Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Jennifer Maddrell
around the world. A key objective of this movement is to make existing educational courseware
and resources available for non-enrolled learners to access for free. At the recent 2007 Open
Education conference in Logan, Utah, over 150 representatives from major universities and
funding institutions came together to discuss the most efficient and sustainable means of
releasing open educational courseware and resources to learners to use free of charge. While
motivations vary, most institutions cite support for lifelong informal learning as a major reason
for releasing their courseware and resources for free (Geser, 2007).
Currently, over 200 higher education institutions make available an estimated 2,500 open
access courses (Wiley, 2007). In addition, open education directories and repositories outside of
higher education link learners to thousands of free vetted learning objects, including those found
at Rice’s Connexions (http://cns.org). However, these numbers pale in comparison to the millions
of freely licensed articles, syllabi, web sites, and separate pieces of digital material which a
who may or may not choose to participate in learning with peer learners, and undertaken for
reasons other than mandates or accreditation. Each independent learner is free to come and go
and participate purely for the sake of his or her own learning.
Impact of Tutor 3
Given these unique features, the effectiveness and sustainability of these massive open
education projects is being called into question. With millions of dollars of foundation,
government, institutional, and personal funding supporting the current development, there is
growing scrutiny over what open educational resources and practices best support this unique
form of self-directed, non-credit, online, and informal learning (Geser, 2007). A key concern is
the effect of offering open courseware without the tutor support that is typically made available
within the traditional learning environment. Beyond access, what is the usefulness of the open
courseware and resources to learners without tutor feedback and guidance? Does the lack of tutor
support matter to self-directed learners in an informal non-credit learning setting? Would tutor
As stated, open education represents a unique subset of education. While there is a lack of
research specifically addressing the impact of tutor feedback on learner participation in open,
self-directed, non-credit, and online courses, there are points of comparison within 3 separate
research threads, including self-directed learning, learner self-regulation, and open and distance
learning. As there are few examples of intersecting research across these threads, each thread is
explored separately.
Self-Directed Learning
Open education is the ultimate form of self-directed learning. It is learning taken on and
controlled by the learner for his or her own specific goals, needs, and wants. Over the past 4
decades, a vast amount of research has been conducted in the area of adult self-directed learning,
including the desired learning and instructional practices to support self-directed learning. In a
literature review of adult education research covering a period of 19 years from 1980 to 1998,
about 1 percent of the total articles dealt with self-directed learning, peaking in 1986 at 3 percent,
Impact of Tutor 4
but dropped to as few as zero in the most recent years (Brockett et al., 2000). Some attribute the
which makes self-directed learning seem out of step with recent research involving the social
aspects of learning (Cho, 2002). To this last point, it is important to note that in a separate
literature review of self-directed learning in adulthood, Owen (2002, p. 10) highlights the
Given this vast body of research and the array of theoretical approaches, it is little
surprise that there is a broad range in research emphasis and findings. Candy’s Self-Direction for
Lifelong Learning (1991) attempts to synthesis hundreds of studies over decades of self-directed
learning research. Candy cites findings of research addressing the effect of learner support on
… almost invariably turn to others for various forms of help. The research reviewed in
this chapter suggests that those helping self-directed learners need to recognize … the
success of a self-directed learning project depends largely on the extent and type of
assistance obtained by individual learners, and on the quality of the personal relationships
established between the learner and his or her helper(s). (Candy, 1991)
There are many parallels between the goals for self-directed learning that have evolved
over the past 4 decades of research and what is happening in open education practice today.
Unfortunately, as noted above, the amount of research in adult self-directed learning to address
these and other questions is far less than it was in years past. It is even more unfortunate when
one considers that open education has just recently gained momentum. Open education would
seem to be the perfect place to take up Brockett’s (2000) call for further research to explore self-
Impact of Tutor 5
directed learning from a “naturalistic perspective”, as well as the fresh research to expand our
understanding of what comprises the “critical practices of self-directed learning” as called for by
A vast amount of research has also been conducted on learner self-regulation. Research in
this area explores the factors which influence the ability of a learner to set personal goals for
learning, to self-monitor progress, and to regulate motivation, and to otherwise influence and
structure his or her own learning environment (Driscoll, 2005). These factors are of particular
interest to open education where the learner takes ultimate responsibility and control over his or
her learning.
