Cost Indicators Project

• Provide transparency for students, helping with informed financial planning.
  “Findings indicate that students, across all demographic categories, who attempt no-cost/low-cost (NCLC) credits increase their likelihood of graduation with a significant impact for older students.” Diaz Solodukhin | No-Cost/Low-Cost and OER Impact on Time-to-Credential: An Event History Modeling Study | Journal of Open Educational Resources in Higher Education
• Promote awareness of OER, library content, and free resources.
• Streamline OER adoption data collection.

Learn more about Cost Indicators: Findings of the OER Course Marking Landscape Analysis Survey by the Midwestern Higher Education Compact [PDF]

• Find Open Resources – Getting Started with OER Publishing
• Copyright and Open Licences – Self-Publishing Guide
• B.C. Open Collection | BCcampus
• Zero Textbook Cost | KPU.ca – Kwantlen Polytechnic University
• The Multi-Year Impact of Canada’s First Zero Textbook Cost Initiative | Open Praxis

• Kwantlen Polytechnic University – Marking Open and Affordable Courses: Best Practices and Case Studies
• Vancouver Island University: Zero Textbook Cost (ZTC) Markings
• British Columbia Institute of Technology: Zero Textbook Cost (ZTC)
• University of Alberta: Zero Textbook Cost (ZTC)
• Zero Textbook Cost (ZTC) Courses at UFV

Myth:
Cost indicators pressure faculty to adopt OER, limiting their freedom to choose course materials.

Facts:
The approach to this project is that cost indicators are based on voluntary participation, not policy enforcement. OER can expand academic freedom by giving faculty more flexibility to adapt and customize materials to fit their teaching.

Sources:

• CAUT Discussion Paper: Open Educational Resources: “OER enhance academic freedom by extending pedagogical options beyond traditional, commercially published materials.”
• Unleashing academic freedom: the case for open educational resources

Myth:
Free materials are assumed to be lower quality, so using them could affect institutional and course reputation.

Facts:
OER can meet the same quality standards as traditional textbooks, often going through peer review and editorial processes. Research shows students achieve equal or better learning outcomes with OER, and both faculty and students report positive experiences with OER.

Many OER repositories are carefully curated and have rigorous criteria that must be met before a resource may be included. For example, see the B.C. Open Collection’s criteria for open textbooks. There are also many high-quality OER publishers and publishing initiatives, such as OpenStax and OPUS at Kwantlen Polytechnic University.

Evidence shows no negative impact on GPA for students enrolled in courses using OER and lower withdrawal rates in courses using OER, suggesting cost indicators bring improved student success rather than negative consequences for instructors.

Sources:

• KPU ZTC: “Many instructors find that ZTC materials allow for more current, customizable content that better serves their students’ needs.”
• Open Educational Resources, Student Efficacy, and User Perceptions (2015–2018 synthesis): “students achieve the same or better learning outcomes when using OER while saving significant amounts of money.”
• Find high quality OERs on the B.C. Open Collection 
• OER Mythbusting
• Bol et al. (2022), A Comparison of Academic Outcomes in Courses Taught With Open Educational Resources and Publisher Content
• Clinton & Khan (2019), Efficacy of Open Textbook Adoption on Learning Performance and Course Withdrawal Rates
• Open Educational Resources (OER): A Faculty Quick Guide to Key Resources

Myth:
Cost indicators do not make enough of an impact on students’ decisions to be worth the time and effort it would take to implement them.

Facts:
Research shows cost is already a major factor in student behaviour, with many students choosing not to purchase required textbooks due to cost. Cost indicators simply make this information available earlier, supporting informed decision-making.

Cost indicators inform students which courses have course material costs at the time of registration instead of surprising students once classes have already started. When cost indicators are in use at an institution, students can be confident they won’t have to drop a course in the first few weeks of a semester because they couldn’t afford the course materials. If courses that have higher material costs are required for a student’s program, then they can factor that into their budgeting.

Sources:

• Report on Institutional Capacity to Support Open Educational Practices in B.C.: “Instead of inconveniencing [students] where they have to withdraw from a course after they learn what the cost of the book is, if this is indeed something that matters to them, you’re supplying them with that information in advance.” — Dr. Rajiv Jhangiani, Vice Provost, Teaching and Learning, Brock University
• University of Guelph Library Statement on the Use of Commercial Textbooks in Classes: “Textbookbroke survey revealed that 57% of students did not purchase a textbook and 87% of these students report some level of concern over this fact”
• BCcampus ZTC Programs
• The Multi-Year Impact of Canada’s First Zero Textbook Cost Initiative | Open Praxis

Myth:
Adding and managing cost indicators can be complex due to system limitations, inconsistent processes, and increased administrative workload.

Facts: 
While implementation requires coordination, many institutions have found the process manageable and an opportunity to improve systems. Case studies show that adding course attributes is often simpler than expected and can lead to broader system improvements. 

Sources:

• KPU Case Study (Banner): “setting up a new course attribute was simpler than expected”
• City University of New York Case Study (CUNYFirst): “Creating the attribute in CUNYFirst, CUNY’s centralized student information system, was a relatively quick and easy process.”
• BCIT Zero Textbook Cost (ZTC)
• State University of New York Case Study
• Houston Community College Case Study

To initiate this work and identify common concerns or myths, AI was used with the prompt “what might be some arguments that faculty have against using course markings to indicate if they are using open educational resources in their course.” From here, several engagements with faculty, students, and librarians took place and concerns they have or have heard were then focused on.