Elements for Excellence in the Design of OER Textbooks: User Research, Expert Peer Reviews, and Accessibility Testing

Research Objectives

The research question for the study was: What critical design elements ensure quality OER and student-centered learning experiences for higher degree students?

The two main objectives of the research were: to provide a textbook to support the course learning objectives and to reflect current technologies and trends in information retrieval system design. It was also essential that the content align with the scaffolded assignments in the course that cover database design, vocabulary design, and the basics of information architecture for websites. A key priority for the book was to build into its development both expert peer reviews and user testing with students, in phases that were iterative. In addition, to equitably support diverse learning styles, including knowledge practices entwined with non-Western and decolonized pedagogies, the book was designed with multimedia content, including embedded videos, recordings, and supplemental readings that provided more depth so students could choose to explore subtopics of particular interest to them. Finally, all content was thoroughly tested to meet current accessibility standards. A key goal was that all students have at hand their own copy of the textbook, whether digital (PDF), print format, or both. Our goal was a 100% adoption rate.

Learning Environment and Learner Profile

The project was conducted at a public university in the United States [anonymized for peer review]. The MLIS and other higher education degree programs offered through the school have been fully online since 2009. Faculty members use a combination of synchronous and asynchronous technologies to create engaging learning experiences (Marghalani & York, 2021). Synchronous technologies include Zoom and other interactive applications (VoiceThread, Panopto, etc.) that evoke in-person classroom learning experiences. Coursework is accessible through the Canvas LMS, including readings, recorded lectures, and discussion forums that facilitate asynchronous and peer engagement.

The use of these learning technologies mitigates many of the common pitfalls associated with distance education, such as a sense of isolation and lack of learner engagement (Akpen et al., 2024; Culduz, 2024; Heider, 2021; Wang, 2023). Students can meaningfully connect with their peers and instructors despite not being in the same physical location (Akpen et al., 2024; Crawford & Huling, 2024; Park & Choi, 2009). As an additional benefit, they learn how to be productive in online environments, which supports them in collaborative skills and open-mindedness (Highton et al., 2011), while preparing them for today’s virtual work environments. Learners are able to complete their degree at their own pace while still experiencing rich and lasting social learning.

The learner profile is reflected in data collected in exit interviews from the MLIS program (SJSU, 2024a; 2024b). These data show the following:

• Ethnic diversity (2015–2021): White 59%; Hispanic 22.8%; Asian 10.3%; Black 4%; American Indian or Alaskan Native 1.3%; other or unknown 2.6%

• Gender diversity (2021): female 75%; male 17%; 8% non-binary, transgender, or other.

• Residency (2021): 55% California; 45% other U.S. states and other countries.

• Current employment type (2021): 44% libraries; 29% education; 27% other.

• Time to complete MLIS degree (as of 2020): 2.5 years or less 45%, 3 to 3.5 years 27%; 4 to 4.5 years 19%; 5 or more years 9%.

Another aspect of the learner profile considered in the project objectives was the adoption rate for the previous textbook so that we could compare it to the new textbook. For many years prior to 2015, the course textbook had been an expensive (over US$100) traditional textbook. In 2015, this changed to a coursebook of collected writings by faculty. The cost of the coursebook was $7 for the digital version and $33 for a print copy. During the preceding four semesters, with slightly over 2,000 students, 1,384 copies were purchased (751 digital and 633 printed), for an adoption rate of 69.2%. Two notes: We were unable to track how many students procured a copy from a student who had completed the course, nor could we track the number of students who might have purchased the book in both formats. As noted, our goal for the new book was 100% adoption rate.

Non-Traditional Learners

The flexibility of the online learning model is essential for many degree program participants who are adult learners and/or non-traditional students (Bozzetti et al., 2024). The category of non-traditional student has been conceived in various ways. These conceptions largely overlap in terms of seven characteristics that also underpin the definition used by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (2015). According to the NCES, the seven characteristics are: being independent for financial aid purposes, having one or more dependents, being a single caregiver, not having a traditional high school diploma, delaying post-secondary enrollment, attending school part time, and being employed full time (p. 7). These students face unique life pressures that may impinge on their educational success (Azfal, 2020). Similarly, due to structural barriers to socioeconomic mobility experienced by groups historically excluded from and underrepresented in higher education, learners from minority ethnoracial backgrounds are also often considered non-traditional students (Sapir, 2022; Stoessel et al., 2015; Wong & Hoskins, 2022).

