Adopting the GHOSHEH Model to Create Innovative Open Educational Resources Based on Rogers’ Process for Diffusion of Innovations
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Review
2255147
Authors: Wahbeh, G.; Burgos, D.; Affouneh, S.
Title: Adopting the GHOSHEH Model to Create Innovative Open Educational Resources Based on Rogers’ Process for Diffusion of Innovations.
Place: Sustainability 2023, 15,
Dear Authors:
My comments:
Line 37: Many researchers ….. (and one citation)
Line 40: the same situation “some studies” (one citation [8]
In the point 1.1.3. After the sentence: (lines 152-153)
The impacts of OERs and the gap that exists in having a model that focuses on creating innovative OERs or adopting them led the researcher to construct a model for creating innovative OERs based on the principles of creative problem-solving.
I propose (should be) the scheme/diagram (fig) of the gap (based on point 1.1.2.)
In the point 1.1.4 the scheme of validation with en/internat should be made.
In point 2 the diagram of methodology should be presented.
Point 3 Results is the difficult to read because the research participants are designated by letters of the alphabet, e.g. capital H, capital S, but it is necessary to standardise the notations, e.g. (H), (S), and not to make it so that the sentence starts with S ... or F and the reader has doubts who it is or to use repetitions, e.g. student (H), Student (S) etc.
Before point 4. Discussion I propose to add the point about summary of the model.
Plase add more information about the innovation of the model
Generally:
The paper is good, the topic is up-to-date and interesting. throughout the paper I miss an emphasis on the novelty of the research and graphical presentations (diagrams, schematics, algorithms) e.g. to the research methodology, to the results in the research summary section (before point 4), and add literature when we use "resreachers... studies...." (37 references - (in my opinion) is not enough )
I wish you success in publishing and please take my suggestions as good guidelines and take them into account
Best wishes
Reviewer
Author Response
Please, find the responses to your questions addressed in the attached file. Thanks. Best
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Article title: Adopting the GHOSHEH Model to Create Innovative Open Educational Resources Based on Rogers’ Process for Diffusion of Innovations
The research subject is interesting and nicely sequenced. However, I feel it needs extra reading to make the subject more clearer in the literature part.
The findings require more data analysis for both qualitative and quantitative parts, as long as you have data.
Another point is the discussion, I felt uneasy following the arguments, I guess it needs more clarifications to make the readers follow it.
Moreover, the referencing is wrong in some places especially in the discussion for instance, it has been written " for [13] " which should be in the form of Author [13] instead.
Author Response
Please, find the responses to your questions addressed in the attached file. Thanks. Best
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors
Congratulations on the article proposed for publication. The article complies with the editorial standards of the journal.
However, some corrections are required:
The bibliography is not in alphabetical order
The title must not end with a colon
Author Response
Please, find the responses to your questions addressed in the attached file. Thanks. Best
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear Authors
While the paper is relatively engaging and contribute to the scholarship of learning and teaching, I have to request proper proofreading/copyediting, as I found some of the words, particularly verbs , could be replaced with more appropriate words. There were also, although limited spelling mistake. The mistakes are minor though, as it does not impede my understanding of the paper.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewer, thanks for your comments. We have carried out a careful proof-reading, which you can find in the revised manuscript, attached. Best regards
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I recommend accept the article after modifications
