From Static PDFs to Living Resources: Building Ethical, Accessible Document Workflows in Open Education

Open educational resources (OER) have transformed how instructors share course materials and how students access knowledge. Open textbooks, modular readings, and multimedia objects can now be remixed, localized, and redistributed across institutions and platforms. In practice, however, much of this content still circulates as a familiar format: the PDF.

In many classrooms, both in-person and online, PDFs function as the backbone of the learning experience. Syllabi, readings, worksheets, problem sets, consent forms, and policy documents often appear as downloadable files students are expected to manage on their own devices. When these files are not designed or handled carefully, they can become a source of frustration, inaccessibility, and unnecessary cognitive load—especially for learners who rely on assistive technologies, mobile devices, or low-bandwidth connections.

This chapter explores what it means to treat PDFs not as static “final” artifacts, but as living components of a larger document workflow in open education. It argues that ethical, accessible document practices are part of digital literacy and information justice. Along the way, it highlights how low-barrier browser-based tools—such as PDFmigo.com, which allows users to merge PDF and split PDF files directly in the browser—can complement open platforms like Pressbooks in building more humane and sustainable learning environments.

PDFs at the Center of Digital Learning

On the surface, the PDF format seems like an ideal solution for educators. A PDF preserves layout, fonts, and pagination across devices. It is widely supported and relatively stable over time. Many instructors inherit PDF-based practices from earlier decades of course management: scan a chapter, upload a file, link it from the learning management system (LMS), and move on.

Yet students do not experience PDFs as static objects. Instead, they are constantly:

• downloading and renaming files,
• combining multiple readings into a single document,
• extracting a few pages to submit as an assignment,
• printing selected sections for annotation, or
• cropping, rotating, or compressing files to meet upload limits.

These everyday actions constitute a document workflow, whether or not we name it as such. When instructors design courses, they effectively design workflows: sequences of expectations and tasks that determine how students interact with texts. If these workflows are not explicit or supported, students with less technical experience or less powerful devices can be placed at a disadvantage.

Recognizing PDFs as part of a broader learning workflow opens space for intentional design. Instead of asking “What file can I upload?” educators can ask “What sequence of actions will students need to perform with this file, and how can I make that sequence fair, accessible, and sustainable?”

Document Workflows as an Equity Issue

The friction around PDFs is not distributed evenly. For some students, manipulating files is a minor inconvenience; for others, it can be a major barrier.

Students who primarily use phones or tablets may struggle with large, uncompressed PDFs that assume laptop-style file management. Learners who rely on screen readers or keyboard navigation encounter obstacles when PDFs lack proper tags, headings, or alternative text for images. Those with limited or unstable internet connections are affected when readings are split into many small files, each requiring a separate download.

These challenges intersect with broader questions of equity. Students often juggle jobs, caregiving responsibilities, and commutes; time spent troubleshooting file formats, rotating upside-down scans, or re-exporting documents to meet upload limits is time they cannot invest in learning. When institutions encourage open and flexible pedagogy but overlook basic document practices, they risk shifting invisible labor onto learners.

Thinking of documents as part of the course’s “hidden curriculum” can help. Just as instructors explain expectations for participation or academic integrity, they can articulate expectations for file naming, submission formats, and the tools students can use to manage their materials. Clear, compassionate guidance in this area can reduce anxiety and make room for deeper engagement with course content.

Principles for Ethical and Accessible PDF Practices

Designing better document workflows does not require advanced technical skills. It does require a shift in perspective: from “getting files online quickly” to “curating an environment where documents support, rather than obstruct, learning.” Several principles can guide this shift.

1. Accessibility by Design

Accessibility should be a starting point, not an afterthought. When creating or exporting PDFs, instructors can:

• Use structured headings, lists, and tables so that assistive technologies can navigate documents logically.
• Provide meaningful alternative text for images and charts.
• Ensure sufficient contrast and readable font sizes.
• Avoid flattening text into images whenever possible, so that screen readers and search functions remain effective.

These practices benefit all learners, not only those with documented accommodations. Searchable, well-structured PDFs also make it easier for students to review material, take notes, and find key concepts quickly.

2. Transparency About Workflows

Students should not have to guess what is expected of them when handling documents. A short section in the syllabus or course introduction can explain:

• how files will typically be provided (for example, through an LMS, a Pressbooks resource, or a shared repository),
• how students are expected to submit their work (file types, naming conventions, and maximum sizes), and
• where they can find guidance on basic operations like compressing, combining, or annotating PDFs.

By making these expectations explicit, educators acknowledge the real labor involved in managing digital documents and invite students into a shared practice rather than leaving them to improvise alone.

3. Respect for Privacy and Data Security

Many web-based tools for working with PDFs require users to upload their documents to remote servers. For some tasks, this may be an acceptable risk; for others—especially when files contain grades, health data, or personal reflections—it raises ethical questions.