The program’s spring 2024 exit survey reports that 71% of students “were between the ages of 26 and 45 at the time of graduation” (SJSU, 2024a, para. 18), and 83% were both students “and employees at public libraries, K-12 schools, academic libraries, and a host of other types of career environments” (SJSU, 2024a, para. 17). Balancing familial and financial commitments with their academic course load, a hallmark of the nontraditional student (Beckwith, 2023; Bozzetti et al., 2024; Dotta et al., 2020), is especially prevalent among participants, who cite the program’s distance education model and flexibility as factors that permit them to pursue an advanced degree (SJSU, 2024a).

Textbook Affordability and Development

The steadily increasing cost of textbooks (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021) imposes a considerable financial burden on students pursuing higher education in the U.S., especially non-traditional students. Textbooks are the largest out-of-pocket expense for many low-income students (Martin et al., 2017; Nguyen & Herron, 2021), and as a result of consistently high textbook costs, low-income students may experience significant academic and emotional difficulties. A recent study by Nagle and Vitez (2020) sheds light on this startling phenomenon. Of the students they surveyed,

• 66% reported they had not purchased assigned materials for one or more courses (p. 2);

• 25% reported working extra hours to purchase textbooks (p. 3);

• 11% reported skipping meals due to the cost of course materials. (p. 3)

Of the students who reported forgoing course materials, 90% expressed concern that this choice would negatively impact their grade. (Note: Nagle and Vitez issued a report in 2021; however, the 2021 statistics are heavily focused on impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, therefore we chose to use their 2020 report.)

Similarly stunning findings have been reported across the relevant literature:

• Students will prioritize purchasing textbooks for in-major courses and forgo materials for general education courses (Wittkower & Lo, 2020);

• Students’ grades are negatively impacted when they cannot afford to purchase assigned materials, and in some cases, students may fail the course (LeMire, 2024; Martin et al., 2017; Wittkower & Lo, 2020);

• Textbook costs influence students’ course selection (Jenkins et al., 2020; Martin et al., 2017);

• Students may take fewer courses each semester due to the cost of associated materials, delaying graduation or contributing to their choice to withdraw without obtaining a degree (Buczynski, 2007; DiSanto et al., 2019; Martin et al., 2017; Jenkins et al., 2020).

• Textbook prices pose barriers that are even more significant for racial/ethnic minorities, low-income students, and/or first-generation college students (Jenkins et al., 2020, p. 4).

In addition to common metrics, such as grade point average and graduation rate, the impacts of high textbook costs are reflected in qualitative studies of student experiences. When students cannot afford to purchase required materials, they may experience anxiety and mental health struggles (Brandle et al., 2019; Nguyen & Herron, 2021). They may also experience alienation or a diminished sense of belonging in their courses and be less engaged with their peers, instructors, and the course material (Nguyen & Herron, 2021).

The experiences of instructors and authors of original textbooks should also be considered when discussing factors in OER textbook development. Pearce et al. (2022) found that “open pedagogy can be one way of building the kind of deep engagement necessary to activate a shift in identity – from novice to active member of a practitioner community” (para. 5). Designing and using OER to foster a culture of open pedagogy and support personal transformation challenges traditional norms of higher education, evoking a range of positive, negative, and conflicted emotions among students and faculty. The commitment to change and growth that this process signals nonetheless aligns with the flexible and expansive ethos of culturally responsive pedagogy. Beyond cost-effectiveness, OER development thus offers rich cognitive, affective, and cultural rewards for learning communities.

