 Hello, my name is Ayaka Yoshimizu. Today I'm speaking from the traditional ancestral and unceded lands of the Mosque, Squamish, and Tsleil-Wathuth First Nations. I am non-disabled, cis woman from East Asia, and speak Japanese as my first language. I have black straight hair up to my shoulders, and today I'm wearing an orange colored cardigan. I am an assistant professor of teaching in the Department of Asian Studies. So I have been working with Corin De Freitas, Shota Iwasaki, and Shaolin Oba to look into the current state of UBC's accessibility and think about what can be done to make the university more accessible. And part of our project involves conducting a university-wide survey about UBC's accessibility. So in this video, Corin and I will present key findings from the survey. So first, let me introduce Corin De Freitas. Thank you so much. My name is Corin De Freitas. I'm a PhD candidate in geography at UBC, and I've been working on the accessibility and support for disabled instructors project. I am a white trans man who identifies as crisp or disabled. I have short brown hair, light eyes, tortoise shell glasses, a plaid colored shirt, and the mustard colored cardigan, and I'm kicking it back to Ayako. So Corin and I will present some of the key findings from the survey that we conducted in March 2021. The survey sought input from disabled instructors at UBC about the university's accessibility and support, and this survey was an outcome of a larger project which was funded by UBC's Equity and Inclusion Office. So aside from this survey, we also consulted with six disabled instructors at UBC to hear about challenges they experience in the everyday context of teaching and working as well as suggestions for best practices. We also produced an annotated bibliography that includes a list of literature that discuss teaching and learning with disabilities and illnesses in higher education. And lastly, we facilitated the workshop called What Would an Accessible University Look Like? Perspectives of Disabled Instructors at UBC as part of CTLT Winter Institute in December 2021. And during the workshop, we had five panelists sharing their experiences of teaching and working at UBC as disabled instructors. So all these materials, including the recording of the workshop, are available upon request. So if you are interested, please contact us by email and our contact information will be provided at the end of the presentation. So this survey was again conducted in March 2021. We received 44 ballot responses from those who identified themselves as disabled instructors at UBC. And areas of inquiry included questions around who UBC's disabled instructors are in terms of the types of disabilities people have and also their ranks at UBC. There were a couple of questions about disclosure, including questions about to whom people have disclosed their disabilities and issues related to disclosure. There were some questions about challenges in the context of teaching, particularly around how disabilities impact their teaching and other areas of work. There were questions about instructional support, whether people have sought instructional support from university, where they get support from, how they assess the levels of accessibility, availability, adequacy, and quality of support. And finally, there were some questions about professional development of support, again provided by UBC. So this graph shows the distribution of our respondents by rank. So the darkest bars, the three bars on the left are full professors. So that includes those in research stream, educational leadership stream, and also clinical professor. And in total, we had nine through professors. And likewise, when we combine different streams together, we had nine associate professors, nine assistant professors. And we also had quite a few instructors who teach under more precarious conditions, so including adjunct professor, lecturer, many sessionals, and graduate student TAs and RA. Now this graph shows the responses to the question, how would you characterize your conditions or impairments? And this was an open-ended question with a list of suggested answer options. And respondents reported a variety of disabilities and core in group similar responses together. And one important point to mention here is that 32 out of 44 respondents, so 73% of respondents indicated that they are multiply disabled or they experienced a condition or impairment with multiple impacts. And among those disabilities and conditions, the most frequently reported was pain. So 43% of people reported it, which is followed by mental, psychological, or mood-dedicated, 41%. Energy levels, sleep, fatigue, 34%. Mobility, dexterity, physical movement, sensation, and balance, 32%. Learning, cognition, and or memory, 27%. Neurotype, including ASD and unspecified neurotype, 20%. Sensory, 14%. Vision, 9%. Digestion and elimination, 9%. Communication, 5%. Hearing, 5%. Cancer, 2%. Unspecified, clinical illness, 2%. Immune compromise, 2%. Limb difference, 2%. And finally, environmental, 2%. This graph shows the responses to the question, have you disclosed your disability status to any of the following? And this was a multiple answers question. Very small number of respondents answered, I am perceived as disabled without needing to disclose. Six people answered, I have not disclosed my disability to