 Hello, everyone. Welcome to the final event in the National Academy of Science, Engineering, Medicine, Conversation Series on Accessibility and Inclusion in STEM. I'm Dr. Rory Cooper, and I am the chair of our planning committee. And it's been a pleasure working with everyone. And I'm looking look forward to our follow up work. This is the latest conversation, probably the last conversation of our five separate conversation series, which have all been pre recorded and are available on the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine website. So please take a look at them if you haven't got a chance to see them in advance. We hope that you were able to see today's pre recorded keynote lectures by the speakers who are attending today and will be able to have a follow up conversation live with our panelists. Our goal in this event is to offer the opportunity for active discussion among the speakers, panelists and those listening in via Slido. For those of you via Slido, you can ask questions in the Q&A section of the website. And we will consolidate your questions and try to bring them into the discussion. I'd like to introduce each of our planning committee members who are present today. First, Dr. Carolyn Solomon, Dr. Julian Brinkley, Dr. Emily Ackerman and Dr. Cheryl Burgstahler. Thanks you all of you for your hard work thus far and your contributions to this committee but more importantly to your contributions to making science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine more accessible for people with disabilities and more inclusive. At this point, I'd like to turn over today's panel about mentoring and career paths to Dr. Cheryl Burgstahler and Dr. Emily Ackerman will be moderators for today's discussion on accessibility inclusion and STEM in STEM. So thank you very much. Hello, this is Cheryl Burgstahler. Welcome to our program today. Before we dive into our conversation with our panelists and speakers, I want to provide an opportunity for our speakers to give a brief overview of the highlights of their pre-recorded talks. We hope that those of you who are attending this session today have the opportunity to view these pre-recorded presentations but before this conversation, but be sure that you have a chance to watch them afterwards because they are recorded and they are on the website. We have two keynote speakers for this conversation. First, I'd like to call upon Dr. Ashley Shaw, associate professor in the Department of Science, Technology and Society at Virginia Technology University. Thank you so much and thank you to the committee here and the National Academies and for those tuning in right now. I'm excited to have this conversation. A lot of what I had to say was about accommodations. Accommodations, and this might be surprising, don't make your workplaces more accessible. Accommodations are ways to get around making your workplaces more accessible. They avoid making structural changes that would allow more people to be present without the extra work that accommodations take. And often accommodations take considerable work on the part of disabled people to be a part of the places that they are asking for accommodations from. To be included always means this contingency upon being allowed to be included, being believed about your disability and having the right sort of documentation and the right sort of supports. It's a huge time sink on the part of people across their career spans. And it works in exclusionary ways. One of the things that I really enjoyed hearing reflections of a year ago at the ADA at 30 years celebrations, particularly in the work of ADA 30 in color, was to hear about how the main beneficiaries of the Americans with Disabilities Act have been white and already privileged disabled people. People who could sue, people who can get documentation, people who have other advantages structurally that let them take advantage of the law in ways that they might be able to gain equal access. But if we're interested in making science accessible and inclusive, this means recognizing structural barriers of all sorts and remediating them. When it comes to disability, this can mean changes to physical infrastructure. This is what we usually think about in removing barriers and making sure restrooms are accessible and these sorts of things. But we can also talk about this in terms of flexibility with regard to timing pathways, with regard to how we view professional exams, allowing multiple pathways in terms of doing things, multiple ways of participating in career and networking that are often exclusive to able-bodied people who can travel and thinking about flexibility in the arrangement of work and its timing. And also part of this means trusting disabled people. In fact, trusting your people, you don't need them to come out as disabled. When it comes to setting up workplaces and work situations that work best for them, believing them about how they need things structured so that they can best flourish in the work that you want them to participate in too. Sometimes I think we have weird ideas about rigor and physical vitality that play into unnecessarily structured things that don't actually get to good science. But we artificially think that certain barriers are musts for people to get into our fields and ways that make things exclusive, that makes things harder for all sorts of people. And this means, you know, when we talk about making things more accessible for a wider variety of people, having flexibility, this serves wider communities too. If we're interested in accessing inclusion on a larger scale, recognizing that people who can't navigate some of our structures will be people who have families with small kids or nontraditional structures or other work-life balance issues. When we make things more accessible for disabled people, when we remove structural barriers, it actually means a lot more people can participate and enter the world we want them to, to make science more diverse in general. So those are some of my thoughts, some of which I included in the video ahead of time. And I'll turn things over to JR. Thank you so much. Well, thank you very much, Ashley. Those of you who haven't seen the video will definitely want to see it now because she expands on these ideas. Great ideas about accommodations. Sometimes people think that their accommodation is just a fix to everything and it's just a retrofit and doesn't always work that well, doesn't necessarily provide equity. So thanks again, and I'd like to now introduce our second keynote speaker, Dr. Harding, who is a faculty member at the College of Business within the Management Department at Florida State University. Well, thank you so much. And thank you, Ashley. Thank you National Academy of Science, Engineering, and Medicine for the invitation for your leadership role and elevating and highlighting employment, employment in the sciences. The literature states there are still attitudinal physical programmatic communication barriers, impeding the recruitment, the onboarding, the retention, and promotion of persons with disabilities in the workforce. These impediments are interfering from the contributions and thriving within STEM and other workplaces. I chose to couch my remarks kind of in an advocacy narrative framework in hopes of educating, entertaining, and challenging the listening audience to take a leadership role in developing the talent of the persons with disabilities community. It's my belief that PWDs and institutions by red share a common bond. They like to solve problems. They have a track record of solving problems. And to solve this workforce problem, we need to assemble the inclusion puzzle pieces together in a way that empowers individuals to contribute to their highest level possible. Let's make it agile, nimble, and flexible. Let's promote choice and opportunity without burdening the individual with too many unnecessary processes or hurdles to overcome. Harnessing this untapped talent found within our community will diversify our workforce, make our institutions stronger, and ultimately advance innovation and competition and competitiveness. These collaborations off and on campus will better reflect society as a whole. This is the one population that is inclusive. People forgot everybody has an equal opportunity to join the community of persons with disabilities. We need to better align our talents and use our universities to tear down that wall of conscious and unconscious discrimination. The number of individuals having the freedom to choose has evolved over time, just like our universities have involved. The data says that people with disabilities are still marginalized regarding their opportunities. We have a higher unemployment, right? A lower labor participation rates and lower employment population ratios. In America, individuals with all abilities have their choice to change their interests and professions at any