The study conducted by Hilton (2016) focused on open educational resources (OER) by analyzing the findings of 16 studies that investigated (a) the influence of OER on academic learning outcomes at the tertiary context, and (b) students' and instructors' perceptions of OER in their teaching and learning contexts. Hilton's analysis of the findings of these studies indicated two major findings (1) when students use OER, they obtain the same learning outcomes as with traditional textbooks while saving money; and (2) both students and teachers find OER comparable to traditional learning resources in terms of quality. Several advantages of OER were also revealed. These included low or no cost of OER, perceived ease of reading and access, their ability to provide the same learning outcomes as traditional materials, and students' and instructors' positive perceptions. By indicating the role of OER in obtaining the same or similar learning, the study has also suggested that OER be considered useful sources for classes and also a valid replacement for commercial textbooks. However, we also need to consider the context where OER will be used and how OER are designed and used in this context since these two determine whether OER will work and suffice. This article considers the contextual factors and design of OER, and the limitations of Hilton's work in addition to several ideas and suggestions for further research regarding OER in online and face-to-face instruction.Schools across the world have been shifting to remote learning options as the COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread. As educators continue to facilitate remote learning, how can they practically think about adapting their instructional practice? Drawing on the work of Nacu et al. (Designing for 21st century learning online A heuristic method to enable educator learning support roles. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(4), 1029-1049, 2018), this paper introduces pedagogical roles educators could consider in remote environments and a heuristic evaluation method to focus on how those moves might relate to the technologies they are using. In short, this paper is a response to Nacu et al. (2018) from a practice perspective.This article examines the work by Hilton (Educ Technol Res Dev 64 573-590. 10.1007/s11423-016-9434-9, 2016) entitled, "Open educational resources and college textbook choices A review of research on efficacy and perceptions" from international perspectives. Hilton (Educ Technol Res Dev 64 573-590. https://www.selleckchem.com/products/Vandetanib.html 10.1007/s11423-016-9434-9, 2016) synthesized findings of 16 studies that investigated the academic outcomes of open educational resources (OER) and perceptions of college students and instructors. The academic outcomes were comparable to using traditional textbooks, and perceptions were positive. His work highlights effectiveness of OER in online courses resulting from their technological affordances. The COVID-19 pandemic pushed many institutions around the globe to abruptly shift their instructions digital and make learning more flexible and affordable for those who face medical, financial, and daily life challenges. Hilton's findings (Educ Technol Res Dev 64 573-590. 10.1007/s11423-016-9434-9, 2016) provide collective evidence to support the adoption of OER and shed light on how it can be used and what future work is needed internationally. This article examines the international value, implications, and limitations of his work and suggests future directions.This paper is in response to the article entitled "The process of designing for learning understanding university teachers' design work" (Bennett et al., Educ Tech Res Dev 65125-145, 2017). Bennett et al. (Educ Tech Res Dev 65125-145) present a descriptive model of the design process that reports findings from a qualitative study investigating the design processes of 30 instructors from 16 Australian universities through semi-structured interviews. This exploratory study provides rich, contextualized descriptions about university teachers' design process and pinpoints key design characteristics as top-down, breadth-first, iterative, responsive, and reflective. These key design characteristics revealed by the rich contextual descriptions could provide applicable insights into the design process especially for new instructors. The findings of the study could inform how learning design could be adapted during an emergency remote teaching (ERT) as it is dynamic and open to revision. A noteworthy limitation of the study is that complementary data such as design artifacts could be utilized to ensure data triangulation in addition to self-reported data obtained via interviews. The study found that university instructors' design process did not appear to draw on instructional design models. Therefore, future studies could focus on to what extent and how such models could be used by university instructors. Lastly, future studies may explore how technology is used in ERT design to support their needs. In this article, I share how design can be informed by humanizing pedagogy and pedagogy of care during ERT.To suggest sound practices in obtaining the faculty design talent needed to rapidly deploy or scale up digital learning, this paper adopts a systems view of the findings and implications of "The Process of Designing for Learning Understanding University Teachers' Design Work" by Bennett et al. (Educational Technology Research and Development 65(1), 125-145, 2017). Bennett et al.'s article makes an important contribution to our growing understanding of faculty capacity for and approaches to course design. Their work establishes faculty roles as designers, which is an essential consideration as institutions seek digital design talent. Nevertheless, important limitations of their research are limited detail about faculty design skills and an emphasis on how faculty design resembles others' design approaches. This paper suggests specific ways that institutions can apply and extend insights from Bennett et al.'s research to cultivate faculty design talents in nimble responses to large-scale or rapid shifts to digital learning through practices of professional development and strategic faculty hiring.