anyone at UBC. And while the number is not too large, it is not worthy that those self-identified disabled instructors have not disclosed about their disability to anybody at work. 10 people disclosed to admin entities, 19 people disclosed to students, 20 people disclosed to offices such as HR and Center for Accessibility, and 25%, sorry, 20 people, 25 people, sorry, disclosed to departmental leadership, and 30 people disclosed to colleagues. And in the next slide, Corinne will share what came up in an open-ended question which describes concerns and challenges of disclosure. Thank you so much. So we also gave folks a chance to respond more in depth to our questions about disclosure, and I've collected some of the major themes as well as relevant quotes from respondents. So first off, an accommodations based approach to disability creates pressure to disclose. And this means that disclosure is more than an individual choice or political decision or an act of trust. It's frequently a form of systemically coerced intimacy. So in order to secure accommodations, whether formal or informal, instructors must disclose intimate personal details. And even when the specifics are withheld, the existence of unrevealed personal circumstances is still disclosed. As the survey data shows, disclosure poses social and professional risks in the current climate. And this is supported by qualitative responses as well. Whenever respondents said, my early career experiences in the 2000s generally deterred me from disclosing disability, graduate advisors explicitly told me not to do so. Another said, my main concern with disclosing was perception of disability as a stigma of a problem or troubled employee. Another said, I did not disclose prior to tenure. And another said, I'm also hesitant to share this with colleagues in my discipline as I've shared other sensitive material based discrimination or been passed over for opportunities. Some of the themes from the qualitative data also include that disclosure is not total or comprehensive. So instructors may not disclose all of the ways in which a given condition affects them. And multiple disabled instructors may not disclose all of their conditions. A destruct instructor who is perceived as disabled without disclosing may also be disabled in ways that are not readily apparent. Disclosure is ongoing. So for a variety of reasons, disabled instructors may find that they need to continually disclose their disabilities to new people or disclose new aspects of dynamic or progressive disabilities. Disclosure is also interpersonally complex. So a disabled instructor may be out only with certain people and in certain contexts. And this might be because of relationships of trust or because the other person is disclosed to them first because of a position the other person holds such as department heads or HR or because circumstances compel disclosure. And lastly, disclosure is relevant for all disabled instructors, but it's not always relevant in the same ways. So for instance, instructors who, you know, recently acquired their disability or who have complex conditions may not have sufficient clarity on their health status to confidently disclose. Invisibly disabled instructors may find themselves having to disclose more often and may encounter skepticism when they disclose. They may also wind up caught between the negative repercussions of disclosing and the strain of being presumed to be non-disabled and therefore expected to operate without support. And meanwhile, an instructor who's perceived to be disabled without disclosing might find that people make incorrect assumptions about the nature of their condition and its impacts as well as their needs. We go to the next slide. Thank you. We also asked about how instructors' disabilities impact instruction and perhaps unsurprisingly the ways in which disability impacts teaching and other work-related tasks. It are incredibly varied. There are several reasons for this. These include the category of disability is itself incredibly varied and instructors an individual's disability may be variable and a disability can affect every area of a person's life. So for instance, some instructors found online options offered during the pandemic to be compatible with their needs and others found the opposite to be true. So in short, the most accessible option is always options. One major theme was how other areas of instructors' lives and well-being often suffer in order to keep up with the expected pace and structure of work. So one of our respondents said mostly it impacts other areas of life during intense times. Fatigue during work leaves little energy to family and personal life. And another respondent said the sheer amount of work is ridiculous when someone has cognitive disabilities. I can do an excellent job but it means I work seven days a week every week. Also the impact of disability. The impacts of disability are not exclusively negative. Disability can be a strength as well and some instructors mentioned they're better able to support students and colleagues. Disability can also transform what or how a person teaches for the better. So one respondent mentioned my anxiety makes it so that I go over student papers more carefully and more often than I would. When being evaluated, disabled instructors may find the disabilities rather than their instructional