time. The Americans with Disabilities Act, almost 32 years old now, starts with employment. We're not locked into a role or a career. We have that freedom to change our interests. This means full and equal access. higher ed is historically trained the next generation. Right? Those early days was an exclusive club just for gentlemen to take their place in society. But now with the help of community colleges, colleges and tier one universities, we have many different individuals building our professions to sustain and maintain our society. If we think about our history, coming out of the civil war, right, we needed to rebuild the country to expand opportunities to fulfill that manifest destiny. We needed to create unique opportunities for some of our black and brown brothers and sisters who were previously marginalized under discrimination laws and policies. The two land grants permanently and profoundly shifted the focus of science, particularly science, to meet the needs of that growing country and our diverse folks. The GI Bill changed the middle class. It then also created opportunities for people with disabilities to enter the University of Illinois for the first time and the courage people the regions had to make that happen. There was Ed Roberts over there on California on the West Coast and the Rolling Fogs resulting in the rehab act. Right? An incredible example of art access and functional accessibility is built into his building. And if no one has been there that is super cool entry point there. Our post secondary institutions have been great change agents for the individual, for the community of the country. Our scientific method is proven to be the best means of articulating the problem, identifying those issues, testing our hypothesis and disseminating best practices. But what else are we doing to advance inclusion? What are you as individual leaders in your institutions doing? Are you building a pipeline of talent that includes persons with disabilities? Are you communicating inclusive practices? Are you utilizing accessible technology like we are today that is inclusive? How about submitting your research articles in an accessible format? Is the classroom sharing materials that everyone can use? Are you exceeding the minimum standard for your new buildings, your new labs and your new classrooms? Finally, are you measuring your own small impact? Telling this story. Let's lead by example. Remember the number of persons with disabilities matriculating in college is only increasing. We're about twelve point five percent of the population right now. We can and do we can and must do better with the recruitment, with the opportunities, the development and the assimilation of persons with disabilities. Let's use our principles of science to advance workforce inclusion. Let's be unafraid to build us into our facilities, our grants, our labs, our internships and our classrooms, rather than trying to fit us back in after the fact into that mosaic of the American life. Let's be the solution, not the problem. Let's educate, let's empower and let's employ. Thank you. All right. This is Emily Ackerman. Thank you so much for that, J.R. And I'd now like to introduce the rest of our panelists that will join us for structured kind of Q and A conversation with Dr. Xu and Dr. Harding today. We are joined by Dr. Desi Shanahan, who is technically in applied AI at Pelleturon and Dr. Richard Boyce, who is an associate professor in the Department of Biomedical Informatics at the University of Pittsburgh. So welcome to our conversation, Jesse and Rich as well. OK, so we can kick off our conversation with some structured questions for our panelists. And for those of you that are listening to the webcast via Slido, you can add your questions and thoughts that you have into the Q and A. And we're going to take those in and spend the last half an hour asking those questions for you. So I'm going to share, would you like to take the first question? Oh, I'm sorry. You're right. I'm on it. Oh, no, it's to ask it. OK. OK, I'm seeing the first question. OK, in your space, what would would a 100 percent accessible accessible space look like? Thinking about the physical workspace, but also other aspects of work, conferences, travel, teaching, interviews, promotions, etc. So a 100 percent accessible world, what would that look like? Just imagine. Yeah, I guess I can kick us off. So I think it really depends, at least for me, on whether I'm thinking about an academic space or the space that I currently occupy in industry, because a lot of my experience is in academia. When I try to think about a 100 percent accessible space, honestly, I I find that I believe it's truly more challenging in academia because some of the fundamental requirements that we've kind of built the institution on and some of our preconceived notions around what success and what intelligence look like, I think are inherently ableist when you start to really deconstruct them. And so it goes beyond ramps and accommodations. And I mean, these are these are things that do help. But I would say that the the far more challenging work to get to achieve that 100 percent accessibility in academia would require some uncomfortable conversations challenging some of those fundamental notions about what is a science? What does it mean to be a successful scientist? Was what does it mean to be a successful academic? Because some of those requirements are by definition exclusionary. And so necessarily to pursue a 100 percent accessible space, they would have to be changed. And I think that's that makes the the challenge of approaching accessibility in academia a little bit greater, whereas one of the advantages of industry is it's changing at a far more rapid pace. Every startup is a chance to do it better to do it differently. Every company could try something different. And this is something that I personally have experienced is that I myself could not find success in academia due to some of this inherent ableism. But I have found a large degree of success in industry simply because there is a flexibility there and in a ability to find companies sometimes younger, sometimes not, that are willing to change some of those preconceived notions. But that's yeah, I don't think I fully gave you a lot of specifics and just simply said it's really hard. But those are some of my initial thoughts, at least. I guess I'll chime in. And I think that this is a question that really requires perspective, the perspective of an individual who maybe requires certain specific accommodations for a hundred percent accessibility. So to say, well, what a hundred percent accessible space look like, I think that I don't have the eyes of every person who is, you know, facing some certain kinds of barriers. And I think it's it's going to be one of those things where we we learn and we try to be helpful and we try to make improvements. And as Jesse said, some of these things are much more structural, much more difficult to address than others. So physical environment might be a little easier to address, but, you know, changing certain attitudes that are very ableist and really in sort of almost insidious ways can really affect people with, you know, certain needs. I'm thinking of the conversation we had a little while ago about people who have hidden disabilities or disabilities that aren't so obvious, you know, those sorts of things are probably going to take a lot more time to address. My experience is more focused at the present time on trying to help our program and biomedical informatics be a lot more accessible, welcoming and supportive of deaf scientists, deaf students, myself and not deaf, but I have a connection to the deaf community through a daughter who is nonverbal and who's received tremendous help and the blessing of language through the deaf community. And what I've learned and I passed this question on to some of the people who I collaborate with, one of them I passed it on to is a student who I've worked with for a couple of years named Tobias and Tobias allowed me to share the name and Tobias said that there's a variety of accessible things in the physical workspace that have to do with visual friendliness. For example, the colors of walls should be relatively dull, match the floor's tone. This would help to to avoid straining the eyes and there should be no objects that block people's view, making sure seating is set up in a way that allows people to sign and communicate with each other without struggling or straining their necks. And another colleague of mine said something that is has been worked out really well, which is this concept of deaf space. And I know we have on the panel, Dr. Solomon, who actually works at a Gallaudet who probably knows this backwards and forwards. But these are all things that are new to me, right? And so in the in the in in our field, because there's been such little thought put into these