����ԭ��

Over the last few months, we’ve been excited to see new projects and resources coming out of our community.

NCWIT published an issue of . AccessComputing PI Richard Ladner and I authored an article, as did several of our community members: Hana Gabrielle Bidon (Cornell), Chris Murphy (Bryn Mawr), Ather Sharif (����ԭ��), Victoria Chavez (Northeastern), and Maya Israel (University of Florida).

The Computing Research Association (CRA) was awarded funding by the National Science Foundation for , which aims to “build consensus around a united vision of inclusive undergraduate computing education.” The effort will bring together CRA, the Association of Computing Machinery, IEEE, and several NSF Broadening Participation Alliances in a series of regional workshops across the country to build consensus. Brianna will represent AccessComputing on the LEVEL UP BPC Alliance Committee.

A new resource, , seeks to expand the use of the Quorum programming language to allow blind and visually impaired students to participate fully in competitive robotics. Quorum Today encourages manufacturers and curriculum providers to allow Quorum as an accessible coding language and integrated development environment (IDE) and provides tips on how to include accessible features in educational opportunities. Additionally, Quorum Today invites EVERYONE to celebrate QDay on May 4th by using the power of social media to show that we all can benefit from an evidence-based programming language. On the website, Quorum Today shares videos from AccessCSforAll PI Andreas Stefik (University of Nevada Las Vegas), AccessCSforAll RPP partner Gina Fugate (Maryland School for the Blind), and John de Lancie, who played Q on Star Trek.

����ԭ�� alum Eric Fan published a book titled . The book covers broadening participation in computing efforts, inclusive equitable learning experiences, and the need to teach about the social impact of computing in the core computing curriculum. Richard Ladner, Sheryl Burgstahler, Brianna Blaser, and AccessComputing partner Andreas Stefik were all interviewed for the chapter on “Empowering Students with Disabilities.”

[This question has been lightly edited for clarity and to remove identifying detail]

Dear AccessAdvice,

Currently, I have a full-time job where I work from home. My manager is flexible with my work schedule, so I can take some time out of my work day to have meetings and work on my day job later that day. Down the road, I'm thinking of enrolling in a master's program to hopefully pursue a research career in human-computer interaction (HCI) in industry or academia.

How do I complete an independent research study to see if I want to pursue a research career? One option is to do an independent research study through my alma mater’s continuing education program, but I'd have to enroll and get approval from a professor beforehand.

I’d also like to know:

• How do I contact professors about this and how do I ask for approval for an independent research study from a professor?
• How do I highlight my research experience; what should I highlight in my resume?
• What other options might I have to do an independent research project?

From,
Research Into Master's

Dear Research,

I really like on how to get involved in research as an undergraduate. Your situation is a little different, but many of the key points are the same: Figure out what you’re interested in and who you’d like to work with, then reach out, following any instructions on their websites about how to do so. You’ll want to keep your initial email fairly short and highlight any key points that might make them interested in talking to you. In your case, you might write something like the following (edited to make sure it sounds like your voice and not mine):

“Dear Professor [Lastname],

I’m writing to find out if you have any opportunities for research in your group. I’m an alum of [University] and am currently thinking about going back to grad school to pursue a research career in human-computer interaction. Before I do, I was hoping to get some hands-on research experience in [the professor’s field]. [something complimentary, like “I always really enjoyed my CS classes, especially your class on [x]” or “I read your paper on [y] and was really interested in your approach to [z]”]. Because of this, I am especially interested in working with your group if possible.

Attached please find my resume; I would be happy to answer any questions or set up a time to meet if that would be helpful. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best,

[your name]”

You’re likely to have the best luck with faculty with whom you have a prior connection; if there was someone you worked with in undergrad, they would be a good person to reach out to. If you know a colleague of the person you want to work with, you can also mention this in your letter; something like “I worked with [name] at [university] during my undergraduate years, and completed a project on [topic].” Just be sure that the person you mention would have nice things to say about you; faculty do reach out to each other to ask about students!

