Advancing Disability Equity in Academic Workplaces: A Professional Development Seminar Case Study

Advancing Disability Equity in Academic Workplaces: A Professional Development Seminar Case Study | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Case Report Advancing Disability Equity in Academic Workplaces: A Professional Development Seminar Case Study Cali Anicha, Canan Bilen-Green, Larry Napoleon, Jr. This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5160614/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 7 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Although about a quarter of working age adults in the United States identify as disabled, representative numbers are not found in most workplaces, including academic and scientific workplaces. In higher education, disability-focused policies, programming, professional development, as well as research, have been predominantly oriented toward disabled learners. This by-default attention to the needs of disabled students implicitly signals that disabled faculty and staff are not expected to be present, and/or are not welcomed and valued employees. In this evaluative case study, we detailed a year-long professional development seminar investigating experiences of academic faculty who identify as disabled and reviewed findings from a post-seminar survey. Taken together, the quantitative and qualitative survey data indicated that participants in the seminar series made meaningful gains in four fundamental aspects of allyship focused on disability (in)equities in academic workplaces: increased general topical knowledge of disability stereotyping and discrimination, improved understanding of discriminatory impacts of ableism, enhanced skills for interrupting disability discrimination and inequities, and amplified personal commitment and motivation for addressing disability equity in the workplace. Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 1. Introduction More than a quarter of working age adults in the United States (US) identify as disabled[ 1 ]. Even so, representative numbers have not been found in most workplaces, including academic and scientific workplaces [ 2 – 4 ]. Indeed, due to social stigmas associated with disability, “disclosure” of disability in academic workplaces is rife with consequential risk [ 5 , 6 ]. A systematic review of studies in six countries revealed that “[f]aculty and staff with disabilities are significantly underrepresented within academia and experience alarming rates of discrimination, social exclusion and marginalization”[ 6 ]. In higher education, disability-focused policies, programming, professional development, and research have been predominantly oriented toward disabled undergraduate learners [ 7 – 9 ]. While research on the experiences of graduate students (who may also fill roles of both faculty and staff) has sometimes reflected workplace rather than classroom concerns [ 10 – 12 ], the by-default attention to the needs of disabled students implicitly signals that disabled faculty, staff, and graduate students are not expected to be present, and/or are not welcomed and valued employees. Until quite recently, the substantial contributions of educational equity and institutional transformation research in higher education had not addressed disability as a marginalized social identity in extracurricular and/or workplace settings [ 13 ]. Nor, until recently, had disability been included in much of the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) work undertaken in wider cultural contexts (see Exec.OrderNo.14035, in which “A” for Accessibility (DEIA) was added) [ 14 ]. However, expressly intersectional, inclusive, and liberatory disability equity scholarship is burgeoning (for a sampling see [ 5 , 15 – 21 ]. In tandem, the social movement for disability justice [ 22 ] that led to and has continued since, the passage of the 1990 ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), is also expanding thanks to persistent activism by members of disabled communities. To encourage the development ofa community motivated to advance disability awareness and equityon our campus, we created a year-long professional development seminar designed to address disability equity knowledge and allyship skills in the academic workplace. Because academic workplaces are comprised of faculty, staff and graduate students, campus community members in those roles were invited to participate. In this article, we 1) provide an overview of the seminar content and process and 2) review findings from a post-seminar survey structured to determine if/to what degree seminar participants found themselves better prepared and motivated to enact disability equity allyship in their interpersonal and professional lives. The research objectiveof this study was to examine if a professional development course designed to uncover overlapping interpersonal and systemic disability bias and discrimination may contribute to knowledge of, and motivation to act for, disability equity. Essential upfront sidebar As the authors of this case study, we would be remiss if we did not acknowledge that research is never truly objective because all aspects, including what is studied