things, we're learning as we go along. And so I feel again, back to the question and 100 percent accessible space is really dependent on the person and the individual. But there's a lot of things that we might have to do with our attitudes and flexibility that will help accomplish that as needed. Great points. Other comments on this? Yeah, I really appreciate these responses from Jesse and Rich. These are, you know, two different ends of things. And I love the deaf space movement, too, in articulating like deaf expertise about design, right? Believing people when they say, here are the things that work best for us. I think about going to different disability studies conference events and people who can move around the furniture are about to move around the furniture, right? So so it means that often I get enlisted with other people to move things so that we're in a semicircle or circle so that people can lip read if they need to. If we have an ASL interpreter knowing where they're located and making sure they're visible, but then also thinking about other types of disability as part of this making room between things, people have mobility aids, allowing people to be in ways that are comfortable, which is to say sometimes as society for disability studies events, people lay on the floor during talks, right? If you are fatigued or if your body is hurting from the way that you have been forced to sit in hostile furniture, which is just a whole thing we could talk about, you know, that being able to keep your body in a space even when your body is in a way that might be read as unprofessional in other contexts, right? So much of our ideas and this gets to what Jesse was talking about, our ideas about professionalism, particularly in academic contexts are very structured and sort of what they are is not always clear. So particularly if you're neurodivergent in any way reading the context clues for how you are supposed to behave can be a barrier. So having things laid out makes sense, but then also just allowing for flexibility that you could be many ways is really important. You know, when I was thinking about this question, because this is one we were fed ahead of time, thank you for that organizers, start on something we could think about. You know, I thought about it in terms of me. What does it mean for some place to be 100% accessible for me? And the thing is it's not going to be the same, right? There are times at which places are accessible for me. And later on, they won't be. Right? When we think about people who have migraines, right? When we think about people with food allergies, when we think about people with chemical sensitivities, you know, when we think about variations in terms of pain and mobility, right? I don't always use the same mobility aid. I'm an amputee, and so I have so many more choices than the rest of you. I could use forearm crutches. I could use a wheelchair. I could use a prosthetic leg. I could use, if I have any, one of those cute little knee scooters, like, options, right? And depending on what I'm driving on a particular day, like, sometimes things are physically accessible to me when they're not at other times. So so I think building in this flexibility, having multiple seating options when seats become hostile things for us, you know, and making what's happening clear, you know, are really important. Things I also think about things like ASAN communication badges that people need to watch the room before they interact or don't want that direct approach when it comes to networking spaces. There's just a lot of facets. But it's not always going to be the same for everyone, something that's accessible one day might not be another if we don't have the right attitude about it. So flexibility is one of the keys. Any other comments on this? I'd like to finish up if we could on this a lot of questions. And 100%, right? 100% for whom? Right. And when and why? All right. And the choice issue, the empowerment. To me, I think it might start a little bit with when I roll into the classroom that I'm not looked at as like some kind of surprise, some kind of, I don't know, almost E.T. at being down and it will take over this particular course because 80% of the population has not had the privilege or the opportunity to learn from us or to interact with us. And then the whole component of being competitive in terms of our traveling or our conferences or our publication, how long it actually takes to write up a document or if you're using different technologies. I know we're thinking of building a new space and somebody said, well, I want to put you right next to your classroom so you only have to cross the hall to get there. And I was like, well, that's kind of nice. But at the same time, that could be considered condescending. Why can't I be down the hallway? Or better yet, I would prefer to be around a space that's more quiet so I could use my speech to text technology and not get interrupted from ambient noise in the hallways. So, no, I would hope that our planners who are listening to us for our next conference are thinking about a hotel with sufficient number of accessible rooms that exceed the minimum count. OK, and then there's airport transportation that meet a variety of needs and remove some of these barriers so we're not then spending a week or two really up our time trying to navigate around an inaccessible event and that all activities we do. And so therefore in academia as we're building our new teaching and learning and lab environments, let's exceed those standards so that we're not having to force accommodations on the folks to have a workaround. Let's just simply build a universally accessible space. So we've got a long way to go, but I'm going to be positive and I think it's a supportive community and maybe very supportive community. And one that I sought to enter because work with government and at the state, local and federal levels work, which was some of my background before also had its procedures, its bucket items, its five people to sign off on it. So let's empower department chairs and deans to be able to make decisions quickly, nimbly and flexibly. Great. Well, ending this question about 100% perfectly accessible space, we probably can never achieve the 100% for everyone. But what I'm hearing here is ideas that fit into two categories. One is what can we build into our environments from the get-go, born accessible? A person with a disability shouldn't have to ask for whether the building they're going to to give a presentation is physically accessible. That should be built into the environment. Similarly, if someone goes to your website, they shouldn't have to ask to have things reformatted because it doesn't work with their screen reader. There are some best practices that are known to us. And so this should be applied and we can find them out on the internet. They're guidelines for making a conference more inclusive and so forth. And then there are the accommodations. We will always have a need for some accommodations, but they should be easy to ask for and easily delivered, which is not always the case. But too often groups think about accommodations first like the only approach rather than building a reasonably accessible environment, maybe not for everybody, but has some basic things considered that were brought up by our speakers. So thank you so much. And Emily is going to guide us through the next question. Yeah, great. So the next question has to do with burdens that maybe are particular to disabled people in science careers. So we want to talk about the policies that maybe are economic, financial, maybe from grant institutions that are present barriers to success across the career pathway. So for example, one that's very relevant to me is I pay out of pocket for personal care just to get to my job every day. And I paid for that out of pocket as a graduate student. I pay for it on my postdoc salary because I make too much for government assistance. So this is a cost that I incur every day. I especially incur it to go to conferences and things where I need to bring someone with me and it's a whole process. So that's just one example. But yeah, I'm interested to hear what you all see as the present barriers kind of on the policy side that maybe we can work to change. Well, I'll jump in and I'll echo Emily's perspective. There are real disincentives. Okay, it's almost perverse of our public policy issue. You have to be poor. You have to be financially indigent, right? Which is separate from your disability issue, right? In order to receive some subsidies or some supports that would help eliminate this challenge. And so this whole economic and financial and self-sufficiency, the challenge Emily is raising high as a quad and are really hundreds of thousands of others is that personal and we've made this choice to work to contribute and so forth. And there as a result of that choice, we're not able