In your resume, make sure you highlight any relevant experience or projects; just like when you’re applying for any other job, you want to make sure you mention major accomplishments. Just keep in mind that faculty typically won’t be interested in business-related accomplishments like sales or process improvements; instead, you’ll want to mention projects and activities that show off your relevant skills. For HCI, this might be something like leading the addition of a new feature to a software project (especially a UI or UX feature) or conducting a focus group. You can also mention personal projects that show these skills, like building a cool 3D clock or making a contribution to an open-source project.

As you reach out, keep in mind that faculty receive many requests for this type of project. If you get a “no”, don’t take it personally, just move on to the next potential advisor. If you find that you seem to be underqualified, you can start to build up your experience with personal projects (for HCI, writing a fun or useful app for yourself, making contributions to open source projects, or doing something cool with your personal website would all be good options). Once you’ve completed some of this type of project, you’ll have more to show off and more to talk to prospective research supervisors about.

I recommend also working through your network as best you can; the best way to get someone to agree to supervise a research project is to have some demonstrated research experience, even if it’s not in the same field. So if you know someone who would be willing to do a project with you, you can start there and then work your way towards your desired field. Finally, if you really can’t get anyone to talk to you and you don’t have good connections to work with, then you might be better off trying to find a formal program like the one at your alma mater. If you decide you want to go for a Ph.D., then the might be a good option for you, or you can see if your alma mater has any programs to connect returning students to research projects.��

Good luck!

Last year at the SIGCSE Technical Symposium, I selectively disclosed myself as autistic, receiving reactions ranging from ableist bewilderment (“Oh, really? You talk so eloquently for being autistic”) to quiet flickers of community as other attendees disclosed their own neurodivergence. As most disclosures happened in corners and hallways around the conference, I wanted a more explicit space for folks to find each other, unmask, and find community. So, this year, I organized a Birds-of-a-Feather (BoF), “Finding Neurodivergent Community in Computing Education.” BoFs, for those unfamiliar, are a 50-minute conference slot, intended to co-locate shared interests that otherwise would be diffused across a 2000 person conference.

Primarily, I wanted to build community, but I didn’t want this space to be any more uncomfortable than being at a normal conference where folks may have to explain themselves, or neurodivergence generally. Given the gorgeous breadth of neurodivergence, and that folks might need different spaces at different times, I offered a few group options: folks that wanted more excitable conference energy, folks that wanted to share conferencing-while-neurodivergent aches, and folks that just wanted to hang, among others. Drawing from caucusing techniques within teacher education, I opted to separate out everyone that considered themselves an ally from neurodivergent-identifying and neurodivergent-questioning folks. And, as oral speech shouldn’t be a requirement to connect with community, I made a discord server as well where folks could communicate over text instead of talking.

We had about around 25 attendees with lots of unmasking and peer support. One group talked through the decision to pursue a diagnosis; another discussed ways to heal the shame imposed by ableist expectations. I had a wealth of concerns around allies attending and making an explicit space (and asking a trusted ally to moderate discussion) assuaged many of my worries. However, creating this space required a decent amount of advocacy. BoFs require a two-page proposal at SIGCSE that’s peer reviewed; one reviewer argued that this space shouldn’t exist at the conference, another argued that there might need to be more neurodivergent scholarship before they could justify the existence of a community space. Both of these responses felt frustrating. While the space was not accessible to all neurodivergent members of the SIGCSE community (e.g. those who could not attend an in-person conference located outside the United States), I was immensely grateful for a conference space where I could show up with all of my delightful eccentrics proudly on display, with little concern for how I might be perceived, and deeply grateful to share that space with others.

The Computing Research Association through three of its committees, CRA-I, CCC, and CRA-WP, sponsored the in ����ԭ�� DC on February 21 – 22, 2023. Two of the organizers are long-time friends of AccessComputing, Shaun Kane and Jeanine Cook. The workshop brought together about 60 participants from industry, academia, government agencies, and advocacy organizations, of which about 40 were on site and 20 remote. The purpose of the workshop was to “vision ways to make all technology accessible and why that is important and necessary for society as a whole.” The workshop featured Richard Ladner, AccessComputing PI, giving the opening keynote address followed by panels of industry representatives who work on accessibility, academic accessibility researchers, and advocacy group representatives who have a stake in what both industry and academic researchers do to benefit their constituents. There was a focus on more short-term solutions, rather than long-range solutions. A of the workshop was prepared by Helen Wright, a CRA staff member.