skills are scrutinized. So one of our respondents said that teaching evaluations are incredibly biased and often contain inappropriate comments from students about my gender and disability that impact both the written comments and the overall evaluation scores. I frequently encounter student comments and evaluations that if said in person will constitute bullying and harassment. And lastly, instructors find themselves navigating a hostile built environment which also impacts the ability to do one's job. So as one of our respondents said UBC is a radically ableist campus designed only for people who can walk or ride a bike back to you. Thank you Ayaka speaking. So this graph shows the responses to the question how confident are you in identifying necessary supports to enable your work? The key finding here is that while 13% answered very confident and 31% somewhat confident, many disabled instructors are not necessarily confident about identifying what supports enable their work effectively. So here almost one third or 28% of the respondents answered they are not confident. So the lesson here is that accessibility needs to be understood as an ongoing iterative process that provides instructors with options and gives them the space and time to figure out what approaches work best for them. And while many instructors are confident that they can identify the support to enable their job, the question of whether those supports are actually available, is the accessible adequate and high enough quality to meet instructors needs is another matter as we will show you soon. So the question is in the context of disability, do you currently use any disability related instructional supports? Of the 41 respondents, 12 respondents, so 29% of respondents answered, yes, I require and use disability related instructional supports. However, the rest of the people, so 71% answered, no. And if we look at this closely, 7% answered, no, I require and have pursued disability related instructional support but have not been able to access them. 39% answered, no, I require disability related instructional supports but have not pursued them. And these two combined, almost half of the respondents require instructional supports but have not been able to access or pursue them. And when we look at the breakdown further, the data indicates that the higher the rank is, the more likely the disabled instructors have pursued or used supports. But those who answered, no, are overly presented by graduate student TAs. So there is a correlation between the rank and whether people have been able to use or pursued UBC provided supports. So here the question is which of UBC provided instructional supports do you currently use? So again, the majority of the respondents answered they do not currently use any UBC provided supports. So the following UBC supports are used by a small number of respondents. So out of 39 people, seven people use schedule modification, five people use workload modifications, four TA arrangements, three classroom specifications, three deserved parking, two office specification, two assistive technology, and finally two course assignment and selection. Here the question is how would you rate the availability of disability related instructional supports at UBC? As you can see, only 10% says readily available, 35% says somewhat available, but the majority answered somewhat or totally unavailable. So 45% of respondents said somewhat unavailable and 10% said totally unavailable. This question asks the accessibility of supports at UBC and again, the majority feel the supports are somewhat or very difficult to access. So 29% of respondents also somewhat difficult to access, 38% very difficult to access. Only 33% also somewhat easy to access, but please note that nobody answered very easy to access. This question asks about the adequacy of supports at UBC. Again, the majority feel the supports are somewhat or totally inadequate to meet their needs. So only 10% feel fully adequate to meet my needs, 32% answered somewhat adequate to meet my needs, 37% answered somewhat inadequate to meet my needs, and 21% totally inadequate to meet my needs. This question asks about the quality of supports at UBC. The number of people who answered this question is particularly small. So only 16 people answered, and that's because most of the survey respondents currently do not use supports provided by UBC and are not able to answer this question. But among those who use UBC supports, 19% answered these are excellent quality, 90% another 90% good quality, another 90% answered okay quality, and 44% answered the poor quality. And I like to note that other data from the survey show that many disabled instructors are spending additional labor time and money to enable their work. And this is to compensate the poor accessibility availability, adequacy and quality of supports currently provided by UBC. And all of those extra labor is paid at the cost of disabled instructors professional development and personal well being. This is Corinne once again, one of the central themes to emerge from the qualitative data and consultations is that there is currently a patchwork approach to disability supports across the university. And the pathways for accessing supports as well as the type of supports available are opaque and vary depending on units. Disabled instructors rely on