Brief report on Open Praxis figures and data (2017)
Brief report on Open Praxis figures and data (2017)
Inés Gil-Jaurena 0
0 Editor for Open Praxis. Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia - UNED , Spain
Innovative practice papers
Software or book reviews
Rejected before peerreview
Days to review
Days to publication
Number of authors
Average authors per paper Number of reviewers 4
15 (+ 4 book
17 (+ 3 book
Regarding visitors and readers, figure 1 shows their location. In 5 years (since publication of issue
5(1) in January 15th 2013 until January 15th 2018), the Open Praxis website has received visits from all
over the world, being the top ten countries the following (in descending order): United States (15,81%
of the visits), United Kingdom (7,30%), Spain (7,15%), India (5,49%), Canada (4,95%), South Africa
(4,73%), Palestine (4,20%), Australia (3,58%), Indonesia (2,63%) and Pakistan (2,12%).
According to ClustrMaps.com (https://clustrmaps.com/site/x7ne), Open Praxis had an average of
approx. 8000 page views per month in 2017.
About the academic impact, citations to Open Praxis in scientific publications (journals,
conference proceedings, books and other specialized works) have progressively increased since
the relaunching of the journal in 2013 (figure 2). Open Praxis h-index is 21 (source: Google Scholar,
January 15th 2018).
After this brief report, what follows is an introduction to the first Open Praxis issue in
volume 10, which includes six articles in the research papers section and two innovative practice
In the first article (Using Future Research Methods in Analysing Policies Relating to Open Distance
Education in Africa), Mpine Makoe, from UNISA (South Africa), presents an analytical lens to various
policy documents in Kenya, Rwanda and Zambia that state the vision and aspirations of these regions
in their way towards becoming middle-income countries. She explores policy documents related to
open and distance education and to the use of ICT in education. The use of interpretive forecasting
techniques leads her to characterize the case in each country and to recognize the failures in the
process of implementing the policies, particularly in widening access to higher education through
open and distance learning.
In the second paper (Space as a tool for analysis: Examining digital learning spaces), Michelle
Harrison, from Thompson Rivers University in Canada, explores the concept of spatiality from different
perspectives, and reflects about what space means in a connected and networked world and which
are the implications in digital education and learning. She proposes a spatial lens to analyze the
transformation of digital spaces into learning spaces. This framework is meant to support researchers
in asking relevant questions incorporating space as a key and under-considered concept.
The next three papers present survey-based studies covering different topics of interest in
e-learning: assessment in the first case, and educational resources in the last two cases.
The first study (Student Perceptions of the Effectiveness of Formative Assessment in an Online
Learning Environment), by Betty Obura Ogange, Kevin Odhiambo Okelo, John Agak and Peter
Kiprotich from Kenya, documents a survey-based research undertaken in the Maseno University
virtual campus to collect students’ perceptions about a key issue in the teaching-learning process:
formative assessment. Questioning about a variety of online assessment tools and feedback, the
study shows students’ preferences, which are a valuable input in the design of future assessment
and feedback methods in online courses.
The second survey-based study (Implementation Factors and Faculty Perceptions of Electronic
Textbooks on the iPad), presented by Michelle Dawn Rogers-Estable from the USA, was developed
in 17 campuses in the United Arab Emirates where eTexts were introduced simultaneously using
various digital platforms. The study considers the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and collects
faculty perceptions about the experience and identifies barriers to the use of eTexts, including
access, interactivity and other technical issues. As a result, only 30% report that using eTexts is an
improvement comparing to paper texts. The findings are of interest for faculty and eText producers.
The last survey-based study (Acceptance and Usability of OER in India: An Investigation Using
UTAUT Model), by Nayantara Padhi from IGNOU (India), also collects faculty perceptions and uses
the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model. It is focused on open
educational resources in 22 universities in India, and among the findings it is worth to mention that
faculty are aware of OER but don’t use them so much, despite there is a will to do so. The paper
identifies a set of barriers to the use of OER, as well, which is of interest for establishing strategies
to increase the use of OER.
In the last paper in this section (MOOCs for Teacher Professional Development: Reflections and
Suggested Actions), Pradeep Kumar Misra from India compiles different views and inter-relations
between two current issues: teacher professional development and MOOCs. He explores different
initiatives and advocates for using MOOCs for teacher professional development, addressing actions
at different levels: policies, technical and operational issues, MOOC initiatives, language and cost
barriers, “MOOC culture”, and research.
The innovative practice papers section opens with Online educators’ recommendations for teaching
online: Crowdsourcing in action, by Joanna C. Dunlap and Patrick R. Lowenthal from the USA. They
relate an ample set of recommendations, collected among practitioners of online education in a
participatory way. Organized into four themes that arose from the data –student support, content
structure, presence and preparation-, the recommendations align with the Community of Inquiry (CoI)
model. The use of crowdsourcing appears as an innovative research methodology to be considered.
Finally, an international team composed by Rajan Madhok, Erica Frank and Richard Frederick
Heller from the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia respectively, present Building public health
capacity through online global learning. Departing from a need to implement new models for training
public health workforce, they suggest online and collaborative learning as an innovative approach.
They illustrate it with two examples and reach a conceptual model for global learning, which can be
useful for other educators willing to go beyond boundaries and making good use of digital tools.
We hope these contributions will invite to reflection and innovation in open, distance and flexible
Special thanks from Open Praxis to the authors and reviewers who have contributed to this issue.
Gil-Jaurena , I. ( 2015 ). Brief report on Open Praxis figures and data ( 2013 - 2014 ). Open Praxis, 7 ( 1 ), 3 - 6 . http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.7.1. 191
Gil-Jaurena , I. ( 2016 ). Brief report on Open Praxis development. Open Praxis , 8 ( 1 ), 3 - 7 . http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.8.1. 296
Gil-Jaurena , I. ( 2017 ). Brief report on Open Praxis figures and data ( 2016 ). Open Praxis, 9 ( 1 ), 3 - 6 . http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.9.1. 596