Options
Innovative Practices

Community-Based, Open Source, Continuous OER Authoring (COCOA): A Novel Model for Open Educational Resources

Authors
  • Steven Clontz orcid logo (University of South Alabama)
  • Drew Lewis orcid logo

Abstract

As demand for open education resources (OER) grows among instructors, methods of supporting OER authors that leverage new technologies and toolkits are needed to support this growing community. In this article, we describe our Community-based, Open source, Continuous OER Authoring (COCOA) model of OER development. In addition to describing the model in the abstract, we also detail the software and services we are currently using to support authoring teams using this model and provide reflections on the relative strengths and challenges this model presents.

Keywords: OER, Technology, Open source, Open Licensing, Open licensing

How to Cite:

Clontz, S. & Lewis, D., (2025) “Community-Based, Open Source, Continuous OER Authoring (COCOA): A Novel Model for Open Educational Resources”, Journal of Open Educational Resources in Higher Education 3(3), 273-290. doi: https://doi.org/10.31274/joerhe.20094

Rights:

CC-BY 4.0

Downloads:
Download Full Final
View PDF

Funding

Name
National Science Foundation
FundRef ID
https://doi.org/10.13039/100000001

132 Views

13 Downloads

Published on
2025-10-27

Peer Reviewed

License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0

 Open peer review from Elnora Farmer

Scope, Objectives, Content

This article is in scope for the Journal of Open Educational Resoures in HIgher Education, covering a compelling topic on the COCOA model and improvements in the creation and maintenance of high-quality OER materials. It is an important one given the evolving and continued growth of OER usage and the desire for quality OERs.



Organization

The article is well-organized, with a logical progression of the abstract, introduction, background (with comparative details), the introduction of the COCOA model and implementation, and a discussion. Content is easy to follow.



Methodology, Approach, Conclusions

Given the research design, the methodology is appropriate which is practice-oriented. The authors provided coverage of key studies, including those covering developments in OER, with a contextual analysis of current OERs, the COCOA model, and practical experience.



Writing Style, References

The writing style of the paper is appropriate with a balance between description and critical analysis. The article is factually accurate and in alignment with the OER literature referenced.



Application

The article provides valuable knowledge and practical content on collaborative OER development, focusing on the utilization of a specific technological application, to support and improve OER authoring. This has positive implications for the authoring and creation of OER materials in multiple disciplines and support the learning outcomes of students.



What are the stronger points/qualities of the article?

The article is structured well, and provides clear coverage of the collaborative model, COCOA. The explanation of the tools and systems are thorough with information shared on collaborative authorship, as well as long-term sustainability and accessibility. The authors demonstrate an understanding of technology and educational applications. 



What are the weaker points/qualities of the article? How could they be strengthened?

Consider the inclusion of additional graphical representation/diagram(s) to visually describe alternative models for comparative purposes and clarity of understanding various models, processes, etc.



Peer Review Ranking: Scope
Highly relevant

Peer Review Ranking: Clarity
Very clear

Peer Review Ranking: Contribution
contributes

Peer Review Ranking: Methodology
Highly appropriate

Peer Review Ranking: Conclusion
Highly sound

Note:
This review refers to round of peer review and may pertain to an earlier version of the document.

 Open peer review from Amie Freeman

Scope, Objectives, Content


Organization


Methodology, Approach, Conclusions


Writing Style, References


Application


What are the stronger points/qualities of the article?


What are the weaker points/qualities of the article? How could they be strengthened?


Peer Review Ranking: Scope
Highly relevant

Peer Review Ranking: Clarity
Very clear

Peer Review Ranking: Contribution
Highly contributes

Peer Review Ranking: Methodology
Highly appropriate

Peer Review Ranking: Conclusion
Highly sound

Note:
This review refers to round of peer review and may pertain to an earlier version of the document.