Teaching to Respect Intersectional Neurodiversity in LIS Classrooms and Practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“Being a librarian is a people-person job….” – Xavier Ateneo Senior High Library, Facebook, 2020 “…libraries are actively trying NOT to recruit people who don't enjoy working with the public…” – iBrarian, r/librarians, 2020 “All I know is that if the jobs of the future depend on "likability," (and the corollary of being a "people person") I may as well give up now. That's the one skill I neither I or people like me cannot learn.” – pigbitinmad, Library Journal comments, 2017 The LIS profession, and in many cases, our textbooks, instructors, and professional guidelines, tend to frame librarianship as an exclusively social profession. For instance, a reference librarian has to be a good “people person” who can intuit patrons’ verbal and nonverbal communication and make others feel welcome. This devalues the skills and strengths that those for whom this is not a default bring to the LIS profession and is exclusionary or traumatizing to neurodiverse students (McCulloch, 2021). In this panel, we propose strategies for reframing instructional practices to allow all students to demonstrate their strengths and find apath in the LIS professions. Even as our profession aspires to adopt a growing definition of diversity and equity and recognition of intersectionality, invisible disabilities are often overlooked. This panel addresses issues of invisible diversity, social interaction, and ways to create an equitable classroom and work environment in which all voices, perspectives, and selves are valued. Previous works have presented the lived-in experiences of neurodiverse information professionals (Bonanno et al., 2018), and explored the potential for autistic university student inclusion in academic libraries through the development of guidelines for librarians (Anderson et al., 2018). Our panel delves into both the lived-in experiences of neurodiverse individuals in ALA-accredited master’s programs and the workplace, how best to support neurodiverse students, and preparing neurodiverse individuals for the information workforce in the face of employers averse to hiring “non-people persons1.” We do this through a moderated discussion revolving around the following critical topics in relation to neurodiversity and invisibledisabilities:1. Reframing deficit thinking to asset-based thinking, grounded in ALA policy2. Modification of teaching practices and policies in LIS classrooms, wording of policies, and acknowledging the “neurotypical professor1” perspective3. Modeling productive and positive interactions for neurotypical LIS students to build and strengthen the ability to interact with neurodiverse classmates, coworkers, and patrons and for neurodiverse LIS students to do the same in the opposite direction4. A discussion of potential holistic accommodations, strengths-based capacity building, and teaching to articulate translatable skills in professional library and information workplaces Our panel opens with a discussion of ALA “behavioral guidelines” and the impossible precedents they set for neurodiverse employees of information organizations. Takeaways for the audience, in addition to the outlined discussion points, include curated documents for the audience related to the panel to discuss with their institutional peers and management, available at https://bit.ly/3QBNaWZ; lived-in experiences of neurodiverse individuals in ALA-accredited masters programs who have gone on to information professions; and examples of how to 1) modify course documents to clarify expectations for neurodiverse students, 2) create an atmosphere of trust with students, 3) normalize asking for help and using resources (for students and faculty) and 4) how to respond appropriately to a private disclosure. We strive to impress upon attendees the importance of recognizing and honoring invisible differences, but recognize that as white, Jewish, and Hispanic women we can only acknowledge that the experience and reality of disability is different for BIPOC and LGBTQ+ members of society. Intersectional identities play an important role in neurodiverse communities, and theracist origins of autism and Asperger’s diagnoses still influence what we know of neurodiversity today (Botha & Gillespie-Lynch, 2022). This panel serves as a starting point in LIS education, and through informing our teaching with empathy, compassion, and acceptance for neurodiverse students, we hope to also improve teaching in LIS education for all students.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it