My first SIGCSE Technical Symposium was in 2013. I can’t understate how much has changed personally since then. At the time, I was just past tenure and promotion, just leaving my startup, and just beginning to realize I couldn’t run from my gender identity any longer. I had just starting computer science education research, doing all of the things a naive newcomer does: Asking the wrong questions, missing related work, and missing the forest for the trees. My students and I were doing interesting work mostly by virtue of our unconventional perspectives, not because we had a deep understanding of the community and its work.

I approached this year’s SIGCSE trying to take stock of what has changed, however small, mostly out of a need to stay motivated. So instead of a bunch of paper summaries, this is instead going to be a chronicle of noticing signals of progress and concerning constants.

On Wednesday I helped co-organize a pre-conference workshop on accessibility. The day drew about 30 attendees overall, most of whom viewed themselves as allies, and who had a wide range of interests from K-12, higher education, workplace issues, programming languages and tools, curriculum, and professional development.

Throughout the day, there was a whole spectrum of ideas, ranging from problematic to justice-centered. Here are some of the ones I found problematic:

• Blaming disabled students for “failing” to disclose their disabilities
• Avoiding conflict with powerful corporations
• Deficit mindsets about autism
• Looking to the APA for how to frame our work
• Encouraging access to broken systems instead of fixing systems
• Reducing disability to complete blindness
• Reducing equity to accommodation
• Well-meaning but misguided saviorism

And here are some of the ideas I was more fond of:

• Evolving our language past notions of “special” accommodations
• Resisting ableist systems by leveraging institutional power
• Expanding literacy about accessibility
• Getting the word “accessibility” into learning standards and guidelines
• Embracing the diversity of autistic experiences
• Intersections between accessibility, culture, and language inclusion
• Including chronic mental health challenges in disability
• Decoupling audio and visual representations with underlying structure
• Thinking critically about the power and peril of labels

.

The 2023 Grad Cohort Workshop for Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Accessibility, and Leadership Skills () was held March 23 – 25 in Hawaii. 2023 marks the third year that the Computing Research Association’s Widening Participation () initiative has hosted IDEALS, and the third year that AccessComputing has provided Bronze sponsorship for the event. The two-day workshop convened over 100 graduate students and 30 professional mentors in computing for sessions spanning practical advice for early, middle, and later years of graduate studies, with topics ranging from “Master’s vs. Ph.D.” to “Navigating Microaggressions and Finding Your Voice.” Organizers’ commitment to disability inclusion was demonstrated by self-reported 40% disability representation among attendees and continuation of robust measures.

AccessComputing leadership, partners, student members, and alumni were present throughout the schedule. (co-PI) presented “Building Resiliency and Overcoming Failure,” (alum) presented “Summer Internships,” (co-PI) presented “Presentation and Other Verbal Communication Skills,” and several members (including ) participated in the career advising and resume advising post-workshop sessions.

, a Ph.D. candidate at the ����ԭ�� and an AccessComputing Team Member, hosted a highly engaging plenary panel entitled “Empowerment of People with Disabilities.” In framing the panel conversation, Sharif explored the meaning of “empowerment” as a quality that originates from individuals with disabilities when their social and physical environments lack barriers. Dr. Kane expressed the nuances of intersecting identities; whereas disability can be a source of oppression, being a white male can be a source of privilege. Dr. Rodger shared her experience of diagnosing her non-apparent disability later in life. Dr. Kushalnagar impressed the audience of computing students with a call to include people with disabilities by introducing the popular refrain “nothing without us.”

Drs. Stacy Branham, Sheryl Burgstahler, and Raja Kushalnagar hosted the AccessComputing Community Meetup immediately after the workshop’s conclusion. Two dozen attendees joined to discuss �������������dz���ܳپ��Բ�’s mission, resources, and ways to get involved. Participants took turns asking questions about the experiences of AccessComputing members and alumni, and they requested help filling out the application to join.