Browser-based tools that process files locally, without uploading them to a server, offer an alternative approach. They reduce the exposure of sensitive information and align more closely with data-minimization principles. When instructors recommend tools to students, they can look for options that:

• avoid mandatory registration or account creation,
• clearly state how (or whether) files are stored,
• support local, in-browser processing where feasible, and
• provide transparent privacy information in accessible language.

Low-Barrier Tools in an Open Ecosystem

Open platforms like Pressbooks demonstrate how educational content can be created, adapted, and shared without locking learners into a single proprietary system. Yet even within such ecosystems, there is an ongoing need for pragmatic tools that help instructors and students manage day-to-day document tasks.

PDFmigo.com is one example of a browser-based service designed with this everyday work in mind. Rather than requiring software installation or user accounts, it provides a suite of tools that operate directly inside the browser. Users can combine multiple readings into a single file, separate out sections, rotate or crop pages, compress large documents, and remove unneeded pages, all without uploading files to an external server.

For educators, this kind of tool can serve as a bridge between open educational practices and the realities of institutional infrastructures. A course might host its primary materials in a Pressbooks-based open textbook, while auxiliary readings, scanned handouts, or student-generated content circulate as PDFs. When those PDFs need adjustment, a low-barrier tool can help maintain coherence and reduce friction across the course.

Because services like PDFmigo.com allow users to merge PDF and split PDF files quickly, they support concrete instructional scenarios:

• assembling a single course reader from multiple short texts,
• creating custom packets for students who need targeted review,
• extracting only the necessary pages of a long document to minimize file sizes, and
• generating clean, final versions of student work that combine cover pages, drafts, and reflection pieces.

When introduced thoughtfully, these tools become part of a larger pedagogical strategy rather than isolated technical fixes.

A Scenario: Making a Course’s Document Experience Visible

Consider a faculty member preparing an interdisciplinary course that relies on both an open textbook and supplemental readings drawn from institutional subscriptions and public reports. At the beginning of the term, they decide to map out the “document experience” students will have over the semester.

First, they organize core content into a Pressbooks-based text, taking advantage of built-in navigation, embedded media, and accessibility features. For materials that must remain in PDF form—such as scanned archival documents or reports with complex tables—they create accessible versions where possible and note any remaining limitations.

Next, they standardize file naming conventions so that students can understand at a glance how each document fits into the course. Filenames begin with the week number and topic, followed by a short descriptor. This may seem minor, but it helps students manage their personal archives and reduces confusion when revisiting older materials.

The instructor also anticipates student needs around file manipulation. In an early assignment, they ask learners to reflect briefly on their own document practices: How do they store readings? Do they prefer to annotate on paper or screen? What challenges have they faced when working with PDFs in other courses? Responses to this assignment guide a short demonstration of basic tools for merging, splitting, and compressing PDFs using a browser-based service like PDFmigo.com.

Finally, the instructor sets aside time mid-semester to revisit these practices. Students are invited to share strategies that are working well and suggest adjustments. This iterative approach treats document workflows as part of the course’s collaborative design rather than a fixed backdrop.

Practical Steps for Educators

For instructors, librarians, instructional designers, and technologists seeking to improve PDF workflows in open education contexts, a few practical steps can make an immediate difference:

1. Audit existing materials. Identify which PDFs are essential, which are duplicated, and which can be incorporated into more flexible formats such as web-native chapters or open textbooks.
2. Improve the most used files first. Focus accessibility and usability efforts on documents that students interact with repeatedly, such as syllabi, key readings, and assignment guidelines.
3. Document your expectations. Include a short “Working with Course Documents” section in syllabi or course pages that explains naming conventions, submission formats, and recommended tools.
4. Offer at least one low-barrier option. When suggesting tools like PDF editors, prioritize those that respect privacy, avoid unnecessary logins, and work reliably on a range of devices.
5. Invite student feedback. Treat document workflows as a shared responsibility. Students are often experts in navigating constraints and can surface issues instructors might overlook.
6. Connect workflows to broader literacies. Frame document skills as part of critical digital literacy, alongside source evaluation, citation, and ethical information sharing.

Conclusion: Toward a Culture of Document Care

As open education continues to evolve, conversations about cost, access, and pedagogy will remain central. Yet the mundane details of how we handle PDFs—how they are structured, shared, and transformed—also shape learners’ experiences in powerful ways. Poorly designed document workflows can exhaust student attention before they even reach the ideas we hope they will encounter. Thoughtful workflows, by contrast, clear a path for deeper engagement.

Building a culture of document care means recognizing PDFs as living components in an ecosystem that includes platforms like Pressbooks, institutional repositories, and independent tools such as PDFmigo.com. It means foregrounding accessibility, transparency, privacy, and equity in everyday decisions about how documents are created and circulated.

When educators, librarians, technologists, and students work together on these seemingly small practices, they contribute to a larger vision of open education—one in which access is not only about whether materials are free to read, but also about whether they are truly usable, navigable, and respectful of the diverse conditions under which people learn.