to save as much. We're not able to prepare for that future of our retirement lifestyle that perhaps we would like to earn. And often our institutions have not considered their policies and procedures have no element for that, except for when you travel on official job duties, right? And so maybe that's six days out of the year. Maybe that's 10 days out of the year. Maybe that's 15 depending upon how many conferences you're going to, but that's an awful lot of other days. And so I would say our institutions of higher ed or colleges of business are med schools, right? Fighting for some substantive policy change and to bring it really relevant, President Obama's leadership, we had the ABLE Act, right? To help individuals earn money and not be penalized for it. But they kept it at $100,000 and it only applies to individuals who acquired their disability prior to age 26. Well, hello, does anybody else have a cap on how much money they can save and earn and apply? No, right? And then what do you mean? It only counts for people who acquired their disability before 26. I mean, if you're a family and got three kids and you then had a traumatic injury at 45, really the implication is far more significant than in my case when I was a 17 year old knucklehead, okay? Who didn't have additional responsibilities. So I would say these are real economic and financial challenges or how about your home? Your accessible shower, right? The Fair Housing Act does not require the apartment complex to put in a shower. So that expenses then bored again by the individual with a disability. And you would want to be close to campus or relegate it to living on campus, right? And then when you're a postdoc, that's not really the right place for you to be. So those things all contribute to the pathway challenge. And so couldn't we work into our grants, into our stipends to ensure that we have adequate policies and procedures that might mitigate some of these challenges and do it perhaps maybe on the merit base that you earn it. So just to add on to that, I want to kind of come back to this idea that actually Ashley brought up earlier, which was the idea of kind of many ways of existing in a space. And I want to expand on that because I think that when you're looking at policies and you're evaluating them, you have to ask yourself, right? What is the goal? I would love to believe that the goal of our academic system in STEM is to produce the best scientists and the best scientific research. So we have to ask ourselves, are our policies truly in support of that? Or are they about creating the appearance of what we believe successful scientists look like? Because whether it's, I'm so glad everyone has brought up so far the financial burden because especially as a graduate student, that was brutal on top of all of the money I was spending for medications and doctor's appointments and everything else, it was below 25,000 a year, which is especially for, I was living in the most expensive state in America and that did not go very far. And no disabled students should be put in the position of choosing between food and medicine. But even moving beyond that, it was the policies that said a successful graduate student can never miss any of our mandatory three-hour seminars that just so happened to be at the same time you have physical therapy. So you must be unsuccessful. You have to take quantum mechanics at 8.30 in the morning and no, there's no other time to take it. It doesn't matter if you have a sleep disorder. You just, that's a successful scientist just does that. And these things pile on. One, to some of the audience, it might seem like, oh, an 8.30 AM class, get over it. But all of these different inaccessibilities, they stack and I come back again and again asking myself, is this truly about creating the best scientist or is it about, we have a preconceived notion of what academia ought to look like, what our students, our graduate students, our postdocs, what they ought to do, what their schedules should look like. And because we have all these preconceived notions, we're creating policies that are perpetuating the inaccessibility and ableism that is inherent in those ideas in the first place. And I recognize that this is, it requires a paradigm shift. So it's very hard to sit there and ask yourself, is this policy accessible? Is this inclusive to all students with disabilities? But really ask yourself, is this actually creating better scientists? Because I would, personally, I truly believe that most of the time the answer is no. And it's really getting at the appearance or the seeming of being a scientist because we have these notions of what that is. But Emily, I think you were jumping in there as well. I don't want to cut you off. No, I think you're absolutely right. I think we really cater to what a scientist has always looked like and upholding that vision, which isn't true, that's not what a scientist needs to look like. Yeah. Would anybody else like to chime in on this question? Just a couple of things that I thought of through this discussion, which is great and informative. I was thinking about some of the key career transition points, at least in an academic pathway. So I've heard discussions about the graduate school experience and the challenges there. I know that there's also, what do you do when you're looking for a job? Or a postdoctoral lab placement or you're looking for a faculty position or you're in an early career development stage and as associate director of a training program, it was eye-opening to me to realize, there's a lot of things that we would have to really work hard to obtain that people would really need. And that's part of the policy changes that need to happen. So our training program grants should already have very easy mechanisms. So for example, if someone who's completing a postdoc and starting to look for job opportunities requires, for example, interpreting and two interpreters to be available for those job talks and for lab visits and so forth, making sure that that funding is there and it's not a burden on the person to try and figure it out and also being able to communicate that to other people so that there's an open playing field for where the person can be placed. And I think with the NIH policy in some cases I've heard that that's true, like with the F grants but we're working on a T-15 proposal and another R-25 and I don't see that very clearly spelled out at that point. So that was one of the things that came to my mind is how do we ensure and preemptively lower those barriers to things that are gonna be super helpful and level the playing field so that all of the opportunities that a person could go for are gonna be there for them. I like that you mentioned these transition points because that actually raises yet another thing which is why do we have an expectation that people are going to constantly change institutions and move all the time? Because at least for me, setting up my care which is a rare condition requires finding a doctor that can actually treat it and setting up a team of specialists. This can take months. So if I'm having to move jobs every one to two years until theoretically achieving some mythical unicorn of a tenure track position, then it's necessitating a lot of burden moving away from your care systems, moving away from the support systems and trusted healthcare professionals that maybe it's taken years, if not decades to form those relationships and find the good doctors and you have to move away from them. And so I had hoped that a global pandemic would open our conception of needing to be present in person and help people realize that virtual presence is just as legitimate. But I still see this requirement that people must move constantly. And I think that's another policy that I think is very exclusionary to anyone with either financial hardships and or disabilities. I mean, I think Jesse is so right there. And I think about all the cheap things we could fix. So I get that there are huge issues around financing and the extra burden it costs disabled people to be able to get care, to move, to get the equipment, the things we need. But I think about just the social norms that are erected in our field. I remember having a meeting with one student at one point and I was interrupted and the student goes, I've had enough eye contact today. Would you mind if we don't? And then we looked in opposite directions and continued on our conversation about the academic thing we were both interested in and had a successful meeting. We didn't need to perform this weird thing we really like to do. At least neurotypical people are really into looking at people's eyeballs. That's unnecessary. I think about the ways like if you're wearing headphones that people interpret what you're doing. I think about like even Zoom camera norms. It's got so complained about when we had to pivot to teaching online in spring of 