Open educational resources (OER) & practices (OEP)

The rising cost of textbooks is entwined with another trend in higher education: the emergence of OER, open educational resources, and OEP, open educational practices. OER “generally refer[s] to educational resources that are publicly shareable through multimodal data (e.g., text, audio, and visual stimuli)” (Moon & Park, 2021, p. 315), and therefore freely available to learners, and OEP refers to the teaching methods or pedagogy that facilitate learner engagement and achievement using OER. The flexible application of OER and the emerging concepts of OEP and OER-enabled pedagogy are often theorized in terms of the ‘five Rs’: retain, reuse, revise, remix, redistribute (Moon & Park, 2021; Schroeder & Donat, 2023; Wiley, 2014; Wiley & Hilton, 2018; Zaid et al., 2024). These factors represent the range of behaviors that authors can choose to make available to users, resulting in an ‘open’ resource (see Table 1). Authors can make any/all of these rights available to users, most commonly through various Creative Commons licenses (Heck et al., 2020). Instructors and learners are consequently empowered to adapt OER based on the context of instruction and learner needs to facilitate creativity, learning, enrichment, and culturally responsive pedagogy (Kurek, 2016; Wolfenden et al., 2012).

The relative novelty of OER materials means fewer studies have been conducted on their quality and efficacy as compared to their traditional ‘non-open’ counterparts. However, emerging research is beginning to converge on three points:

1. First, the introduction of OER in a higher education setting has no adverse impact on student achievement (Hunsicker-Walburn et al., 2018; Luo et al., 2020; Croteau, 2017), and in many instances is correlated with improved learner motivation and/or academic performance (Cooney, 2017; Read et al., 2020; Colvard et al., 2018; Feldstein et al., 2012; Hilton et al., 2016; Hunsicker-Walburn et al., 2018; Bliss et al., 2013; LeMire, 2024; Weller et al., 2015);

2. Second, students who take courses that assign OER make faster progress toward graduation than students who take courses using traditional textbooks (Fischer et al., 2020; Hilton et al., 2016);

3. Third, students tend to express strong satisfaction with the quality of OER used in their courses (Cooney, 2017; Hunsicker-Walburn et al., 2018; LeMire, 2024; Lin, 2019; Magro & Tabaei, 2020; Wynants & Dennis, 2022), and cite cost-effectiveness and ease of use (Cooney, 2017; Feldstein et al., 2012; Hunsicker-Walburn et al., 2018; Magro & Tabaei, 2020) as distinct advantages of these materials.

An additional benefit of OER is its capacity to facilitate more independent and self-directed learning (Lin, 2019; Olivier, 2020; Stracke et al., 2023), and thereby promote the development of a non-dogmatic cognitive orientation called ’open thinking’ (Jung & Lee, 2022), which includes openness to multiple perspectives, new learning, collaboration, sharing, and to diversity and inclusion. Lifelong and socially responsive learning (Bozkurt et al., 2025) have also emerged as a trend in open learning priorities, reflecting a convergence (and synergy) between OEP, which “strives to be antiracist, democratizing, liberatory, and decolonized” (Jhangiani, 2019, para. 6), and the mindful integration of multiple (non-Western) pedagogies into higher education (Katz & Van Allen, 2022; Olivier, 2020).

Universal design: an accessibility-first design perspective

OER materials are ‘open’ in the dual sense that they are readily accessible for digital sharing and reuse and are publicly available free of charge. Despite the elimination of certain impediments, barriers to access remain as many OER lack accessibility features for learners with disabilities (Lomellini et al., 2025; Navarrete & Luján-Mora, 2018; Weirick-Johnson & Abumeeiz, 2022; Zhang et al., 2020). Common issues include: a lack of compatibility with assistive technologies (Lomellini et al., 2025; Majeed, 2018; Moon & Park, 2021; Navarrete & Luján-Mora, 2018; Zhang et al., 2020), inaccessible interface design and navigation elements (Lomellini et al., 2025; Moon & Park, 2021), inaccurate or missing captions, transcripts, and alternative text (Lomellini et al., 2025), and complicated language and jargon without plain language alternatives (Lomellini et al., 2025; Navarrete & Luján-Mora, 2018).

An accessibility-first design movement is gaining momentum in higher education but remains underutilized and underexplored in both OER and commercial learning resources. As the number of students pursuing higher education who identify as having one or more disabilities continues to rise (Zaid et al., 2024), the need for design justice (Weirick-Johnson & Abumeeiz, 2022) and an accessibility-first design approach has come into ever sharper focus. Also referred to as ‘universal design’ or ‘universal design for learning’ (UDL), this philosophy exhorts instructional designers and their host institutions to “employ accessibility as a framework for design and not an afterthought applied to already created materials” (Weirick-Johnson & Abumeeiz, 2022, p. 17, emphasis added). Fundamentally, it is a “framework for improving instruction because it helps provide equal opportunities for all learners to succeed” (Marghalani & York, 2021, p. 4), and it achieves this by adhering to seven principles: equitable use, flexibility in use, simple and intuitive use, perceptible information, tolerance for error, low physical effort, and size and space for approach and use (University of Washington, 2022). See Table 2.