Of specific interest to the question at hand is the effect of tutor feedback on the learner’s
self-regulation. This was the focus of a comprehensive research review in the mid-1990s.
Following this review, Butler & Winne (1995) suggest that, in terms of self-regulation,
difficulties arise when learners “examine information about a task’s structure, adopt or set their
own goals, select and implement the cognitive tasks and strategies that constitute learning, and
monitor their performance” and that feedback is information with which a learner can “confirm,
add to, overwrite, tune or restructure.” This sentiment is similar to that expressed by Artino
online environments mirrors the findings in traditional face to face classroom and
… some of the highest quality research in online education seems to indicate that
educational programs in for-credit educational institutions, there is less research addressing open
and distance learning in informal contexts. It is unclear if research regarding tutor support and
learners have motivations other than grades, educational mandates, and accreditation.
The closest body of research to the open education is found within the Open Learning
journal. Of particular interest are research reports from the Open University which include
extensive studies involving their for-credit student participation and retention rates. As reported
in a 2004 study of withdrawal rates at the Open University in the United Kingdom (UKOU), 13
percent of students dropped out before the class start date and in some courses the withdrawal
rate between the start date and first assignment was as high as 30 percent (Simpson, 2004). The
diverse student body within these open for-credit courses is found to regularly “mix and match”
courses, leave and come back to the same or different program of study, skip exams and
assessments, and leave entirely when they perceive they have learned enough (Tait, 2004). In
addition, the Open University Institute of Educational Technology Student Research Centre
reports that after the first tutorial session less than one-third of UKOU students generate
additional contact with their assigned tutors and advisors (Simpson, 2004).
Given that open education is non-credit, subject to open admission, and outside of a
traditional educational institution, it is difficult to know what inferences can be made from the
for-credit participation levels and retention rates. As a high level of choice and “openness” is the
Impact of Tutor 7
goal of an open education program, it may not be appropriate to characterize the noted traits as
necessarily bad or even fickle within the context of open education. Rather, learners may have
gotten what they need and desire from the experience and moved on to their next educational
endeavor. One could assume that the participation rates in non-credit open education courses
would be at or below the rates of for-credit traditional online institutions. Learners have little
stake, so they take what they want and leave. However, it is also plausible that informal learners
who actively seek the educational resources come with relatively high intrinsic motivation for
the topic and may engage at an even higher rate than for-credit learners.
Therefore, it is difficult to predict the level or reasons for an open learner’s participation,
including participation with a tutor. A lack of participation could be due to faster fulfillment of
their need than expected or learner dissatisfaction with the experience. Following an extensive
review of distance education research, Bernard (2004) suggested further exploration into learner
“task choice, persistence, mental effort, efficacy and perceived task value” is needed. The same
Purpose of Research
There are many parallels between open education and the key goals for self-directed
learning that have evolved over decades of study. The objectives of enhancing the ability of adult
reflection, and promoting emancipated learning (Merriam et al., 2007) are goals shared by those
in the open education movement. However, it appears further research is needed to explore self-
directed learning from a “naturalistic perspective” (Brockett, 2000) and to evaluate the critical
practices of self-directed learning (Merriam et al., 2007). Certainly, this would apply to open
Impact of Tutor 8
education, as well. While the goals of self-directed open education are clear, the critical practices
While research suggests that most self-directed learners reach out for help (Candy, 1991),
that feedback can support a learner’s self-regulation (Butler & Winne, 1995), and that self-
regulatory scaffolding can be an effective instructional method (Artino, 2007), tutor support data
from the UKOU suggest that the vast majority of open education learners do not take full
advantage of tutor support when it is offered (Simpson, 2004). Therefore, does it makes sense to
spend time and money offering tutor support service that open education students do not want
and may not use? Does the lack of tutor support matter to self-directed learners in an informal
non-credit learning setting? Would tutor support impact learner participation within open
education courses?