2020 and I don't know if people are there and worries about Zoom. Most of us have adjusted and most of us feel like being on camera all the time is actually not great if you're sitting through multiple hours of stuff each day. Our neurodivergent people maybe noticed it sooner that they didn't like to be gazed at all the time. But in fact, being gazed at for eight hours a day of work is actually something none of us like as it turns out. So I just think about just like the things that don't matter shouldn't matter. And it's a shame we make them matter so much. Yeah, that's an excellent point. It really makes it feel like we can all do something about you know, it's not just like I have to change the way my funding institution gives me money but it's like I can be receptive to turning my camera off and feeling okay about it. Like that's just as you know, we're making progress in the same way. So thank you all for that question. I'll hand it off. Before we leave that Amelie, I think we need to end on a positive stroke a little bit guys that in fact COVID has broadened the world of some leaders and some members of the community and that telework idea, right? That accommodation really was good for everybody and it was not a special privilege. And so I think there's room for hope and there's room for traction in realigning some of those expectations, policies, procedures and way to integrate us. Yeah, that's true. Very good point. Yeah, and I think there's a lot of room for optimism too because we've been down this path. There are quite a few women here, women scientists. I'm a little older generation than some of you and in my day in graduate school at the University of Washington in math and computer science it was typical, this was just a typical example but I came into a class of 60 students. I knew it was a graduate course in mathematics. I knew it was a difficult class and a faculty member who had a reputation of kind of liking to screen out people and so a lot of people dropped out. And I remember I was the only girl there, a woman there and at the 60 and when it was down to six at the end of the quarter, he says, wow, well, there are at least six of you left. And he looked at me in front of the whole group and he says, and I didn't expect one of them to be you. And it's like that happened to me all the time. Like you don't look like a mathematician or someone interested in computer science and that's the same now for people with disabilities when you think about it in some ways. So particularly what Dr. Harding was saying about that, you don't want it to be a surprise. And so if we really believe we want the best scientists, brightest and best with the most creative ideas and so forth, we can't afford to leave out any population but certainly people with disabilities and the more of you, those who have disabilities are out doing great stuff, the more that people at least get used to that aspect of it. But we have a long way to go certainly but I also am very optimistic. So let's go on to the next question. How would you want an anti-Abelist mentoring or management relationship to look? I mean, for me, when I think about what it means to be mentored, having someone who recognizes that there are multiple ways to do work is really important instead of thinking there's one linear path. And just recognizing the ableism all around us, right? I think a lot of people who aren't disabled maybe don't see all the ableism around us and even if you're one type of disabled, it doesn't mean you understand all the types of ways it is to be disabled. So having some sort of perspective, particularly on the extra labor it takes to be disabled because I feel like a lot of that is just very much covered up by accommodations processes which are necessarily secretive, right? You're not supposed to like bring everyone into your meeting to talk about your disability. That's a violation of a number of things that we would not want to violate. But it also really keeps us from organizing together and finding each other when we're always put into an individual process. So I really think about like having community as a really important facet of mentoring. So I learned from Emily Ackerman among other people in my disability community who I've been in touch with and sort of mentoring isn't always at one's institution when it comes to disabled mentorship but that sort of understanding and seeing the ableism. I often talk about this when I teach disability studies classes as seeing the marinade like ableism is like the sauce we're all marinated in and you have to like wipe off some of that marinade to actually see things more clearly. Like it's just the lens. Jesse's pointed this out in terms of like how we, like not just who we expect to come but like the sort of like facets of hidden disability that unless if you're part of a community you didn't know it was on you the whole time which is like a really crude way of putting it but I really when I think about what it is to be anti-ableist you have to know what's ableist and you have to see the ableism in yourself. A lot of us have internalized ableism and are working through it. A lot of us are ableist towards other types of disability and some of our communities are too. I mean, I'm an amputee and that means that sometimes people say, well at least my mind's not affected. And I think, well that's garbage. I have chemo brain. My mind is definitely affected. It's just not literally cut off but I like most of us are multiply disabled but that's sort of lateral ableism even within an internalized ableism. To be anti-ableist you have to know and it takes a little introspection there too. Well, I'll jump in here. I thank the introspection, the community and willingness to open up, to ask for and to receive help in a sense. To me, those were really some of the really heavy lifting as a young person with a disability. And it was because of my brethren at Wright State University and not hundreds of individuals who just went about being themselves, right? Who were going to be engineers, who were going to be writers, who were going to be CPAs. They just did their thing, right? And learning from them and understanding how better to remove those barriers is magnificent in that sense of community and being able to look at Ashley or Jess or Emily and we get it, right? But then I think our chairman, Dr. Cooper, he gives an extra kind of unconscious respect for the journey of the quadriplegic versus the journey of the para. While many of those challenges are similar, some of them were elevated. And so I think that's really beautiful. But at the same time, I've got a neighbor in the hallway upstairs and he's a little older, a little senior. He's a faculty tenure in the finance department, but he's just an incredible little gift who helps you navigate giving you those mentoring pieces, coaching you on your promotional materials. Did your package get right? Did you recruit the right faculty member to do the observation of your teaching, right? Because not every faculty letter comes with the same oomph as some of the other letters. And those little nuances of stripping that junk away, Ashley, so that our disability and the burden of overcoming it on a constant time period is exhausting. And I think people just acknowledging that that in itself as a journey would make a difference. Yeah, I keep coming back to the question being, not just what is accessible mentorship look like for you, but what explicitly anti-Aboist mentorship looks like. And that I think is a really a challenging thing to think about because I have plenty of answers because I have plenty of ideas about what accessible mentorship would look like. But for something to be explicitly anti-Aboist, I definitely think Ashley had the crux of it, which is they have to recognize what is Aboist first to be anti-Aboist. But then also it, I have found at least in my experience that a lot of the burden is on my shoulders to not only understand my own disabilities to an extent that perhaps I was not ready to, but to also understand the solutions and the fixes and all of the possible accommodations I might need. And then it's my job to go to the mentor and explain all of that. And I think for me anti-Aboist mentoring would, I'm not sure if there is a way to have this without having a mentor that perhaps shares similar disabilities to me, but to have that mentor already be informed somehow so that it's not my job to come in and sit down and educate every single time to sit down and say, okay, I need, I'm gonna have to give you the talk on hi, I have ADHD and what that means is that I'm not going to come and work, eight hours every single day. I'm going to work 14 hours and then none at all. And then four hours and then I'll be staring into space maybe for an hour. And then at the end, it averages out, but it's going to look very different than perhaps what you are asking me to do. And it might