The research team set out to examine how imperialism is portrayed in open educational resources, commonly known as OERs, which are freely accessible teaching materials that teachers download, adapt, and distribute. Because these materials are often produced by trusted names such as PBS or C3 Teachers, educators frequently adopt them with limited scrutiny. Yonas described the typical scenario: a high school teacher planning three or four different courses needs to cover imperialism in an upcoming unit, searches Google for preexisting resources, and downloads whatever appears credible. With little time for deep vetting, teachers may assume that a recognizable institutional name guarantees quality. The study tested that assumption by systematically analyzing 46 sets of commonly used OERs designed for middle and high school social studies instruction.

The results were unambiguous. According to the study, 85.7 percent of the primary sources included in these materials were recorded by colonizers, with very few sources contributed by colonized peoples themselves. The authors wrote that OERs overwhelmingly privilege pro-imperial perspectives, frequently favor Eurocentric narratives, and minimize colonial voices. In doing so, the researchers argue, these materials normalize imperial conquest and perpetuate what they describe as systemic silences, gaps in the historical record that render the experiences and resistance of colonized populations nearly invisible. For a field that has spent decades working to diversify its sources and narratives, the prevalence of one-sided materials in widely used digital resources represents a significant setback.

Beyond the imbalance in sources, the study documented the prevalence of what the researchers call a balance sheet approach to teaching imperialism. In this framework, students are asked to weigh the pros and cons of colonization, essentially debating whether imperial expansion produced net benefits or harms. The researchers found that this approach was not uniform across platforms. They analyzed four: OER Project, PBS, DIG, and C3 Teachers. None of the DIG resources employed a balance sheet approach, while OER Project and PBS used it relatively infrequently. Every single C3 Teachers resource examined, however, included one. The variation suggests that platform-level editorial decisions, rather than isolated lesson design choices, may drive how imperialism is framed for students.

The specific questions embedded in these balance sheet exercises illustrate the researchers’ concerns. Examples included asking students whether Hawai’i should be sovereign, whether American expansion abroad was justified, and requiring students to perform a cost-benefit analysis of the French occupation of Vietnam. Jackson argued that such questions are inappropriate on multiple levels. They invite high school students to debate whether people have a right to exist freely or whether colonizing another nation can be justified, placing fundamental matters of human rights and self-determination on the table as subjects of casual classroom debate. He noted that this framing invites moralizing and shallow, uncomplex thought rather than rigorous historical reasoning, and that it treats sovereignty as an open question rather than an established principle.

The researchers also emphasized that the balance sheet approach is academically inappropriate because it diverges from how professional historians actually work. Historians do not, as a matter of practice, weigh the supposed benefits of imperial conquest against its costs, and recent scholarship is extremely critical of pedagogical frameworks that do so. Furthermore, the approach reduces history to hypotheticals: it is impossible to determine how life in colonized regions would have unfolded had imperialism never occurred, so asking students to calculate what colonization contributed becomes an exercise in counterfactual speculation rather than evidence-based analysis. The authors contend that this method misrepresents both the discipline of history and the moral reality of empire.

Not every resource examined drew the researchers’ criticism. Yonas highlighted the OER Project as a positive example, noting that it does a strong job of providing lessons that include sources from a range of perspectives and of asking questions appropriate for students, such as how colonized peoples resisted imperial rule. The researchers argue that elevating materials of this kind serves two purposes. First, it steers practicing teachers toward resources that handle difficult topics with balance and rigor. Second, it offers a model that can be incorporated into pre-service teacher preparation, training future educators to identify the shortcomings in the materials they encounter before those materials ever reach a classroom.

The study fills a notable gap in the research literature. Although open educational resources have become a fixture of modern classrooms, little research has been conducted on their actual content, the sources they draw upon, or their overall quality. Yonas has previously studied how states mandate the teaching of difficult topics such as genocide and how early-career teachers approach such subjects, and she argues that understanding the materials themselves is a critical piece of the puzzle. Without systematic evaluation, schools and districts cannot know whether the free resources they approve or the websites their teachers frequent meet the standards of accuracy and inclusivity that educators and families expect.

The broader implications extend well beyond the topic of imperialism. As the economics of education push schools toward digital and open materials, the mechanisms that once guaranteed a baseline of quality, such as editorial review at established textbook publishers, are being bypassed. The Kansas study demonstrates that even resources bearing the names of respected institutions can embed problematic framings and skewed source selections. The researchers hope their work will encourage schools, teachers, and teacher educators to scrutinize online materials more carefully, to favor resources that include colonized perspectives and historically sound questions, and ultimately to ensure that all students have access to high-quality, reliable materials when learning about the most difficult topics in human history.

Subject of Research: How open educational resources portray imperialism in middle and high school social studies

Article Title: Study finds online educational resources present imperialism in positive light, put students in inappropriate discussions

Article References: Study finds online educational resources present imperialism in positive light, put students in inappropriate discussions. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: imperialism, open educational resources, social studies education, curriculum, colonialism, balance sheet approach, University of Kansas, teaching materials, history education, OER Project, PBS, C3 Teachers