hypothesis is that open education learners who are offered tutor feedback support will participate
at a higher level than open education learners who are not offered the tutor feedback support
within the control group. The independent variable is tutor feedback provided during the course
This proposed study will include registered learners enrolled in specific non-credit free
classes at The Open University’s Open Learn Learning Space course management web site
University now offers hundreds of their online self-study course modules to learners free of
charge on the Learning Space platform. The courseware and rich learning support options are
nearly identical and include learner forums for asynchronous discussion, an instant message
platform, free synchronous audio and video web conferencing tools, and space for an online
Impact of Tutor 9
learning journal to post and share assignments. However, a significant difference is that learners
at the non-credit Learning Space do not have access to tutors who play a major learner support
Method
Learning Environment
All visitors to the Learning Space web site have the option to either browse the course
material or register and enroll for any number of free self-directed classes. The course scope and
duration varies from 4 to 50 hours across the Learning Space course offerings. Courses in this
study will include only the self-directed courses listed in Figure 1. While these courses differ in
terms subject matter, they are similar in terms of scope and duration. All are intermediate level
self-directed courses designed to be completed in 50 hours over a 120 day period with no set
Participants
Participants in this study will include only those learners who select to register on the
Learning Space course management system and enroll within the self-directed courses listed in
Impact of Tutor 10
Figure 1. For a two month period, all learners enrolling in one of the courses in Figure 1 on the
Learning Space web site will be randomly assigned to either the experimental (tutor) or the
control group (no tutor). The initial registration process for participants involves completion of
less than ten fill in and check boxes in an online registration within the Moodle course
management system, including required fields for the participant’s first name, last name, town,
country, e-mail address, desired password. Other items and questions appear on the registration
form, but participants have the option of leaving the remaining sections blank.
Upon registration, the learner sets a unique log on ID which must be entered each time
the student logs onto the Learning Space web site in order to gain full access to the site and
enrolled courses. Enrollment into individual course units involves an additional step of selecting
the enrollment hyperlink and then making a selection within a pop up box that instructs the
learner to either a) “Click ‘Yes’ below if you want to add this unit to your list and participate in
the associated activities and discussions”, or b) “Click ‘No’ just to browse the material.”
Actual participant enrollment for the study is not known as it is dependent upon the
rolling registration and enrollment during the period of the study. Current learner enrollment
provides a sense of the participant level in each of the classes, as shown in Figure 1. It is
important to note that if a learner does not visit a unit for more than 60 days he or she is
automatically unenrolled. Therefore, the active learner enrollment numbers shown in Figure 1
include only registered and enrolled learners who visited the online unit between 09/01/07 and
10/31/07.
The participation goal for the study is enrollment at the current course enrollment levels.
However, since actual enrollment during the period of the study cannot be predicted, a minimum
participation level of 100 enrolled learners will determine whether or not the study is conducted.
Impact of Tutor 11
Design of Study
feedback. Learners in the study will either be provided tutor feedback or not.
Independent variable. Tutor feedback will be offered to the learners in the experimental
group for a period of 120 days after enrollment. Tutor feedback will not be offered to learners in
the control group. A tutor from the pool of tutors currently employed to tutor courses within the
Open University will be randomly assigned to support the learner. The tutor will be instructed to
respond only to direct inquiries and feedback requests initiated from the learner about content
covered in the unit. The tutor will review and provide feedback on items sent directly to the tutor
by the learner for review, but the tutor will not review items posted in the learner’s personal
online learning journal nor will the tutor engage in the full group discussion forum or in group
For each inquiry received from a learner within the experimental group, the tutor will
tally the number of feedback responses he or she makes and record the total time it took to
prepare the response. This information will provide data on the level of tutor engagement for
each learner in the experimental group in terms of both a) frequency of feedback (the total
number of feedback responses) and b) depth of feedback (the total time required to prepare the
response).
Dependent variable. Learner participation will be measured for both the experimental
(tutored) and control (non-tutored) groups. The registered and enrolled learners in both the
experimental and control groups will have free access to the course material, an online learner
forum discussion board, an instant messaging platform, audio and web based video conferencing,
and an online space to prepare an online learning journal within the course management system.