and what sources of knowledge and experience are engaged, are influenced by researcher positionality(ies). Our positions within social structures always inform what and how we know, and how we see ourselves and others [ 30 – 34 ]. Those positions influence all aspects of our lives, and it is important to acknowledge and reflect on one’s own social identities in order to locate the impacts of those life experiences on knowledge production efforts. While there are reasoned arguments resisting the use of reflexivity or positionality statements [ 35 ], we find recent scholarship that champions the inclusion of such statements to be compelling [ 36 – 38 ]. To share with our readers “where [we] write from and how [our] perspectives are formed”[ 49 ],we briefly take note of several social identities we believe are salient to the work described in this article. The authors bring diverse perspectives, identifying as follows: a cisgender white woman and a disability ally/accomplice in training, a cisgender Black man, participating in disability work as a learner and as a member of the community under scrutiny, and a cisgender woman who has firsthand experience in her own career of the impacts of gender and disability inequity in higher education and the negative effects experienced by faculty, staff, and students, including BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color), LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans, Questioning+) individuals, and those with disabilities. At least one of the authors identifies as having a disability, offering valuable personal insight. In the following sections, we begin with a review of the literature on disability as an essential component of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts and disability equity in higher education, with particular attention to systemic ableism, intersectionality, and allyship. This review provides background and highlights the models and content that informed the year-long professional development seminar, emphasizing its importance in promoting disability equity. We then describe the seminar that serves as the focus of this evaluative case study. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings for advancing disability equity in academic workplaces, offer recommendations for fostering inclusive institutional practices, and explore the broader relevance of these efforts for systemic change in higher education. 2. Literature Review Due to pervasive negative biases and resultant disability stigma and discrimination, most people know too little about disability in general and have minimal awareness of systemic ableism/disableism. This lack of knowledge can include people with disabilities because experiences of disability are so multifaceted and because the prevailing cultural view of disability effectively obfuscates the structural dimensions of disability discrimination. In majority culture contexts disability is generally medicalized, seen as an individual issue in need of fixing or accommodating. In disability culture contexts, most disability-related concerns faced by individuals are understood as socio-cultural issues, the result of barriers erected through discriminatory beliefs and social practices [ 23 ]. A frequently cited example of such barriers identified the lack of an elevator—and the lack of planning to have a (working) elevator—as a causative factor that “disables” the person using wheeled mobility (think scooter, wheelchair, child stroller). Viewing disability through such environmental accessibility and impacts-focused social models [ 18 , 24 – 28 ] connects disability with other systems of unearned over-advantaging and disadvantaging [ 29 ], such as those grounded in notions of race and gender. That shift in perspective changes how disability is understood and addressed. Indeed, from this vantage point, disability equity demands an informed and motivated public, that is, a community of advocates, allies, and accomplices, intentionally inclusive of both disabled and nondisabled people. 2.1 Disability and Allyship in Broad Cultural and Higher Education Contexts Using the lenses of language and intersectionality, we first offer an overview of current macro-cultural contexts related to disability (in)equity. We then review overlaps across larger cultural and higher education contexts by asking and answering “why disability and why now?” Next, a brief reprise of allyship literatures to foreground and establish our rationale for seminar and survey content. To set the stage for the current study, this is followed by a recounting of several campus disability equity measures taken at our institution prior to the seminar series. 