While the seven principles are not equally applicable in every design scenario, together they offer a set of heuristics for prioritizing the access and comfort of learners with a range of diverse abilities. By designing for each learner, we are designing for all learners, thus ensuring inclusivity and equitable and universal accessibility in the learning environment.

Methodologies & Data collection Phases

Results by Data Collection Phase

Phase 1: Alpha Test Interviews and Questionnaire (n = 4)

The first phase, alpha testing, involved two forms of data collection with the four participants: semi-structured interviews (SSI) and a follow-up questionnaire to elicit any further thoughts and reflections.

Data collected during alpha testing, including both the SSI and questionnaire, demonstrated clear patterns that strongly endorsed the new textbook and the use of OER generally. Four themes were evident in the alpha test results: learner preferences, usefulness of the course blog, perceived usability, and comparison to the previous textbook.

Learner Preferences

Alpha testers reported being comfortable using digital resources and indicated a preference for a balance of print and digital learning resources. When asked, ‘Do you typically prefer to use print or digital resources (e.g., textbooks) when learning new concepts and skills?’, all participants identified at least one advantage of using digital resources (e.g., the convenience of embedded hyperlinks).

The participants’ relative comfort with digital resources was further affirmed in the follow-up questionnaire, with 75% agreeing or strongly agreeing with the statement, “I usually find eBooks easy to use” (see Figure 1).

Figure 1

Course Blog Usefulness and One-Stop Approach

When asked during the interviews about their experience using the blog, all alpha testers indicated they believed the blog would provide “enough” or “more than enough” information to a student with limited digital fluency. One tester (‘Jackie’) expressed that they had found the information on PDF readers and digital annotation tools to be “very helpful” and had learned valuable digital skills by accessing the blog. Participant ‘Nurja’ noted, “I looked at all of the information on the blog, and I loved it. It was great. It makes me wish that all of my classes had a blog like this, with…all of the information you need right there.”

Positive Usability

Positive usability was one of the strongest themes supported by the alpha testing data. As noted above, alpha testers’ positive opinions of the blog spoke to its usability, including its capacity to help users with more limited digital literacy skills succeed in the course. These favorable views were echoed in other responses.

In response to the interview question, “Tell me about your experience using the new textbook,” alpha testers offered overwhelmingly positive feedback. Participant ‘Meg’ noted that “nothing was confusing.” Another tester, ‘Nurja’, echoed this sentiment, stating: “Everything made total sense, and nothing was unclear to me.” A closely related idea about navigability also emerged: “It was laid out consistently, which was great; it was very easy to navigate.”

The easy navigability and clarity of scaffolded content as supportive of user experience were also substantiated by the questionnaire data. In response to “Each chapter in the textbook introduced a manageable amount of information,” all respondents agreed or strongly agreed, and similarly, in response to “The textbook clearly explained concepts,” all respondents agreed or strongly agreed.

In response to the open-ended question, “What were the most successful and least successful aspects of the textbook design and user experience for you?,” participants identified the most successful aspects as 1) “its level of accessibility,” 2) “the content flow, use of links and embedded materials, and ease of use,” and 3) the fact that users could “navigate easily, the content was clear and easy to understand” making it “very accessible.” When asked during the interviews, “What changes would you make to improve the textbook user experience?” all participants responded that they had no further suggestions.

Comparison to Previous Textbook

Alpha testers were asked to evaluate the design of the new textbook as well as compare it to the previous edition. During the SSIs, the latter question was posed as: “Based on what you recall from taking the course, how does the new textbook user experience compare to the last version of the textbook?” Participants responded:

• All changes were “positives, or they made [the textbook] better” (‘Meg’);

• The new edition is “much more user friendly…than the previous eBook. The information…[is] super accessible…similar to that, it’s very easy to understand, and the flow is accessible…for…many different skill levels or…learning styles.…this [edition of the textbook]…is just more…accessible…it just seems easier to use” (‘Nurja’);

• “…the chapter layout this time around seemed to be much more organized” (‘Gina’);

• The new edition was “easier to navigate” and “more user-friendly” (‘Jackie’).