a mix of formal and informal supports tending more towards informal support at the department level or privately arranged supports. Because accommodation occurs mostly at the department level of practice, disabled instructors are particularly vulnerable to interdepartmental politics and changes in departmental leadership. When support is not worth coming, the burden falls to instructors themselves rather than the university where the responsibility actually lies. And this is also supported in data that I presented on the amount of time and money instructors spend to compensate for lack of supports. So respondents told us supports are incredibly hard to access and frequently change with department leadership. I often have to renegotiate accommodations and resupply documentation every year. The process and pathways for accessing accommodations varies with departments and is opaque. What accommodations are even possible is unclear and often very difficult to negotiate and implement taking months or even taking months or even more than a year to put in place and then challenged each semester. Another response said much depends upon the head of unit, the head of our unit at the moment is a warm, empathetic, responsible person. If she were not, things might not be going so well for me. It would be good to see a system that would work well for disabled people no matter who the head of unit is. I used to have an informal arrangement with my department about scheduling but the current administration stopped respecting that arrangement so I had to go to HR and officialize my accommodation. Next slide please. Related issue is that instructors' needs are not being consistently and impartially accommodated within and across units so our survey data suggests that instructors who are able to access adequate supports of sufficient quality in a timely manner are overwhelming tenured faculty. Meanwhile, teaching assistants, research assistants, adjuncts and sessionals are far more likely to avoid seeking supports and rate their availability, accessibility, adequacy, quality and timeline for delivery as poor. Rather troublingly this suggests that the university is not actually accommodating disability but institutional power. Another concerning hint of a trend to emerge in the data is that perceived gender also strongly correlates with whether instructors are able to access adequate supports of sufficient quality with men having greater access to and a higher opinion of disability supports. So this suggests that the university may not be accommodating disability but rather social power and in further surveys it would be important to include demographic questions to facilitate a more intersectional analysis. Both of these things have huge ramifications for the professional development of disabled instructors. They suggest that whatever pipeline may exist isn't just leaky but blocked. The purpose of support should be to help a person excel in their position and not merely to keep their head above water. And yet we heard that instructors have been required to take a leave, fail or otherwise prove their need before being able to access supports. So as one of our respondents said, I have been fortunate not to have any significant flare-ups or serious complications since arriving at UC. I do believe that if I had I would not be supported and would be forced to take a leave of absence. All of the issues highlighted in this section are part of a larger system of academic ableism and inaccessibility that disproportionately impacts disabled instructors and interferes with work and well-being. So as one of our respondents said, my disability is not always present in terms of clear or distinct physical symptoms. However, the emotional and bodily toll adds up in the academic setting. And lastly, it's important to note that the supports that are or ought to be provided by the university are part of a much larger toolbox strategies and skills that disabled instructors employ. So as one of our respondents said, I have many strategies I always have needed to strategize around my learning teaching needs. The context is always slightly different depending on course, class, set of workload and inclusion of TAs. Unfortunately, I have had to learn how to self-accommodate. So you can see that disability is a source of creativity and knowledge of disabled instructors are not asking the university to do our work for us, but rather that you're saying that the university owes it to disabled instructors to pull its weight instead of offloading costs and labor onto disabled instructors. That's one moment while I get caught up on my slides. Okay, so based on our survey and consultations, a few things stand out with respect to professional development as well. First, there's currently very little professional development for disabled instructors at UBC, which is what motivated this work. Our survey confirmed that disabled instructors are generally pretty isolated and overextended. One of the few spaces that does exist for disabled instructors and staff is the disability affinity group. Although the core mission of the group isn't professional development per se, we were lucky to be joined for the panel portion of the workshop that we gave by Jennifer Gagnan, who founded Disability Affinity Group. There is also not much awareness or acknowledgement of what might be