be weird hours. And to have that conversation over and over again, you gamble every single time with, is this mentor, manager, PI, whomever, is this person who is in a position of authority, are they going to respect this? Are they going to listen? And I think a truly anti-Aboist mentorship would one have that mentor be informed and be proactively looking for ways to make my particular relationship with them, whether it's a research or an industry job or they're my professor, making that particular environment less ableist, not just accessible, but less ableist. It would also, I think require, I've never had someone sit down and say, okay, what does success look like? What does that mean for you? What do you define success as? Every single manager, mentor, PI has come in with what they believe success is and has judged me and mentored me accordingly. Instead of asking what is a successful career mean for you? What are you aiming for? And allowing me to define that in a way that is accessible for me. So I think those are the two components that I would add on top of the marinade that Ashley mentioned. We're making, we're crafting a dish. I think not to torture the metaphor, but yeah, I thought that was a really, a very wonderful way of explaining it. So I'll just add those two things on top. Yeah, I super appreciate these comments and Ashley in particular, the marinade metaphor is a good one. And I have to admit, I've brought my ableist perspectives in certain ways and then maybe only recently realized I did. And fortunately, some of those gives us an opportunity to do better the next time. And it makes me think about one perspective here with this question, anti-ableist mentoring and management has a mentor. Am I listening really closely to my mentee? Am I seeing that person as having absolute dignity in themselves without meeting certain performance metrics that ableism imposes upon us? Like in our program, for example, in my mentoring career, it was laid down, you have to publish four times for authorship, or four papers a year or two of them, first author, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah. There was a list of quantitative measures and every faculty meeting, even now in my department, we hear a lot of numbers and we're compared to each other and they show it publicly as this sort of crowdway of reinforcing those counts and those numbers. How am I advocating? How am I gonna stand up against that for the person who I'm mentoring, who I know is an incredibly intelligent and brilliant science? And like you said, Jesse maybe has to work in unconventional ways or works most effectively, let's say, in conventional ways. And it may not look exactly like what that typical stereotypical thing that people are looking for who are very ableist like myself in some circumstances have been. So I'm thinking about that advocacy for that person so we can be there and both cheer lead and support and adjust but also communicate when those pressures that we are being kind of trickled down through us as mentors within a particular institutional environment are not a good fit and maybe they don't make sense. Like you just said here, we can question those in a respectful way but I try to move them around and change things. One other thing just more specific to the work that we're doing in expanding our program for inclusion of deaf students and scientists. So again, Tobias allows me to share this talking about having the mentor be trained and understand the culture, in this case deaf culture and making sure that there's direct communication and one clear thing here being stated, it's never okay to give comments such as I'll tell you later or I don't feel like repeating the question. So basically losing patience because the communication is not happening at a rate that it's supposed to be or there's another comment such as looking at the interpreter while communicating instead of looking at the individual who you're communicating to. So these are all things that I think maybe without some education and knowledge might happen naturally. And so one of the things we try to do in our program is we try to help our faculty who are gonna be teaching in classes to know these things are things that you might do without even thinking about it. Maybe you'll speak too fast, not take enough time to make sure the interpreter is keeping up with you. Do you really care about people learning? All the people in your class learning or do I really care as a mentor that my mentee is getting all of the best help in terms of mentorship that I can provide? Yes, I do. And so I'm willing to do these things and our faculty and other folks should be as well. And I think that begins to move towards an anti-abulous sort of perspective. Yeah, thank you for that. I think that's a great segue into our final question before we answer audience questions. So if you're listening and you have a question, make sure you write it in the chat. And so yeah, you've provided a great example for our last question, which is drawing on everyone's range of experiences. What are some examples of times where you've been in or created anti-abolist specifically spaces? So where is it sending up classrooms and things like that are great examples. We're also interested to hear Jesse's in Sweden and your comparison between Swedish and American culture, I guess you could say. So maybe you'd like to start, Jesse. Yeah, sure. So I think there have been a few times that I've been in, I would say more anti-abolist spaces. One was a conference that I attended in 2015 that was called Accessible Astronomy, or Inclusive Astronomy, sorry. I wanna put accessibility and everything. I was on a panel called Accessibility in Astronomy. And there, one of the speakers invited everyone to move how they needed to if you needed to get up and walk around. And this was during a keynote and sit where you want to, lay down if you want to, fidget if you want to. And I'm reminded again of Ashley's term from earlier of hostile furniture and that particularly in conferences, I don't know if other people have had some amazing experience with comfortable chairs, but conferences are the worst for comfortable chairs. And I suddenly felt that this environment was welcoming. There were many, all ways of participating and paying attention were welcome. There wasn't an expectation of me performing, paying attention. And that is something that has been challenging, especially in even in virtual meetings with having the camera on. And that actually is a less accessible thing I would say here that I've noticed in Sweden is that there is a far greater pressure to if you're in a virtual meeting to have your camera on. And I have been the sole person with my camera off in meetings before and been called on and people like, why is your camera not working? I said, no, I just, I don't want to turn it on today. I pay attention a lot better when 30% of my brain isn't occupied with do I look like I'm paying attention? And so, but there are, oh, I can't remember who said this, so I apologize. In our meeting that we had last week, kind of brainstorming questions and ideas for this, someone brought up this idea that real accessibility, you don't notice. And I think that's a really beautiful idea. And I've tried to pay attention over the last week a little bit more to the spaces around me to try to find those kind of hidden accessibility features because one of the things that has surprised me immensely here in Sweden is the walkability and the wheelchair friendliness or mobility-aid friendliness of the spaces. That it isn't just, it's not explicitly like here is your disabled entrance or parking space or something. It's just that everything is that way. It's not othered. And I thought that, at least for me, I found this to be a very beautiful idea that creating accessible, anti-abless spaces does not mean separate. It's not separate but equal, that never works. It's changing everything to be accessible. So this means that the ramps that lead to any place that has stairs to kind of climb, there's a lot of hills at least where I live, there's also a ramp. And that helps people with bikes, that helps people with scooters, that helps people with strollers, that helps people with wheelchairs. Plus there's lots of lifts as well. But I didn't notice it first. And then, this idea of the invisible accessibility, I think is, I keep daydreaming about it honestly of what would it be like to truly exist in a space where I didn't have to constantly think about access in some way? Because I don't think I fully realize just how much mental energy that takes, how much of our brain power, how much of our physical energy is taken up with constantly having to navigate the world with a disability. And this quiet, this hidden, this invisible accessibility, if you will, if we truly lived in an actual accessible place, I think then that burden could be lifted because we