What a policy is for
An open education policy is a short, formal document that states how an institution will treat openly licensed teaching materials. It usually answers a handful of questions. Who owns materials that staff create? Which license applies by default? What support is available? Who decides when exceptions are needed?
A policy does not make materials open by itself. What it does is remove uncertainty. Many staff hesitate to share their work because they do not know whether the institution would object, or whether they are even allowed to apply a license. A clear text answers that question in advance and gives managers something to point to when they approve a project.
This guide describes a typical drafting process. It is general information rather than legal advice, so any final text should be checked by whoever handles your institution’s legal and intellectual property matters.
Step 1: Define the purpose in one paragraph
Before writing clauses, write a paragraph that says why the institution wants a policy. Common reasons include lowering the cost of course materials, making resources easier to adapt for different learners, meeting the requirements of a funder, or encouraging staff to publish what they build. Pick the two or three that are really true for you.
This paragraph matters later. When a clause is disputed, the group can ask which wording better serves the stated purpose.
Step 2: Decide the scope
Scope is where most drafts either succeed or stall. Settle these points early:
- Who is covered. Permanent academic staff, part-time instructors, contractors, students who contribute to materials, and external collaborators may all be in different positions.
- What is covered. Full courses, slides, assessments, images, recorded lectures, datasets and software are all different. Some institutions start with teaching materials only and leave research outputs to a separate policy.
- What is out of scope. Third-party content, confidential assessment banks, and materials created under contracts with outside parties usually need to be excluded or handled by exception.
- Whether the policy requires or encourages. A mandate is simpler to administer but harder to agree. Many institutions begin with a recommendation and review later.
Questions of ownership vary by country and by employment contract, so check what the existing rules on intellectual property already say before drafting anything that might conflict.
Step 3: Choose license defaults
Most open policies name a standard set of public licenses rather than inventing new terms. The Creative Commons family is the best-known example. A policy normally states a default and lists acceptable alternatives.
In general terms, the attribution-only license is the most permissive: others may reuse and adapt the work as long as they credit the author. Adding “share alike” requires adaptations to carry the same license. Adding “non-commercial” or “no derivatives” restricts reuse further, and these restrictions can make it harder to combine materials from different sources. Many open education advocates therefore favor the least restrictive option that the author is comfortable with, but the right choice depends on your goals and local law.
Whatever you choose, the policy should also explain how to handle third-party material, how to record the license on each resource, and who to ask when unsure. A short reference to wider copyright and licensing guidance in your region helps staff stay within the rules.
Step 4: Draft the text
A workable policy is usually two to four pages. Typical sections are:
- Purpose and definitions
- Scope
- Default license and permitted exceptions
- Responsibilities of staff, departments and central services
- Support available, such as training and technical help
- Quality and accessibility expectations
- Reporting and review
Use plain language, define terms like “openly licensed” once, and avoid detail that will date quickly, such as the names of specific platforms. Put such detail in linked guidance that can be updated without reopening the policy.
Include a clause on accessible learning materials. Publishing something openly does not help learners who cannot use the format it was released in, and a requirement to follow recognized accessibility good practice is easier to add at the start than later.
Include a protective clause as well. Staff worry that a policy will override academic freedom or become a way to monitor their teaching. If the policy does not do those things, say so explicitly.
Step 5: Consult before you submit
Circulate a draft to the people the policy affects: teaching staff, librarians, learning technologists, legal or intellectual property advisers, student representatives and finance. Ask specific questions rather than for general comments, such as “Does the default license cause a problem for any course you teach?”
Keep a simple log of comments and how each was handled. It shortens committee discussion because objections already have answers.
Step 6: Approval and governance
Find out which body has authority. Depending on the institution, that might be an academic board, a senate, a council or a senior management group. Ask the secretary of that body about timings, paper formats and any required impact statements. Policies often fail through process delays rather than opposition.
Name an owner for the policy, ideally a role rather than a person, and agree where the approved version will be kept. Consider how the policy fits within wider institutional governance so it does not conflict with existing rules.
Step 7: Support the policy once it exists
A policy with no support is a statement of intent. Plan for the following:
- short, practical training and help with applying licenses
- time allowance, since educator workload is a common barrier
- a place to find or deposit openly licensed materials
- recognition in promotion or review processes where possible
Staff development, including teacher training, is often the part that decides whether anyone changes their habits.
Step 8: Measure uptake
Decide at the drafting stage what you will count, because retrofitting measures is difficult. Reasonable indicators include:
- the number of openly licensed resources published
- the number of courses using openly licensed materials in place of purchased ones
- staff who have attended training
- estimated changes in textbook costs for students, stated as estimates with the method shown
Be careful with claims about learning. Usage figures show activity, not learning gains, and the evidence on whether open materials change outcomes is mixed. Some institutions look at student retention alongside cost data, but a change in either figure can have many causes. Where you have the data, learning analytics can help you see how materials are used, though it raises its own privacy questions that need a separate decision.
Step 9: Set a review date
Write a review date into the policy, commonly after one to three years. At review, ask which clauses nobody used, which exceptions were requested most often, and whether the default license still suits staff. Policies that are revised from evidence tend to be trusted more than ones that never change.