Questionnaire responses echoed these sentiments. Answers to, “How did your experience with the new textbook compare with the one you used when you took the course last fall?” included:

• “The new textbook is much more engaging and easier to follow”;

• “I found this new textbook to be a much improved experience from the one I used last fall”;

• “This eBook is much easier to use than the previous eBook…I had no issues using the new textbook at all”;

• “The layout and figures were more logical and the supplementary materials were visually pleasing and the information was well presented.”

In response to the statement, “Compared to the textbook I used in my course last fall, this textbook is better organized for the course assignments,” all alpha testers strongly agreed; and again, in response to the statement, “I would recommend the textbook to other MLIS students,” all testers strongly agreed. The relevance and high usability of the textbook coupled with the fact that it was free of charge (which ‘Nurja’ identified as “incredible, and very helpful for students”) may account in part for alpha users’ positive evaluations.

At the conclusion of Phase 1, the lead researcher revised the book to address the alpha test feedback, then readied it for Phase 2, the peer reviews by ten subject matter experts.

Phase 4: Course Delivery (n = 630) and Survey (n = 102)

In the fourth and final phase, the textbook was rolled out to 630 students in the 16-week Fall 2024 term, in 20 course sections taught by eight different instructors. A few weeks before the end of the term, a questionnaire was distributed by the instructors, with 31 questions about the course materials, including the textbook, assignments, and the custom tutorials and screencasts for the database software for the design assignments. Our focus here is on the 18 questions specific to the textbook. Results from Phase 4 are reported in three parts:

1. student learning environments to understand how they used the textbook (quantitative data), such as the devices and format (digital and/or print);

2. extracts from open-ended questions (qualitative data) about their user experiences; and

3. instructors’ perspectives on how their students experienced the textbook, summarized from the faculty meeting held at the end of the semester.

Learning environments and perspectives (quantitative)

Understanding the environments and ways in which the students used the textbook was part of the foundation for understanding their information experiences. Several questions addressed their approaches to using the book’s multimedia content. Figure 2 shows the devices most often used with the book, and Figure 3 represents their use of the print and/or digital (PDF) versions of the book.

Figure 2

Figure 3

The course blog where students downloaded the textbook includes information on PDF tools for viewing and highlighting, along with recommendations for text-to-speech (read-aloud) tools. All of the tools had been tested by our researchers. Figure 4 shows the students’ choices of tools.

Figure 4

The survey also asked about their overall experience with understanding concepts covered in the book, with Figure 5 showing that 83.3% of students agreed or strongly agreed that the textbook clearly explained the concepts; 16.7% were neutral on the statement, and no respondents disagreed.

Figure 5

Qualitative responses and thematic patterns

The resultant themes in the qualitative responses about the user learning experiences are represented by quotes in the students’ own words (in vivo), shown in Table 3.

Table 3

Phase 4: Initial themes from qualitative datasets.

THEME	REPRESENTATIVE PARTICIPANT QUOTES
Information structures in the book affecting the user experience	This textbook is my favorite. I appreciate having chapters and supplemental readings/videos all in one place. The most successful aspects of the textbook were the content flow, use of links and embedded materials, and ease of use.
Immersive experience from the multimedia content, embedded videos	The most successful aspect of the textbook design was its user-friendly navigation, allowing for quick access to chapters and sections. The search function also worked well, making it easy to locate specific topics. I appreciate the clickable “contents” sections that take you to specific sections/pages. The embedded Panopto videos were a great addition, as were all other linked resources and materials.
Freedom from obstacles in textbook content, benefiting the user experience.	I think the textbook design is very helpful, and it helps students save on money spent on course materials. The design of the content was very easy to navigate, and I liked the table of contents in the sidebar. Impact: the “one place” approach supports accessibility, learning styles, and inclusivity.
Learning modes are integrated in textbook content.	I love that the videos relate directly to the text and supplement it. It’s really nice to have everything in one place. User friendly. Easier to understand. Wish all classes were set up in this way.
Easy to interact with the concepts, to take ownership of it, and personally connect to it.	I liked that the videos were interspersed throughout the text to break up the reading. I like highlighting phrases I feel are important and searching for key topics for review and study. Flexible, Intuitive, User-Friendly, Accessible, Accepting.
High quality and understandability of textbook content	I didn’t find any…of the content…difficult to understand because it seemed to kind of build itself up… as you…went through, you were able to kind of scaffold that information to get a better understanding for later chapters.