Impact of Tutor 12
At two points in time, first at 60 days from course enrollment and the second at 120 days from
course enrollment each learner’s participation data will be collected based on the measurement
No Tutor
Tutor Support Support
(Experimental) (Control)
Days from enrollment in Course
60 120 60 120
days days days days
(measured by)Learner Participation
1. Enrolled in Class
(Counted as 0=Unenrolled or 1=Enrolled)
2. Participation in Learner Discussion Forum
(Total Number of Posts)
3. Participation in Learning Journal
(Total Number of Posts)
4. Participation in Instant Messaging
(Total Number of Sent Messages)
5. Participation in Web Conferencing
(Total Number of Meetings)
6. Frequency of Visits to Web Site
(Number of Total Log ins to Web Site)
7. Extent of visits to unit:
(Number of Total Page Views in Unit)
8. Participates in Rating the Unit
(Counted as 0=Did Not Rate or 1=Rated)
Enrolled in Class. On the 60th and 120th day from enrollment, the learner’s enrollment
status will be measured. A learner has the option on the course web site to unenroll in a course at
any time. In addition, if a learner does not visit an enrolled course unit for more than 60 days, he
or she is automatically unenrolled from the course. Otherwise, the learner’s log on ID will
remain within the learner roster for the course. The measure will be “0” if the learner is
unenrolled from the course or “1” if the learner is currently enrolled in the course.
Participation in Learner Discussion Forum. On the 60th day from enrollment (measuring
from enrollment day through day 60) and on the 120th day from enrollment (measuring from day
Impact of Tutor 13
61 through day 120), the learner’s total number of posts in the online learner discussion forum
will be measured. The measure will be the total number of posts the learner makes in the online
Participation in Learning Journal. On the 60th day from enrollment (measuring from
enrollment day through day 60) and on the 120th day from enrollment (measuring from day 61
through day 120), the learner’s participation in the online learning journal will be measured. The
measure will be the total number of entries the learner makes in the online learning journal
Participation in Instant Messaging. On the 60th day from enrollment (measuring from
enrollment day through day 60) and on the 120th day from enrollment (measuring from day 61
through day 120), the learner’s participation in the online instant messaging platform will be
measured. The measure will be the total number of sent entries the learner makes in the online
Participation in Web Conferencing. On the 60th day from enrollment (measuring from
enrollment day through day 60) and on the 120th day from enrollment (measuring from day 61
through day 120), the learner’s participation in online web conferencing will be measured. The
measure will be the total number of web conferencing meetings the learner attends during the
Frequency of Visits to Web Site. On the 60th day from enrollment (measuring from
enrollment day through day 60) and on the 120th day from enrollment (measuring from day 61
through day 120), the frequency of the learner’s log ins to the Learning Space web site will be
measured. The measure will be the total number of log ins to the Learning Space web site during
Extent of visits to unit. On the 60th day from enrollment (measuring from enrollment day
through day 60) and on the 120th day from enrollment (measuring from day 61 through day 120),
the extent of the learner’s visits to course unit will be measured. The measure will be the total
number of page views within the course unit content during the two time periods.
Participates in Rating the Unit. On the 60th and 120th day from enrollment, the learner’s
participation in rating the unit will be measured. The measure will be “0” if the learner has not
completed the online course rating form or “1” if the learner has completed the online course
rating form.
Procedures
For a two month period, all learners enrolling in one of the courses in Figure 1 on the
Learning Space web site will be randomly assigned to either the experimental (tutor) or the
control group (no tutor). Upon enrollment, both the participants in the experimental and control
groups will be taken to the course’s main web page which provides an introduction with
instructions and recommendations on how to proceed through the lesson. Participants in the
experimental group will also receive an additional pop up message informing them that they will
have access to a tutor from the Open University and to expect an e-mail with additional
information about the tutor support and the tutor’s contact information. An e-mail outlining
details of the feedback support, along with the tutor’s contact information, will be automatically
generated and e-mailed to both the learner and the randomly assigned tutor.
The self-directed courseware module and learning tools for each group will be identical.
Learners in both groups will progress through the module at their own pace based on the
instructions provided in the unit. Each course covers key life skills. Learners are provided with
recommended skill development strategies and are asked to establish detailed plans to improve
Impact of Tutor 15
their skills and performance and to produce a personal portfolio to monitor their progress and
evaluate their own strategy. They are also invited to share their ideas, progress, and questions
with peers in the course and to seek outside mentors to help them evaluate their individual plans
and portfolio. Learners in the control group will complete the module without the offer of tutor
support. Learners in the tutor supported experimental group may contact their assigned tutor at
any time during the 120 days for feedback on their individual portfolio.
