Before the term existed
The idea of sharing teaching materials is old. Teachers have always borrowed lesson ideas, copied exercises and lent books. What changed in the late twentieth century was the scale of sharing that digital technology made possible, and the arrival of ways to share legally.
Early on, much educational material online was posted informally, with unclear permissions. A teacher might put notes on a website, and others could read them, but whether they could copy and adapt them was uncertain. Copyright generally applies automatically, so the default answer was usually no. That ambiguity limited reuse, even among people who were happy to share.
Licenses and a shared vocabulary
A turning point was the development of standard public licenses. Creative Commons, an organization established in the early 2000s, published a family of licenses that let creators attach clear, reusable permissions to their work. Other open-licensing traditions, particularly from free software and open access publishing, influenced educators’ thinking.
Around the same time, the phrase “open educational resources” came into use, with its coining usually linked to an international meeting in the early 2000s. The term is now generally used for teaching, learning and research materials that are either in the public domain or released under a license that permits free use, adaptation and redistribution. Exact definitions differ in detail between organizations, so it is wise to check which one a source is using.
Having a shared name and a set of standard licenses mattered. It meant that someone looking for reusable material could search for it, and someone sharing material could signal clearly how it could be used.
Growth in different forms
Open educational resources have grown in several forms, each with its own path.
Open course materials. Some institutions began publishing their course materials, such as syllabi, notes and assignments, openly. This showed that sharing teaching material at scale was feasible.
Open textbooks. Complete textbooks released under open licenses appeared in many subjects, particularly introductory topics with large enrollments. Their growth was often driven by concern about textbook costs and by funding from governments, foundations and institutions.
Repositories and collections. Sites that gather and organize open materials made them easier to discover. The usefulness of these varies with how well they are maintained and described.
Smaller items. Images, simulations, question banks, lesson plans, videos and datasets also appeared under open licenses, giving course builders building blocks smaller than a whole book.
How online courses came to depend on them
As online learning expanded, course builders needed lots of content, and the cost of producing it was high. Openly licensed material offered a way to fill that need without legal obstacles. Several developments tied online learning and open resources more closely.
- Digital by nature. Online courses use digital files, which are easy to reuse when the license allows it.
- Large audiences. Courses reaching many learners benefit from sharing the cost of content across everyone who uses it.
- Platform support. Many learning management systems can import and display shared materials, which lowered the technical effort of reuse.
- Policy encouragement. Some governments and funders began asking that publicly funded educational materials carry open licenses, which grew the supply.
- The large open courses of the early 2010s. These drew attention to free online learning, although “free to enroll” is not the same as “openly licensed”, and many such courses kept restrictive terms on their content.
What held growth back
The picture of steady rise needs balance.
Awareness. Many teachers still do not know open resources exist or how to find them.
Time and incentives. Searching, checking and adapting material takes time, and academic careers do not always reward it.
Funding. Many projects depend on short-term grants, and sustaining them is hard. Some resources have been abandoned.
Quality and fit. Material may not match a particular curriculum or may be out of date.
Gaps in coverage. Some subjects, levels and languages have much more open material than others.
License confusion. The differences between licenses, and the rules for combining them, put some people off.
Technical barriers. Material locked in formats that are hard to edit is less reusable in practice than the license suggests.
Reading growth claims carefully
Statements like “open educational resources have exploded” are common and rarely come with precise support. Counting resources is difficult because collections overlap and are defined differently, and the number of items says little about how much they are used. A larger catalog does not necessarily mean more classroom use.
For accurate information, look for recent surveys that explain what they counted and who they asked, and be cautious about any single dramatic figure.
Where things stand
Openly licensed resources have moved from an experimental idea to an established part of how many online courses are built, especially for introductory subjects and for budget-conscious providers. They remain unevenly used and unevenly maintained. Their growth has been real but gradual, shaped by licenses, funding, policy and the practical convenience of online delivery, and the continued rise is not guaranteed.