called a leaky pipeline, but as I mentioned is more accurately blocked pipeline to faculty positions. If it's professionally dangerous for graduate students and non-tenured instructors to disclose disability through supports, we can't really hope for a functioning professional development strategy for disabled instructors, so the university needs to stand behind all disabled members of the UBC community regardless of rank. Likewise, professional development needs to attend to the power-laden landscape of access and accommodations, and this is something that this quote on the screen speaks to. This respondent said, precarious employment, inconsistent access to extended medical benefits, lack of access to avenues for promotion and advancement, and inability to safely access medical leave or work with accommodations without jeopardizing contract renewals all add to the difficulties and insecurities of being a disabled contract faculty member at UBC. And lastly, promoting professional development of disabled instructors needs to be the responsibility of the university. Work like this often falls to disabled instructors who are already expected to do more with less than their non-disabled colleagues, so the university needs to provide administrative, financial, and material supports for this work. Okay, so Ayaka speaking, to summarize our key findings, while accommodation-based approach to disability requires disclosure of disabilities, disclosing disabilities remain challenging in the context of teaching or working for a variety of the reasons as coined detailed earlier. In terms of the supports, I'd like to remind you that the majority of disabled instructors, at least the respondents in this survey do not currently use instructional supports provided by UBC, and among those who currently use or pursued UBC supports, the majority feel these supports are unavailable, difficult to access, inadequate to meet their needs, and poor quality. In this survey and consultation, respondents also noted that access to support is contingent on the current departmental leadership, and therefore, accessibility of support is precarious and conditional rather than permanent and guaranteed. And finally, UBC does not adequately provide professional development of programs and resources for disabled instructors. This is Corinne once again, so based on our findings, we have some preliminary recommendations. First, we need to normalize discussions of disability, assume the presence of disabled instructors, and plan for accessibility. University cannot make strides in professional development of disabled instructors if disability remains a taboo subject. Disability is a core part of the lives and experiences of many instructors, and the university needs to therefore assume the presence of disabled instructors and not treat us and our needs as unexpected or an exception. Finally, this means planning for accessibility. Disabled instructors are part of the university community, so it's time to stop approaching disability as an afterthought. Second, the university needs to promote available supports and resources for disabled instructors. It's not clear what supports are even available to disabled instructors, and this is a particular issue for instructors who may not know what supports would be most helpful to them. Necessary supports vary depending on the nature of a person's disability, but the data show that the most popular supports instructors currently use are work with modifications, TA arrangements, scheduling modifications. Instructors also indicated that if available, they would like excessively structured disability teaching positions followed by a mentoring program, informational resources, and a centralized hub of institutional support. Third, the university must create barrier-free, individualized, centrally funded instructional supports. The university needs to start from the place of planning for accessibility, but accommodation in some form will always have a play, and securing appropriate accommodations for a person's individual needs must be a barrier-free process and not dependent on departmental budgets. Fourth, the university needs to clearly define institutional responsibilities and pathways and hold all levels accountable for legal obligations around accommodation. The current process for securing formal supports is fragmented, disorganized, opaque, and labor-intensive. The process for securing informal departmental level supports relies on goodwill, interpersonal politics, and departmental budgets. Neither option serves the needs of disabled instructors or delivers on the university's legal responsibilities. And lastly, it's lonely out there, and isolation doesn't support disabled instructors' well-being or our collective interests. So the university needs to create mentorship and networking opportunities among disabled instructors, and importantly, ensure that this doesn't become another item on the to-do list of already extended disabled, excuse me, of already overextended disabled instructors. So this means devoting, funding, and administrative support to professional development programming. Okay, thank you very much for watching or listening to our presentation. If you have any questions or are interested in the materials we produced through our project, please feel free to contact us at emails provided here. Thank you.