2.2 Language Person-first language (e.g., person with a disability) invites the recognition of disability as (only) one aspect of a whole person, whereas identity-first language (identifying as disabled) lays claim to a valued membership in a social group. Andrews and colleagues developed a social media campaign, #SaytheWord , noting that positive disability identities are erased through use of euphemisms (e.g., differently-abled) and advocating for a recognition of disability as a rich cultural identity [ 40 ]. We use both person-first and identity-first language in this article. In agreement with the assertion that language choices are “crucial in the struggle against disability degradation” [ 22 , 23 ], in this paper we endeavored to avoid ableist metaphors. Specifically, we eschewed language that links human variations conventionally identified as disabilities with problematic outcomes or morals such as “that’s so lame,” “falling on deaf ears,” “blind faith,” or “crippling rage” [ 41 ]. We also explicitly reject medicalized models in which disability is imagined as an individual pathology or problem. 2.3 Intersectionality Ableism, the devaluation and/or discrimination of people perceived as disabled, does not exist apart from and cannot be experienced in isolation from other forms of systemic unearned advantaging and disadvantaging [ 29 , 42 – 45 ], thus it is essential to be always mindful of intersectionality [ 30 – 32 ]. Just as racialized discrimination is an expected outcome of racism, a social model lens views disability discrimination (disableism) as the expected outcome of ableism, that is, ableist beliefs and concomitant political, economic, and cultural practices [ 22 , 46 ]. We offer the following sources for concise, compelling, and intersectional short courses on ableism: CripStory [ 47 ]; Sins Invalid: An Unshamed Claim to Beauty in the Face of Invisibility [ 22 ]; and Joy and Resistance [ 48 ]; we encourage readers to visit one or more of these rich digital resources no matter how familiar you may be with disability topics. 2.4 Timing: Why Disability and Why Now? Why focus on disability? As detailed above, the inclusion of disability in DEI efforts to date has been limited in scope and prevalence, and this has been especially true in academic workplaces. In the context of growing political divisiveness around DEI in higher education [ 49 , 50 ], disability may be one social identity category around which there is less cultural backlash. Yet, the ongoing, lopsided, and harmful impacts of the not-yet endemic COVID-19 pandemic for disabled people [ 51 , 52 ] have put disability equity ‘on the radar’ of most human resource departments, including those in educational institutions. Perhaps more pointedly, the loss of the accommodations hastily installed as the pandemic first raged—accommodations that often benefited all employees—were just as hastily purged in (misguided) efforts to return to a ‘normal’ in which access barriers are ubiquitous [ 53 – 55 ]. Disabled workers continue to be left behind because in dominant US culture disability is most often understood as an individual medical issue and discrimination has primarily been addressed through a civil rights approach, leaving aside questions of biased beliefs and their contributions to inequitable systems [ 56 , 57 ]. This have resulted in disability accommodations being viewed through legalistic lenses [ 68 , 59 ], a set-up for burdensome and ineffective policies and practices. Why center disability now? There has been a notable uptick in disability-related media content over the past few years. This is by design. Disability activists, including intellectual activists in higher education [ 60 ], have been working nonstop to claim rights, demand respect, and seek recompense for generations of harmful discrimination. Some examples include Fixed: The Science/Fiction of Human Enhancement [ 61 ], a film that invites viewers to ponder the epistemological and ontological assumptions that undergird notions of what it means to be human. Another recent award-winning documentary film, Crip Camp: A Disability Revolution [ 62 ] chronicles disability activism in the US since the late 1970s (informatively reviewed by Kafer in 2015 [ 63 ]; though see Sedgwick’s important critique in 2021 [ 64 ]). In 2022, motion picture awards were given to CODA [ 65 ], notable for featuring a deaf actor authentically playing a deaf character; an important step toward greater disability representation in the media. In 2021, the US Office of Personnel Management, for the first time, included “Accessibility” in its diversity, equity, and inclusion strategic plan making “DEIA” the law of the land. This grassroots groundswell is finding its way to academia, partly also due to the impact of COVID-19 on faculty workload and student learning [ 5 , 6 , 52 , 66 – 68 ]. Our seminar series leveraged this growing interest to promote disability equity allyship. 2.5 Allyship It bears noting that all systems of advantaging and disadvantaging interdependently rely upon one another [ 4 , 29 , 32 , 45 , 69 , 70 ]. Similar to critical race or gender studies, critical disability studies center notions of disability as a lens through which to view the myriad ways in which human differences have been deemed deviant, when in fact, human difference just are [ 71 – 75 ]. Acknowledging the common roots of systemic advantaging and disadvantaging leads us to recognize that the foundational allyship skills needed to interrupt bias and promote equity are shared across forms of social inequities. Allyship has been the focus of much scholarship and social analyses in efforts to parse the essential aspects of what constitutes effective ally behaviors and