wouldn't have to constantly be wondering, is there an accessible bathroom? Is there going to be an elevator? Or how many stairs up is it? Or what kind of chairs are gonna be here? How long am I gonna be asked to sit in this meeting? Et cetera, I could go on, of course. And so I think that's what I've been hunting for when I'm thinking about an anti-ablist space is this idea of accessibility that is so ingrained, so entwined into the design and policies of a particular institution that you don't even notice it. So I think that's, yeah, that's what's been on my mind especially when it comes to this question. I need to jump in and follow Jess and continue on that theme, okay? That is the best space to be in when you're not being exhausted or taxed or worried about your disability access. It just appears almost magically the way you feel comfortable in the environment. And that goes for everybody. And it makes me think about how sometimes we've evolved and how other times we have it. So like pre-Uber, pre-Lift, I had a chance to go out there to Australia and the number of accessible wheelchair cabs just touched my heart. I mean, I can jump in a cab and go to the lunch or the coffee shop or the movies or down to the beach at a blink of an eye and not have to plan it out like it was a dissertation or a research study, right? And then here we come back to America and then this Uber thing is supposed to transform everyone's lives. Well, most persons with disabilities still aren't using Uber or Left. And as we get into this next space of automated vehicles and how are we gonna interact with that? What does that look like? What is our expectation? So to me, the anti-abulous space is where we have a voice at the table that we are part of building our futures and transforming what we have now rather than constantly having to be that squeaky wheel, right? I'm saying, oh my, what about us? What about us? And I think we would be in a much better space for everybody if we could just take down some of those barriers because the truth is as we get older, we're all gonna be facing some kind of challenge but we all wanna be able to read our 401 statements. We all wanna be able to balance our checkpoints and we need to be able to do that to just this point, anytime, anywhere while we're enjoying the game of life. And I don't wanna, I definitely don't wanna hog anything but I just wanted to add one thing onto that because I loved what you built on there and I think this brings up two really important things. One is this is why it's critical more places except it become inclusive to working from home. I have poured so much effort and unfortunately money into making my home space and my home work environment as accessible for me as possible. And if a academic institution, if a business is not willing or not able to replicate that, then please we need to respect people being able to use the spaces they have crafted for themselves. And then to your point about this idea of, all of the burdens that we kind of are facing and you mentioned going to Australia and all of the cabs being accessible for you, I think this is why it is critically important, especially in the technology component of STEM that technology is not built without accessibility from the ground up. It has to be there from the start. This isn't a oops, we're gonna tack on accessible vans someday down the line. It has to be built in from the start and that existing everywhere is something that could greatly, I think improve the accessibility of our society. But unfortunately it requires that the people building this technology and of course working at an AI company. I'm incredibly mindful of this that that technology has to be inclusive from the very start. So yes, I'm sorry though, Cheryl, please continue. I was just gonna say one practice we have on our campus through my project that's a do-it-center at the University of Washington is I look around at spaces that are being created on our campus. One was an engineering lab where I was actually the associate director of there was being built and another one was a maker space and the business school. When I see these, I figure out who's designing them. There's usually an architect involved and then the project people and I offered to bring a panel together to meet with the architects and with the directors. Actually, usually the basic plans have already been written at that, developed at that time. And there's always a reluctance. People are nervous about this. I said, oh, I'm just gonna bring some students here with different types of disabilities just to give you input, just share your plans and they'll give input. And they tell me that they're really nervous because well, I don't think we're gonna be able to do all that they want. And I said, well, isn't that your job? Engineers and architects, shouldn't you be used to that? But there's this reluctance and they're like, well, I don't know how to turn down an idea from a person with a disability, I guess. I don't know. And they usually have pretty basic things. Like I remember in the engineering lab, one student who was in all types of disabilities, we had about six people there. And he said, well, where's your button gonna be to open the door, the electronic door here because it was the button. And they showed him and he said, well, you know, if I push that button, which I am capable of doing that, I'm gonna have to back up really fast for that door is gonna hit me. And another person looked at the bathroom spaces and said, well, you know, I'm not gonna be able to turn my wheelchair around here or whatever. And some people with visual impairments were bringing up different ideas and even learning disabilities about being able to see the speaker in their little presentation area and stuff. And after the meeting, I met with them. They were really surprised that this group of people wouldn't come up with all these really unusual and unreasonable requests. So people have this idea that if disability is involved, it's gonna cost a lot of money and be a lot of work. It's just not true. By the way, we pay those students honorariums to do that. And that's an important thing too, that we value their expertise. They're not gonna make a lot of money, maybe $100, but for a college student, that's worth buzzing over to the other side of campus. But we always give them a stipend or an honorarium. And other people get stipends, right? And it's called equality. Yeah. Yeah. Right, imagine that. Right. The idea that what you've learned as a person with disability is of value to people. If you're talking to a group of special ed teachers or regular teachers or something on a panel or talking to online learning designers and making things accessible, you should get paid for that. With possible honorarium stipend, most of, you know, that's a common practice. They're usually surprised, by the way. And that's fantastic. But going just right, the ICT is built into the law of the 98, right? And so are the accessibility standards, but it's the minimum expectation. All right, that's all they have to do. 50% of the doors, right? Wow. Wouldn't it be nice if everybody goes through those doors? And then the last piece I'll end with, returning to what's that 100% question? Well, when I don't need signs anymore, that tells me this is my entrance. Right, I'd like to go in with Cheryl and Amelie and Kate and we just go all through the same door. These are all great comments. And what other direction this can take to is just in the information that people are given, for example, in education as we're training folks. And I did hear the talk by Dr. Geodice, Nicholas Geodice for a few talks ago about spatial information and presenting that for people with low visual acuity. And in our experience with expanding access for deaf scientists in our program, one of the eye-openers for me was one of the first students through our program, had brilliant scientific mind, really struggled with English. And there were two kind of compounding factors. So one was a little bit of a reading disability that she communicated. And the other was that throughout the course of education, different interpreters have been interpreting things slightly different in terms of the scientific context and the grammar. So we had two things that were going on there. What we tried to do is start to build out some technology that would make everything more visual. So you'd have multimodal. So you'd have the textual communication of the scientific concept and then you'd have visual figures and we're possible into the much degree possible, we'd also have ASL around that concept. And we brought that into the things that were being read, YouTube videos, websites. You go to a website that's maybe a bioinformatics website where you're trying to accomplish some kind of a task and making that, and then the documentation around that, a multimodal. And it's really, you know, one of those