For optimal engagement with these select public presentations, open these slides in Google Slides or PowerPoint. This enables you to view the speaker notes, aka an approximate transcript of the presentation, and even change file format.

(Description of event)

What practices are you employing to build anti-racism and EDI into your distance and online learning work?

My colleagues have talked some about how important technology is for teaching and learning is online, and I just want to expand on this by emphasizing that: We must extend the same criticality to technology that we apply to libraries, colleges, and labor. At the individual level, and especially for individuals with budgetary input, that means selecting the most accessible, learner-affordable, open source software and service providers. For instance:

Padlet didn’t offer alt text capabilities until early last year, 2024. When I shared that information with folks requesting a library-wide subscription, they were first shocked (it was 2024, after all!) and then supportive of the decision to not purchase that tool. When that basic accessibility feature was implemented, IT reevaluated requests and moved forward with the purchase.

As the university level, it means establishing ethical edtech values, incorporating diverse users in the technology governance process, and developing a rubric to evaluate enterprise-wide technology requests. This is especially important due to increased marketing of and investment in Generative AI. For instance: Are student concerns and recommendations reflected in university guidance and training for classroom instructors? Are classroom instructors and university administration together in dialog about how contracts with vendors may introduce risks related to security and sustainability?

Finally, are we protecting ourselves and each other by understanding and claiming user privacy? Freedom of Information Act requests related to DEIA work seem to be increasing; do you know how access to personal devices with saved work accounts or two-factor authentication apps may be included in such requests? My own library is seeking guidance on this from both our Office of General Counsel and Office of Technology Services. I encourage your own library to do the same.

(View TLWAI PDF)

I am...

• Former K12 classroom teacher and tutor;

• Current Learning Technologies Librarian;

• College of Education liaison to distance graduate students who are themselves teachers;

• Formerly of the Research & Instruction department, now in Library IT;

• Co-designer and co-teacher of the library’s semester-long three-credit course;

• Chair of the university’s Information and Instructional Technology Committee;

• Co-chair of the library’s Accessibility Team and library representative on the university’s Accessibility Advisory Group

• Co-founder and co-chair of the Disability, Neurodivergence, and Chronic Illness Faculty and Staff Association / Affinity Group; and

• ACRL Distance and Online Learning Section's Vice Chair / Chair Elect.

In other words: I’m an accessibility evangelist and teacher first, a digital pedagogy practitioner and critical technology enthusiast second, and a teaching-systems-liaison librarian third. These identities—and the inherently associated values of inclusion, critical pedagogy, student-centered learning experience design, privacy, and security—guide my work, including my approach to generative artificial intelligence.

(View TUES in new window)

“The real behavioral question is not 'Do students prefer print OR electronic?' but 'WHEN do they prefer print and WHEN electronic?'” (Mizrachi & Salaz, 2020, p. 816).

Digital reading and annotation are often more affordable, sustainable, convenient, and accessible for learners and scholars. Digital reading and annotation are not, however, the equivalent of their print alternatives: Specific skills, strategies, and confidences must be developed, and different tools must be used. Without direct instruction and consistent practice in digital reading and annotation, the academic success and reading identities of all students are negatively impacted.

(View MDTC in new window)

What did we as CoP leaders do to facilitate the CoP and support tech adoption?

1. Maximize communication: Supplement meetings with emails and teams-based direct messaging (via WebEx, Microsoft Teams, Slack, etc.) that all CoP members are invited to initiate.

2. Longevity as sustainability: Some seasons are for seeding (inspiration), some seasons are for harvesting (production), so encourage members to drop in for meetings and share only when ready.

3. Embrace a growth mindset and embody playful learning: Balance structure with surprise.

4. Trust the connections: Allow flexibility to experiment without any agenda – Members will organically create content that is most relevant to their lives, personal (such as famous guitar player crosswords) or professional, and the practice of individual creativity complemented by collective celebration benefits morale beyond the CoP.

5. Expand your knowledge base: Welcome an outside practicioner to help launch the CoP! You don't know what you don't know... but someone else may know it and be willing to share it. Consider inviting them for a second visit some time later after members have developed more specific questions and encountered specific challenges.

6. Encourage individual members to:

   • Block off time for creation

   • Storyboard ideas to make the creation more streamlined

   • Ask the CoP for troubleshooting help

   • Share creations with the rest of the CoP for feedback

My advice is grounded in the acknowledgement that too many people, higher education workers and students alike, have primarily had negative experiences teaching, learning, collaborating, and connecting online. Those past experiences color their present expectations and, by extension, negatively impact future attempts with technology-enhanced interactions. Our most important job as distance library workers, then, may be to loudly and frequently share all that drew us to this work and keeps us doing it. When we share these experiences and visions, we help others realize better alternatives are possible. Ultimately: When we share the positive impacts of eLearning and virtual relationships on health, happiness, productivity, and achievement, we facilitate individual as well as programmatic reimaginings of both distance education and library engagement!

I’m grateful the accommodation process worked as I’d hoped, but big picture-wise: Disabled folks shouldn’t have to bet on empathetic supervisors, compassionate OHR reps, or timely and accurate medical diagnoses. We shouldn’t have to be unfailingly personable, strategic self-advocates, exceptional workers, or forgiving teachers of our disability in particular and ableism in general. We shouldn’t even have to claim disability. We should, all, just be able to initiate conversations with our employers about the barriers that keep us from doing our best work and the supports that will resolve them. Until we achieve that goal, though, let’s take advantage of the systems we currently have.

Our workshop experience was shaped by these principles for engagement: 

1) Ease of access. We lessened the barrier to entry by not requiring advance registration or product installation;

2) Care. Breaks were built in and folks were encouraged to be only as present as they were able and participate in whatever way made sense, via chat or mic, with camera on or off;

3) Centering lived experience. We emphasized our own limited perspectives and invited participant experiences via brief polls; and

4) Accountability. When our community explicitly tells us or indirectly shows us things that keep them from attending, enjoying, or recommending program, we listen and respond.

Whether teaching online or on-campus, I center disability. I encourage folks to contact me and collaborate however they prefer.  My student hours are flexible and include weeknights and weekends. I stress that, although I’ve done my best to address known issues of inaccessibility, only another human can determine if something is truly accessible. As such, they’re welcome to contact me directly with concerns or submit them anonymously via our library web form. ... Ultimately, this has facilitated some incredible opportunities to work with disabled students previously reluctant to reach out due to library anxiety and discrimination. 

(View TUES in new window)

“The real behavioral question is not 'Do students prefer print OR electronic?' but 'WHEN do they prefer print and WHEN electronic?'” (Mizrachi & Salaz, 2020, p. 816).

Digital reading and annotation are often more affordable, sustainable, convenient, and accessible for learners and scholars. Digital reading and annotation are not, however, the equivalent of their print alternatives: Specific skills, strategies, and confidences must be developed, and different tools must be used. Without direct instruction and consistent practice in digital reading and annotation, the academic success and reading identities of all students are negatively impacted.