Learning ownership and integration

As occurred during Phase 1: Alpha Test, students emailed further unsolicited comments about the book after completing the survey and the course. These comments enriched the themes in the results, many representing gratitude and appreciation, but most importantly, a deepening sense of ownership of their learning experiences. This spontaneous feedback reinforced the theme in Table 3 of learning ownership about the concepts and integration of the threshold knowledge. We found this to be the basis of a key finding from the study with potential for further exploration.

Instructors’ viewpoints of student experiences

Further results were gathered during a faculty ‘roundtable’ with the instructors who taught the course in the fall term in 20 course sections. One instructor provided a summary of five key findings based on themes from this instructors’ discussion, shown in Table 4.

Table 4

Instructors’ findings from new textbook roll-out.

FINDING	IMPLICATION AND ILLUSTRATION
1. Reduced financial barrier to entry	Reflects university’s commitment to meeting needs for working students.
2. Reduced technical barrier to entry	Reflects understanding of variable technical expertise levels among LIS students.
3. Reduced interoperability issues	Reflects awareness regarding increasing use of mobile devices—the content works the same on mobile as on desktop.
4. Ensures consistent user experience	Less prone to variation due to eBook/eReader configurations.
5. Reduced technical support requests on instructor	Lightens the workload for the instructor so their focus can be student learning.

Noteworthy is that the themes from the instructors’ findings align with the learning experiences reported by the students. For example, both students and instructors reported ease of use, including for the embedded links to videos and supplemental readings.

The researcher-author needed to make only minor changes to the book at the conclusion of Phase 4. The changes were fixing embedded URLs that had moved during the semester and adding more information to the how-to page for navigating a PDF (changing the view and highlighting).

Alignment between Findings and the Literature

The user research findings echoed a key theme from the literature examining trends in higher education and OER, namely that OER materials have a strong potential to positively impact student learning experience and learning outcomes. The clear preference among testers for the OER textbook over the former non-open textbook confirmed that OER materials can be of very high quality and can provide users with superior learning experiences. The positive user experiences that students reported align with the positive correlation found between the use of OER materials in higher education settings and increased student achievement (Bliss et al., 2013; Colvard et al., 2018; Feldstein et al., 2012; Hilton et al., 2016; LeMire, 2024; Read et al., 2020; SPARC, 2017; Weller et al., 2015).

Alignment with UDL Principles

In our study design and user research methodologies, we harnessed learner-centered and accessibility-first principles to create a textbook that was consistent with the principles of UDL, with particular relevance to the first five of the seven principles: equitable use, flexibility in use, simple and intuitive use, perceptible information, and tolerance for error. Table 5 shows specific features of the textbook that addressed these principles, offering an overview of the ways that an accessibility-first philosophy informed the design process.

The Phase 1 alpha test data reflected the successful incorporation of these principles into the design, with multiple instances of participants citing the easy navigability, accessibility, and user-friendliness of the book. Participants’ perceptions of the book’s features and culturally relevant content signal its consistency with UDL best practices and multiple (non-Western) pedagogies, indicating that OER can be of excellent quality and meet the needs of a diverse range of learners.

Iterative Design: Cycles of Improvement Based on User Feedback

The positive findings from our study and the positive correlations between 1) OER materials and user experience and 2) OER and student achievement documented in previous studies, together provide a strong justification for the use of OER materials in higher education. In addition to ensuring the high quality of the OER textbook, ensuring responsiveness to user needs and equity of access for all students remained primary objectives. Our iterative approach, guided by user feedback, centered on the learner during the design process and supported development of a textbook that was responsive to the needs and preferences expressed by real users.

OER Adoption and Quality Assurance

The textbook was completed and launched in its current form in late July 2024. In addition to the 234 pages of narrative, the book contains 12 custom videos, 20 videos curated from other sources, 32 supplemental readings, and an extensive bibliography. To date, over 4,100 copies of the book have been downloaded free of charge. The adoption rate is 100% for our own students, far exceeding the 69.2% rate for the previous book.