things that was eye-opening as well, because you see all of these videos that they're out there teaching concepts and almost all of them are either not captioned or they're auto captioned with all kinds of, you know, mistakes and it gets worse and worse the more specialized the topic. So I think, I envision and I want to be a part of this where we really start to make all of that stuff much more accessible and multimodal so that visual dependence on your, on reading is not a requirement in order to obtain and capture all of this information. It's just another space, I think, where this perspective needs to be brought in. Yeah, that's great. And I think we have one audience question that we can take the last five or seven minutes to answer. The question is, how can STEM professional spaces intentionally invite people with disabilities to include and create a community for people with disabilities within STEM? Higher disabled people. Yes. And in positions of leadership and set them up with all the things we've talked about through the rest of this panel. To add on to that, I would say disabled people already are there even if you haven't noticed. And this is of course talking more about invisible disabilities, but I remember after that conference and the panel that I was on on accessible astronomy that I had somebody come up to me and say, I'm a professor and I have MS and I've hidden it my entire career and I'm terrified somebody's gonna find out because I think that I'll be excluded and I'll be judged. So I would tell you that disabled people already are present and it's, but I think Ashley really hit the nail on the head that hire them, pay them. You want people to do work, creating a community, pay them for it because far too often, DEI work is seen as something that we should all do volunteering, like volunteering our spare time because if we all don't spend enough energy and time related to our disability already, changing the space often is seen as just something we should do out of the goodness of our hearts, pay people for their work. And I think that's one of the ways that you can also start to correct some of those inequities related to finance is if you want disabled people to be present in your community and to create accessible spaces, you want their expertise, you want their advice, then hire them, put them in positions of power and pay them. This is Rory. Although we need the people who have hidden disabilities in some ways to disclose, to help those of us that have visible disabilities because it's important for the community to know that there are people with disabilities already among them that are very successful to open up doors for those of us that can't hide our disabilities or have to disclose. Absolutely. And that gets back to what is 100% space look like? It's a space where people are comfortable with that disclosure, right? It's a space where people are compensated for their skills, for a space where people are invited and are recruited at a young age to come, hey, look at my lab. Let's look at the cool things I'm doing. Look, Jesse and Emily, you're gonna be my mentors here for this tour. Let's grow the next cohort of leaders, right? So we are in that position of change and in that position of power, in the position of influence. So we don't need a DE and I program, right? We shouldn't have to pass laws to get things done every time we wanna do something. People should just have the right attitude, with the right access, with the right kinds of empowerment tools, just because. And looking at our post-secondary institutions, we need to look at what we're teaching. Most computer science departments are today graduating computer science students with degrees that know nothing about accessible IT design. And we have a project where we're working nationwide with companies actually, like Microsoft and Google, it's called Teach Access. Really promoting that, but also engineering. Are we teaching people how to design excessively? We need to look at that too. I would even broaden that beyond IT and say, anyone who will be put in a position of mentoring or teaching students should be taught about accessible pedagogy, accessible mentorship. Because it goes, I completely agree with you, the amount of times that I've unfortunately had to sit down in some kind of software development project and remind people that, we need to make sure things are actually accessible. Completely agree, there's just not that part of the curriculum when it should be mandatory, but also, why do we often allow PhDs, postdocs to move forward in their career and teach students when they've never been taught how to teach, let alone how to excessively teach? And so ideally I would love to see that become a greater part of our curriculum and STEM, but also I would say that whatever changes are made, they should not require disclosure, because disclosure can have an incredibly high cost and particularly if people are multiply marginalized. So people of color who have disabilities shoulder that burden far greater, for example. So any accessibility that's offered should be offered without requiring the student, the professor to come and disclose first. So ideally disclosure would, we could get rid of that entirely. Well, I would actually take it one step further. I think we should get rid of reasonable accommodation and that just, it should just be accommodation, right? That the ADA is over 30 years old. So I mean, people should be making facilities, building resources, software, websites, all accessible to begin with. It's not, the whole reasonable accommodation concept was really put in as a transitional concept. Curren Sue and JR has to say about that. Absolutely, Rory. It was, and it was a bait or a compromise with the politicians in the business community who were afraid of persons with disabilities. But the truth be told, they're not fulfilling their obligation in this contract we made. I was just down at a conference down in part of Tampa, Florida in a nice little waterfront property, right? Paying way too much money to have a bed in the toilet and the roll-in shower was built incorrectly. And I could tell it was the reasonable accommodation standard or the barrier removal product rather than all the other rooms that they had modernized and updated that the disability room was somehow of less value. So absolutely, Rory. And we have a piece in it that says equal access to all goods and services. Well, everything that's moving forward all in this tech world and this new fuel line space, have you seen accessible charging stations for the new Teslas and new electric pickup trucks coming? Right, I haven't seen any. Are those functional or the apparatuses functional so those with fist elements can pick it up and use it and stick it in the vehicle? The answer is no. So we have a long way to go in this advocacy, this policy but I'd like to remind our audience that you take one bite at the elephant at a time, right? Take care of your lab, your department, your research grants and your college and the rest will work out. If you lead by example, others will covet what you are doing. And just to I think add on to that, no space. Like truly when we talk about 100% accessibility that is the perfection that we strive towards that probably isn't fully possible. So the idea of getting rid of say accommodations or and replacing that with 100% accessibility we cannot fully anticipate all of the access needs of every variety and combination of disability but what we do need to do is make our spaces as accessible as possible, removing as many barriers and also make it a lot easier for people to request the changes that they need without disclosure. And so I can't see a way of, I mean, I would say let's get rid of the laborious often stigmatizing process that we have currently for accommodations but I do think there needs to be an avenue for people to ask for what they need but we need to ensure that they're listened to that they're given what they need and that they're empowered to do that because I think a lot of times the numbers that we have quoted around about the percentage of disabled people in undergrad, I would honestly, I would urge you all to think of that number as being much higher because a lot of people are not willing to disclose. That's very true. Yeah, well, I'm so sorry to be the one to cut this off but we are at time. I wanna thank everyone for sharing your thoughts and ideas. You're so valuable to us for this conversation that we had today about improving accessibility and inclusion across this clear pipeline and we hit multiple axes today. And so as we are at the beginning, this is our last event. So we're very sorry to be closing out this conversation series but all of the events have been posted online. You can watch them to your heart's delight and we hope that you enjoy the rest of the day and thank you for coming and for joining us today. So thank you.