practices. Earlier research focused on underlying beliefs, knowledge, and skills, with more recent work amplifying the need for consistency, authenticity, and action in both interpersonal and institutional allyship[ 76 – 80 ]. Allyship is generally understood to occur when “members of dominant social groups (e.g., men, Whites, heterosexuals) [work] to end the system of oppression that gives them greater privilege and power based on their social-group membership”[ 81 ]. It is important to note that, as McKenzie has articulated, acting as an ally is “…not an identity. It’s a practice… that must be done over and over again, in the largest and smallest ways, every day” [ 82 ]. Indeed, understanding allyship as accomplice-ship may move us closer to meaningful and effective disability equity praxis [ 83 – 85 ]. From this body of scholarship we synthesized four key elements of allyship [ 86 ]: 1) issue-specific knowledge, 2) understanding of associated impacts of social advantaging/disadvantaging, 3) suitable strategies for promoting equity, and 4)motivation to act on behalf of equity. While these elements reflect essential foundations for action, they do not guarantee action. Nonetheless, these foundational perspectives are prerequisites for the development of equitable policies and praxis. 3. Recent Historical Contexts on One Midwestern Campus To redress institutional inattention regarding disabled faculty and resultant discriminations, more than a decade ago our campus established a Women Faculty with Disabilities task force as part of a larger National Science Foundation (NSF) institutional transformation initiative, ADVANCE FORWARD (NSF) [ 87 ]. Following an investigation of disability policies and practices at other higher education institutions and a literature review regarding the experiences of faculty with disabilities, the task force developed a campus-wide survey to assess the status of disability knowledge, attitudes, and experiences of faculty at our institution. The task force hosted a Faculty Forum to share survey findings and additional faculty perceptions, concerns, and questions were discussed and included in a final report. Equipped with these data, the task force provided recommendations to university administrators, resulting in substantial changes to the faculty and staff ADA (American with Disabilities Act) accommodations request and grievance policy. During that project period, several disability-focused professional development opportunities were hosted on campus including invited speakers who provided workshops, keynoted pedagogical luncheons, and facilitated working meetings. In addition to the ADA policy change, the ADVANCE FORWARD initiative and task force engendered increased campus awareness regarding disability and has prompted a number of follow-on developments: the inclusion of disability in demographics and workplace satisfaction queries on campus climate surveys; the provision of a wider range of professional development opportunities that intentionally included the views and lived experiences of faculty, staff, and students who identify as disabled; the establishment of a campus-wide Accessibility Committee; the rebranding of our student disability services unit to reflect a shift away from a medical/compliance model toward a more comprehensive campus-wide center for accessibility and disability resources approach; and the convening of a new task force to again review and enhance our staff and faculty ADA accommodations request and grievance policy and practices, including encouragement for institutional adoption of a Universal Design approach to employee accommodations. The inclusion of disability demographics and workplace satisfaction queries on campus climate surveys has highlighted the ongoing need for attention to accommodation processes, climate measures, and supports for individuals with disabilities. The following findings from our most recent campus climate survey included disaggregated responses by women, people of color, not a US citizen, and disability/chronic health condition [ 88 ]. Campus surveys completed over the past several years showed a steady rise in faculty and staff identifying as disabled. In 2017, 16.5%; staff identified as disabled and in 2021 nearly 24% of staff survey respondents did so. For faculty there was a similar rise in identifying as disabled from 12.8% in 2017 to 19.4% in 2021. Disaggregated survey results underscored that individuals with disabilities were the least satisfied group. When asked about satisfaction with the work environment at the institution the collective ratings for all staff were 73.9% and 54.5% for all faculty, whereas satisfaction ratings were noticeably lower for both staff (60.3%) and faculty (41.2%) with disabilities or chronic conditions. This trend persisted when asked about being treated with respect by their department head, with staff with disabilities or chronic conditions at 77% compared to all staff ratings of 83.7% and faculty with disabilities or chronic conditions at 75.8% compared to all faculty ratings of 77.1%.When staff/faculty with disabilities or chronic conditions were asked if hostile or intimidating behavior was treated seriously on campus, 51.6% of