Statewide OLER Advisory Council
This survey was created by the Course Marking Committee of the Massachusetts Open and Low-Cost Educational Resources Advisory Council (OLERAC) to assess the current state of course marking across the Commonwealth's public higher education institutions. The data was collected and compiled to identify best practices, highlight challenges, and inform recommendations for improving textbook affordability transparency for students.
Course Marking Committee
Robert Awkward (DHE) · Ceit DeVitto (BHCC) · Tim Dolan (GCC) · Donna Mellen (UMass Lowell) · Tracy Joyce (Middlesex CC) · Elizabeth McKeigue (Salem State) · Stephanie Walker (UMass Boston) · Devan Walton (NECC)
A bird's-eye view of course marking adoption across Massachusetts public higher education.
Where does the Commonwealth stand on course marking? Click any segment or waffle square to drill down.
Each square = 1 respondent
How have institutions progressed since the last survey cycle? Arrows show movement between status categories.
Explore institutions on the map. Switch metrics to see patterns in implementation, SIS platforms, bookstores, and more.
How institutions are approaching terminology, timing, and student-facing transparency.
Respondents could select multiple terms. Click any bar to see which institutions use that term.
Click a segment for a list of matching institutions.
Click a segment for details.
The vast majority encounter flags during registration — but visibility gaps remain. Click bars for details.
The systems, vendors, and workflows powering course marking across the state.
Click a segment to see which institutions use each SIS.
Click a segment to explore which institutions partner with each bookstore.
How course markings are technically recorded. Click bars for details.
Click a segment to see matching respondents.
Respondent Roles
Click a segment to explore. (Multi-select: institutions may appear in more than one category.)
Overseeing Departments
A multi-dimensional view: how does each institution score across key readiness factors? Hover cells for details.
Recurring themes from open-ended responses — real obstacles institutions face.
Multiple institutions cite faculty non-compliance as the single biggest barrier to accurate data. Without reliable reporting, markings remain incomplete.
Several SIS platforms lack native filtering for OER/low-cost courses. Students can see markings but cannot search by them — a critical usability gap.
20% of institutions finalize markings around or after classes start — too late for students to make informed registration decisions.
Bookstore data, registrar records, and faculty surveys often don't communicate. Manual processes create bottlenecks and data discrepancies.
Some institutions lack active committees or clear ownership. Staff turnover and stalled proposals have slowed momentum at several campuses.
Some institutions face discipline-specific challenges that generic marking schemes don't address. Course marking needs to be adapted to each institution's unique context.
Key takeaways and next steps for the Advisory Council and institutional partners.
Converge on "No-Cost" and "Low-Cost (Under $40–$50)" as the standard labels. These are already the most widely adopted terms and reduce confusion for students transferring between institutions.
Only 40% of institutions finalize markings before registration. Establish a shared deadline framework tied to registration calendars so students can make informed choices.
Students at many institutions can see markings but can't search or filter by them. Work with SIS vendors (especially Banner and Colleague) to enable native OER/low-cost filtering.
Automate where possible — leverage bookstore data feeds (especially from eCampus) and implement "no changes" confirmation flows to lighten the burden on faculty.
Multiple respondents requested model templates, fact sheets, and elevator pitches. Compile best practices from fully-implemented institutions into a shared resource library.
Three institutions report "not implemented" and two are in the planning stage. Pair them with successful peers for mentorship and provide targeted technical assistance.
Click any institution to see their course marking details.
What does it take for an institution to achieve fully integrated course marking? Click each step to learn more.
Assign clear ownership — whether that's the Registrar, Library, Academic Technology, or a cross-functional committee. Institutions with dedicated oversight see faster, more consistent implementation. Ensure an active committee or designated point person drives the initiative forward.
Configure your Student Information System to support course-level or section-level attributes for OER/no-cost/low-cost materials. The strongest implementations use native course attributes (Banner, Colleague, Peoplesoft) or hard-coded designations that persist across terms. Catalog notes work but are less searchable.
Students need to discover markings during the registration process — not after. The gold standard is searchable/filterable attributes in self-service course registration. Icons, badges, and color coding all help. Ensure students can actively search for affordable courses, not just stumble upon them.
Markings are only useful if they're in place when students are making decisions. Aim to have all markings finalized before the registration period opens. This may require earlier faculty reporting deadlines and automated data pipelines from your bookstore partner.
Reduce reliance on manual faculty self-reporting. Partner with your bookstore (eCampus, Follett, etc.) to create automated data feeds. API connections, dashboard access, and regular reports can supplement or replace faculty surveys. The less manual effort required, the more accurate and timely your data will be.
Use consistent terminology across all platforms and communications. "No-Cost" and "Low-Cost (Under $40-$50)" are the most widely adopted terms in Massachusetts. Publicize the marking system to students through registration guides, course catalogs, library resources, and campus announcements each semester.
Key definitions used throughout this survey and in course marking discussions.