The research and development that resulted in the OER textbook contributes to a growing body of literature identifying the many benefits of OER in higher education. However, OER materials do not have an inherent advantage over non-open materials in terms of quality. An important lesson learned from this project is that rigorous research and testing are central to ensuring OER materials are responsive to learning objectives and individual learner needs. The project facilitated quality assurance through four controls: a structured user research protocol, technology-aided PDF accessibility checks, domain expert peer reviews, and the involvement of a graduate research assistant to represent an MLIS student’s perspective throughout the design process.

The user research phases were instrumental in eliciting user needs and perspectives. In addition to confirming findings of previous studies, which demonstrate that most learners have favorable impressions of OER materials and can benefit financially and emotionally from the provision of cost-free higher education resources, the use of semi-structured interviews and questionnaires led to important improvements, ensuring the final textbook was responsive to student needs and high quality.

In addition to representing the perspectives of discipline experts in reviewing the textbook, the graduate research assistant working on the project provided an MLIS student’s perspective on the textbook, ensuring that a key stakeholder group was centered in the design process. By offering insights into the student experience—nontraditional students, in particular—she helped ensure the creation of a learner-centered OER. Her contributions to the project included:

• Becoming familiar with WCAG 2.0 accessibility standards and verifying that the style guide complied with them;

• Researching and recommending a variety of no-cost external accessibility tools for users that are compatible with the eBook file format;

• Evaluating the content of the eBook and supplementary materials through a lens of learner-centered design and an MLIS student’s point of view;

• Providing copyediting to ensure clarity and readability;

• Conducting formal accessibility testing on the alpha edition via manual checking and using Adobe Acrobat’s accessibility checker;

• Participating in all phases of user research from study design and questionnaire development to the delivery of semi-structured interviews to ensure adequate representation of the student perspective.

The provision of accessibility checks in particular was instrumental in ensuring the textbook met UDL standards. Accessibility checks were conducted in an iterative manner. We submitted the alpha edition to Adobe Acrobat’s internal accessibility checker and made manual changes based on the results documented in the accessibility report it generated. We repeated this process until the PDF was fully accessible.

By making these methodologies transparent and replicable and tracing their connections to an end product that has been shown to be highly usable and accessible, our project has demonstrated that OER materials can offer the twin advantages of high quality and affordability when adequate provisions are made. Representing the perspectives of both students and domain experts in the textbook design and centering accessibility-first principles from the beginning are powerful and reproducible approaches to quality assurance that allow for a greater integration of excellent OER materials in higher education.

Benefits for Educators of Well-designed OER

OER and OEP can be transformative for educators as well. Researchers exploring threshold concepts in student learning have further asserted that the repositioning of an instructor’s own thinking about open education is in itself transformative. As this study focused on a course designed around threshold concepts for the content (Tucker & Perucci, 2025), the threshold concepts theoretical framework and its curriculum principles underpinned the writing. Indeed, the framework transforms how a researcher-educator conducts their work. Tur et al. (2020) assert that applying ‘the threshold lens to the OE conversation will add value because it provides a theoretical framework within which to assess the impact of engaging in OEP on the identity formation of the open educator’ (p. 11). This meta-experience of new thinking about OER and OEP opens up new possibilities for educators and students alike (Atkinson & Fields, 2023; Adamiak, 2024).

Next Steps: Wider Distribution and Ongoing Evaluation

The author has received requests from educators at other universities to use the textbook in their information retrieval courses, and this has led to planning for wider distribution on OER platforms for the next edition of the book. This next step in the book’s development has already begun and involves guidance from OER librarians in other countries, including Australia and Indonesia. Specific parts of the book are being modified so that it is easier for instructors to localize the content and to reflect their students’ learning environment. As an example, all mentions of the local university library and degree requirements are being rewritten with an ecumenical positioning, allowing for straightforward adoption by other universities.

For ongoing evaluation, the Phase 4 questionnaire is being modified, eliminating questions that were somewhat redundant, and this version will be used to assess the textbook content each year. The modifications are also aimed at reducing the amount of time needed from respondents in order to increase participation. We are reducing the number of questions about the software tutorials and merging several questions about assignments. In order to support longitudinal analysis of the course materials and student experiences, however, most questions will be retained in their current form.