Image courtesy of Dave Braunschweig: (CC BY-SA 3.0)
Introduction
As African universities increasingly adopt Open Educational Resources (OER), the need for robust monitoring and evaluation (M&E) has never been greater. Effective M&E enables institutions to track progress, demonstrate impact, and ensure that OER initiatives genuinely advance access, equity, and quality in education. This communication explores practical approaches to monitoring and evaluating the implementation of OER at Universities.
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E): what they are and why both matter.
Monitoring is the ongoing tracking of implementation and helps identify whether planned activities are happening with the expected outputs and producing the intended outcomes. This helps implementers spot issues early and throughout implementation, not just at the start.
Monitoring looks mainly at inputs → activities → outputs.
Evaluation is a periodic, systematic inquiry into outcomes and impacts. Beyond simply asking if it worked, evaluation examines how and why results occurred, for whom, and under what conditions. Together, M&E provides timely evidence for project implementation, with deeper learning and accountability.
Evaluation focuses on outcomes → impact and tests the logic of the results chain from input to outcomes.
The value of Monitoring (during implementation)
Monitoring is a vital tool for university managers involved in implementing OER. It enables oversight of activities such as finding, adapting, licensing, and integrating OER into curricula. For managers, monitoring provides actionable data, such as OER downloads, course-level OER usage, and student access patterns in learning management systems that can inform strategic decisions and resource allocation within a university.
The value of Evaluation (of outcomes and impact)
Evaluation is essential for university managers to understand the deeper outcomes and impacts of OER implementation. While monitoring tracks activities and outputs, evaluation asks critical questions such as: Did it work? For whom? Under what conditions? This systematic inquiry enables managers to assess whether OER initiatives are improving teaching and learning, enhancing access and success, and reducing the costs of education. By combining quantitative indicators with qualitative insights, evaluation supports evidence-based decision-making, accountability to funders, and strategic planning for future phases. Ultimately, evaluation empowers managers to refine their approaches, scale successful practices, and ensure that OER initiatives contribute meaningfully to institutional transformation.
Incorporating the SCOPE Framework
To further strengthen OER evaluation, the Open Education Group’s SCOPE framework (Savings, Capacity, Outcomes, Perceptions and Equity) can be used alongside UNESCO’s OER Recommendation. This approach would ensure that both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of OER impact are captured, from financial savings to user experiences.
| SCOPE Dimension | Example Indicator | Data Collection Method |
| Savings | Student and institutional cost savings | Institutional financial data, student surveys |
| Capacity | Number of educators trained in OER | Training records, professional development surveys |
| Outcomes | Pass rates, retention, academic success | Academic records, comparative analysis |
| Perceptions | Faculty and student satisfaction with OER | Surveys, interviews, focus groups |
| Equity | OER access across diverse student groups | Demographic analysis, usage analytics, accessibility audits |
Monitoring Indicators
| Monitoring Indicator | Linked OER Recommendation Outcome |
| Institutional Readiness: Approved institutional OER Policy and implementation | 2.2 Policy and legal frameworks developed that promote the use of OER in support of educational outcomes, including incentive measures for stakeholders to implement policies and procurement models that support OER |
| Academic Capability: Number of academics trained in finding, adapting and creating OER | 1.1 Stakeholder communities aware of benefits of OER and limitations on copyright |
| OER Repository: Number of OER items uploaded, accessed, or reused | 1.3 Tools for accessing OER enhanced and made easily accessible |
| Quality Assurance: Percentage of OER meeting quality OER standards | 3.2 Quality assurance criteria for OER based on guiding principles of learning excellence, equity and inclusion |
Evaluation Questions
Evaluation Question | Examples of Data Collection Methods | Linked UNESCO OER Recommendation Outcome |
| Are OER initiatives improving student learning outcomes and access to quality education? |
| 3.2 Quality assurance criteria for OER based on guiding principles of learning excellence, equity and inclusion |
| Are lecturers increasingly confident and capable in finding, adapting, and creating OER? |
| 1.1 Stakeholder communities aware of benefits of OER and limitations on copyright |
| Is the institution creating an enabling environment for sustainable OER implementation? |
| 2.2 Policy and legal frameworks developed that promote the use of OER in support of educational outcomes |
Conclusion
For the OER Africa community, monitoring and evaluation are not just about compliance but they are tools for learning, improvement, and advocacy. By aligning our efforts with the UNESCO OER Recommendation and utilising frameworks like COUP, we can demonstrate how OER reduce costs, enhance outcomes, and foster open, equitable education. Robust M&E enables us to share what works, address challenges and demonstrate the impact of openness across Africa.
Further Information
For more on frameworks and indicators for monitoring and evaluating OER, see Chapter 13 by Baijnath, Strydom-Wilson, and Butcher in Researching Distance Education: Volume 1 (Eds Aluko and Coetzee, 2023) https://www.oerafrica.org/resource/chapter-13-measuring-implementation-unescos-oer-recommendation-possible-framework
For more on Open Education Group’s SCOPE framework, see https://openedgroup.org/the-scope-framework/
Related Articles