) found insufficient awareness about OER within the educational institutions. It is a key challenge due to the large number of stakeholders to be reached. The awareness challenge is not just related to OER, it also includes copyright issues, open licensing, and technological limitations (Adil et al., 2024; Luo et al., 2020). Teachers need more orientation about the proper usage of the OER (Swain & Pathak, 2024); however, in nursing education, Connolly and Svoboda (2023) emphasized that workshop alone is not sufficient for implementing OER. For OER adoption, awareness, finding available sources of OER, and insufficient knowledge continue to be a challenge (Farrow et al., 2024; Otto et al., 2021; Tlili et al., 2022). Lack of student awareness about OER also results in low use of the university repositories (Tlili et al., 2019). The lack of OER in the local language is also considered a challenge, according to the findings of Li and Wong (2021).

Resource related

Limited or lack of resources and funding issues affect the sustainability of OER initiatives (Bozkurt et al., 2019; Farrow et al., 2024; Koseoglu & Bozkurt, 2018; Mishra et al., 2022). Considering the potential of OER to reduce the cost of instruction for the student, cost issues are always a major consideration for creating institutional support (Luo et al., 2020). As such, the institutional cost is also a major barrier to the sustainability of OER (Sousa et al., 2023). There is a vicious cycle between lack of funding and availability of resources, including technologies to foster OER (Swain & Pathak, 2024). Limited funding of OER has significant implications for the creation and promotion of OER (Tlili et al., 2022). Faculty also considers lack of time as a resource barrier for finding, adopting, and adapting OER (Mullens & Hoffman, 2023).

Technology and infrastructure

OERs are not necessarily digital. However, they need significant technological infrastructure to create an ecosystem that can promote the use of OER and benefit from the economies of scale by reaching more users. From this perspective, infrastructural support, and lack of access to technology for OER (Farrow et al., 2024; Li & Wong, 2021) is a critical barrier for higher education institutions. In the enthusiasm for the benefits of OER, the issues related to technical aspects necessary to create, reuse, adapt, and share OER are often not discussed (Sousa et al., 2023). However, several reviews highlight the challenges related to technology and infrastructure in the literature. Technological barriers impact access and create difficulty adapting resources (Mullens & Hoffman, 2023). For developing countries, the lack of infrastructure is the toughest of the challenges for OER adoption (Mishra et al., 2022). Broadly, technological barriers are related to a lack of computers, software, internet connections, and bandwidth (Adil et al., 2024; Mullens & Hoffman, 2023; Otto et al., 20021; Swain & Pathak. 2024; Tlili et al., 2022). This could also include accessibility, interoperability, and reusability of OER (Zancanaro et al., 2015).

The limited availability of technological tools in the early 1990s impacted the reusability of OER (Chiappe & Arias, 2015). The issue of accessibility of OER and the use of assistive technologies for persons with disabilities are not often discussed (Zhang et al., 2020).

Lack of institutional repositories, inefficient search facilities, and complex navigation of the resources to find OER are also technological barriers (Connolly & Svoboda, 2023; Mullens & Hoffman, 2023). Research shows that the complicated interfaces of OER failed to consider the difficulties faced by the users (Moon & Park, 2021). Technological barriers are also related to discovery, storage, and poor use of metadata in the repositories (Luo et al., 2020). There is also a gap in technological platforms for OER to work collaboratively in communities (Sanabria-Z et al., 2024).