As described above, for each inquiry received from a learner within the experimental
group, the tutor will tally the number of feedback responses he or she makes and record the total
time it took to prepare the response. This information will be aggregated and provide information
on the level of tutor engagement for all learners in the experimental group in terms of both a) the
frequency of feedback (the total number of feedback responses) and b) depth of feedback (the
total time required to prepare the response). The level of tutor engagement will be evaluated
based on: a) the percentage of learners in the experimental group who requested tutor feedback,
b) the average frequency of feedback (the total number of feedback responses divided by the
number of learners in the experimental group who requested feedback), and c) the average depth
of feedback (the total time required to prepare the responses divided by the total number of
feedback responses). While estimates of the frequency and depth of feedback requests and
responses are unclear, given the historical tutor support data from UKOU, it is estimated that
approximately 30% of the learners offered tutor support will take advantage of it.
In addition, at two points in time, first at 60 days from course enrollment and second at
120 days from course enrollment, each learner’s individual participation will be measured based
on the criteria outlined in Figure 2. The data for each learner will be aggregated for both the
Impact of Tutor 16
Tutored and No Tutor Support groups to compare participation levels for all learners in all
1. Enrolled in Class
a. Total number enrolled during study n/a n/a n/a n/a
b. Total number currently enrolled
c. Retention rate
2. Participation in Learner Discussion Forum
a. Total Number of Posts
b. Average participation per learner
3. Participation in Learning Journal
a. Total Number of Posts
b. Average participation per learner
4. Participation in Instant Messaging
a. Total Number of Sent Messages
b. Average participation per learner
5. Participation in Web Conferencing
a. Total Number of Attended Sessions
b. Average participation per learner
6. Frequency of Visits to Web Site
Data evaluation at the two snapshots in time will allow an assessment of learner
participation at both the anticipated half way point and the completion point of a 120 day course
unit. Given the decreasing retention and tutor participation rates over time from the previously
Impact of Tutor 17
mentioned studies, it is anticipated that the level of participation will decline over time for both
groups. Yet, given the hypothesis that open education learners who are offered tutor feedback
support will participate at a higher level than open education learners who are not offered the
tutor feedback support, it is assumed that the participation levels will be higher overall for the
Tutored Supported group than the No Tutor Support group at both the 60 and 120 day snap shots.
The following further describes the data evaluation and estimated outcome of the participation
Enrollment and Retention in Course. Total enrollment in the study’s courses will be
captured based the total number of students: 1) enrolled during the study period (estimated to be
between the minimum study participation level of 100 and the current enrollment of 240), 2)
enrolled at 60 days past the original enrollment date, and 3) enrolled at 120 days past the original
enrollment date. Capturing the total number of currently enrolled learners at three snapshots in
time will allow a comparison of active enrollment and retention rates between the Tutor
Supported and No Tutor Support groups over time. Retention rates for both the Tutor Supported
and No Tutor Support groups will be determined based on the total enrollment numbers at both
60 and 120 days past the original enrollment divided by the total number of learners who
enrolled during the study period. Given previous studies of retention rates in open education
courses, it is assumed that retention rates will decline over time for both groups. Yet, given the
hypothesis that open education learners who are offered tutor feedback support will participate at
a higher level than learners who are not offered the tutor feedback support, it is assumed that the
retention rates will be higher for the Tutored Supported group at both the 60 and 120 day snap
shots.
Impact of Tutor 18
Web Conferencing. The total number of learner discussion posts, learning journal posts, sent
instant messages, and attended web conferences on the 60th day from enrollment (measuring
participation from enrollment day through day 60) and on the 120th day from enrollment
(measuring participation from day 61 through day 120) will allow an analysis of the average
participation rates between the Tutor Supported and No Tutor Support groups. Average
participation rates per learner will be determined for each measure by separately dividing the
total participation levels for each group at the 60 and 120 day snap shots by the respective total
number of currently enrolled students. Given the hypothesis that open education learners who are
offered tutor feedback support will participate at a higher level than learners who are not offered
the tutor feedback support, it is assumed that the average participation rate per learner will be
higher for the Tutor Supported group at all participation measures at both the 60 and 120 day
snap shots.
Frequency of Visits to Web Site. The total number of learner log ins to the Learning Space
web site will be measured on the 60th day from enrollment (measuring total log ins from the
enrollment day through day 60) and on the 120th day from enrollment (measuring total log ins
from day 61 through day 120) for learners in both the Tutor Supported and No Tutor Support
groups. The average visit per learner will be determined by dividing the total log ins for each
group at the 60 and 120 day snap shots by the respective total number of currently enrolled
students. Given the hypothesis that open education learners who are offered tutor feedback
support will participate at a higher level than learners who are not offered the tutor feedback
support, it is assumed that the average number of log ins to the Learning Space web site per
learner will be higher for the Tutor Supported group at both the 60 and 120 time periods.
Impact of Tutor 19
Extent of visits to unit. The extent of the learner visits to the course unit will be measured
based on total number of page views within the course unit for all learners in both the Tutor
Supported and No Tutor Support groups. The total number page views for all learners within the
course unit will be measured on the 60th day from enrollment (measuring total page views within
the unit from the enrollment day through day 60) and on the 120th day from enrollment
(measuring total page views within the unit from day 61 through day 120) for learners in both the
Tutor Supported and No Tutor Support groups. The average page views per learner will be
determined by dividing the total page views for all learners in each group at the 60 and 120 day
snap shots by the respective total number of currently enrolled students. Given the hypothesis
that open education learners who are offered tutor feedback support will participate at a higher
level than learners who are not offered the tutor feedback support, it is assumed that the average
page views per learner will be higher for the Tutor Supported group at both the 60 and 120 time
periods.
Participates in Rating the Unit. The total number of learners who participate in the rating
the unit will be measured at both the 60th and 120th day from enrollment. Participation rates for
both the Tutor Supported and No Tutor Support groups will be determined based on the total
number of learners in the study who rated the unit as of both the 60th and 120th days from
enrollment divided by the total number of learners who enrolled during the study period. Given
the hypothesis that open education learners who are offered tutor feedback support will
participate at a higher level than learners who are not offered the tutor feedback support, it is
assumed that more Tutor Supported learners will complete the unit rating at both the 60 day and
References
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovsk, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., et al. (2004).
the Empirical Literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379. Retrieved from
http://www.aera.net/publications/?id=474
Brockett, R. G., Stockdale, S. L., Fogerson, D. L., Cox, B. F., Canipe, J. B., Chuprina, Larissa, et
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal?_nfpb=true&ERICExtSearch_Sear
chValue_0=Canipe&searchtype=basic&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=au&_pageLabel
=RecordDetails&objectId=0900019b800c2170&accno=ED449348&_nfls=false
Self-Directed Learning in the 21st Century. Procedings of the 41st Annual Adult
from http://www.edst.educ.ubc.ca/aerc/2000/brockettr-web.htm
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and Self-Regulated Learning: A Theoretical
http://bert.lib.indiana.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=t
rue&db=eric&AN=EJ515490&site=ehost-live
Impact of Tutor 21
Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning a comprehensive guide to theory and
practice. The Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cho, D. (2002). The Connection between Self-Directed Learning and the Learning Organization.
http://bert.lib.indiana.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=t
rue&db=eric&AN=EJ658640&site=ehost-live
Cox, B. F., Canipe, J. B., Stockdale, S. L., Donagby, R. C., Fogerson, D. L., & Brockett, R. G.
http://bert.lib.indiana.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=t
rue&db=aph&AN=23265900&site=ehost-live
Dennen, V. P., Darabi, A. A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). Instructor-Learner Interaction in Online
http://bert.lib.indiana.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=t
rue&db=aph&AN=25084207&site=ehost-live
Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Pearson Allyn and Bacon.
Geser, G. E. (2007). Open Educational Practices and Resources. OLCOS Roadmap, 2012: 150.
comprehensive guide. The Jossey-bass higher and adult education series. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Impact of Tutor 22
http://bert.lib.indiana.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=t
rue&db=eric&AN=ED461050&site=ehost-live
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=RecordD
etails&objectId=0900019b800ef762&accno=ED490435&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_
0=ED490435&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=eric_accno
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=NE5UMNMP4B
T9W3T6
Stevenson, K., MacKeogh, K., & Sander, P. (2006). Working with Student Expectations of Tutor
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=R541J73T7385T
261
education: 21 Paper commissioned by the OECD’s Centre for Educational Research and