staff and 25.8% of faculty agreed, whereas 63% of all staff and 44% of all faculty positively endorsed that item. These climate data continue to provide crucial information on the experiences of disabled faculty and staff and to inform disability equity policy and practice advocacy efforts. A recent partnership with the University of Washington on an NSF initiative, AccessADVANCE , has created further disability equity awareness and has prompted new professional development activities on our campus [ 89 , 90 ]. AccessADVANCE works to develop systemic and intersectional approaches for increasing the participation and advancement of STEM faculty with disabilities. The project has launched a range of national programs to address issues impacting the career advancement and success of faculty with disabilities. Those programs include individual and team engagement in an online asynchronous Community of Practice listserv; access to webinars and capacity building institutes, as well asa searchable, frequently updated, and extensive clearinghouse of disability-related content; direct mentoring support to individuals and organizational cohorts; and minigrants for activities to expand, replicate, and disseminate best practices[ 90 , 91 ]. While the knowledge and perspectives of disabled faculty are centered, AccessADVANCE programming intentionally invites all campus stakeholders to engage in advancing disability equity in academic workplaces. To bring the national focus of AccessADVANCE on disabled faculty to scale on our own campus, we hosted a year-long seminar series, Intersections of Disability and Academic Faculty , focused on investigating the views and experiences of disabled faculty and staff in academic workplaces (specific content and resources available upon request). Additional collective actions that have been incited in follow up to that series are described in the interpretations and recommendations section below. 4. Methods We will now describe our approach to a year-long Intersections of Disability and Academic Faculty seminar series that investigated the views and experiences of disabled faculty and staff in academic workplaces, then describe the post-seminar survey. After reviewing the quantitative and qualitative findings collected from participants in the post-seminar survey, we consider study limitations. 4.1 Participant Recruitment, Seminar Model and Content Seminar participants included academic faculty, staff, and graduate students interested in promoting disability equity. The post-seminar survey assessed participant ratings of learning in four key elements synthesized from allyship literatures: issue-specific knowledge, understanding of associated impacts of social advantaging/disadvantaging, suitable strategies for promoting equity, and motivation to act on behalf of equity. Seminar invitations came from one of the authors in her role as Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs and Equity via campus-wide listservs to all faculty, staff, and graduate students. The invite indicated that the seminars were designed for faculty and staff interested in broadening their own understandings of disability and in developing skills and strategies for disability equity advocacy and activism. Commitment to consistent participation in all nine 90-minute seminars was requested. Although scheduled with our academic calendar in mind, semester and/or work-duty changes made commitment to a specified day and time across the academic year difficult for some; 12 of 17 initial respondents attended at least three seminars. The seminar series was conducted at a university located in the Upper Midwest region of the United States. The university iscomprised of over 600faculty and lecturers. Additionally, it has an enrollment of over11,900 undergraduate and graduate students. The seminar approached disability equity as a shared community need. In recognition that inequities for any group undergird and perpetuate inequities for all, seminar content was designed to reflect intersectional social models of disability. Disability equity must be addressed through the efforts of all of us, whether we identify as disabled or not. Moreover, because disability may not be apparent to others, and because experiences of disability are profoundly mediated by social contexts, we emphasized that it is crucial that disability status never be assumed or expected to be disclosed or shared. Ableist biases abound in many world cultures [ 5 , 18 ], and it is incumbent on us all to become aware of and eradicate those foundational discriminatory practices from our personal and professional communications and practices. Our series of nine monthly online seminars was modeled on a blend of two programs: the Advocates and Allies (A&A) program [ 89 , 92 – 94 ] and the National SEED Project [ 95 ]. The A&A model was developed on our campus during previous NSF ADVANCE projects and the approach guides men faculty in leveraging their gendered privilege in service to gender equity. This prioritization of supporting members of an advantaged group (men) to evolve knowledge and skills for leveraging personal and positional power to promote equity for members of disadvantaged groups (women) has proven demonstrably effective [ 89 ] and has been adopted by over 30 organizations to date. The National SEED Project is a professional development model that supports learning and skill-building through structured dialogues and systemic analyses [ 29 , 96 , 97 ]. Following the SEED model, seminar content was intentionally selected to be authored by people who identified as disabled and who represented a broad and intersectional set of disability experiences and perspectives, and in this case, by faculty and staff who identified as disabled. One seminar co-facilitator identified as a member of the disability community and the other as a nondisabled advocate for disability equity. The SEED seminar model also encouraged participants to share and examine their own lived experiences through the lenses of social systems of advantaging and disadvantaging (e.g., ableism, racism, sexism) and to commit to maintaining confidentiality of seminar discussions [ 97 ]. Figure 1 displays a course outline highlighting the intended scope of each three-month segment, including focusing questions used to initiate discussions. In general, topics included the need for nondisabled people to listen to and believe disabled people; interdependencies among ableism, racism, sexism/gendered biases and discriminations;and actions we can take, individually and collectively, in our offices, departments, colleges to promote disability justice. Though experiences of disabled faculty were the intended focus of this seminar series, we simultaneously explicitly acknowledged that concepts of disability, ableism, and social justice emerged from and existed within much wider, and necessarily intersectional, contexts. Seminar content included articles, books, videos and a variety of blogs and websites. Assigned content and optional resources were made available on a shared drive for asynchronous access and participants were encouraged to engage as their schedules allowed. When pondering the key concepts and questions noted in Fig. 1, we reflected on those wider intersectional contexts while prioritizing the perspectives of faculty/staff who identify as members of disability communities. Additionally, informal data provided formative guidance for adjusting seminar content to meet participant interests (from seminar chat transcripts, group activities, and instructor notes taken during seminars). To maintain confidentiality, these informal data are not included in our analysis. 4.2 Survey Instrument To assess participants’ self-reported learning regarding the aforementioned elements of allyship, application of seminar content to personal and/or professional lives, and satisfaction with the course delivery, a brief survey was developed. Early in the fall semester following the Intersections of Disability and Academic Faculty seminar series, participants who attended three or more seminars (N = 12) were emailed an invitation to complete an online Informed Consent and Final Evaluation/Participant Feedback assessment. Items in the first section of the survey used four forced-choice options: Strongly Agree; Agree; Disagree; Strongly Disagree. Those first four items appraised the four aspects of allyship identified above: 1) general topical knowledge, 2) understanding of impacts of discrimination, 3) skills for interrupting inequities, and 4) personal/professional commitment to equity. Items five through seven invited forced-choice ratings of the overall quality and value of the seminar course, followed by five open-ended items to further assess participants’ learning and views regarding the quality, manageability, and value of the course as a professional development offering. Next, participants were asked to retrospectively rate the breadth of their own learning by indicating the degree to which their awareness had changed from prior to and then following their participation in the seminars. Using a 10-point scale (1 = Minimal to 10 = High), the six survey items asked for pre and post series ratings for awareness of a) disability stereotyping and discrimination, b) ableism, and c) commitment to addressing issues of ableism and disability discrimination. Open comments were invited following all items. The final section included two optional demographic questions (roles in academia and if the respondent identified as disabled or not).To best address anonymity and confidentiality given the small group and the participatory nature of this seminar we limited the number of demographics requested and have only included disabled/not disabled status in our findings when that demographic is particularly salient. 5. Results 5.1 Study Participants Eleven of the 12 seminar participants responded to an anonymous survey. Inconsistencies in one survey prompted us to remove that record from our analyses. In that record, all responses to the items asking about increased disability equity knowledge, understanding, skills, and commitment/motivation were “Strongly Disagree,” however, in each of the retrospective items asking about pre-post growth in disability equity knowledge, understanding, and commitment they indicated a positive change of four or more points. The final respondent pool for summative analyses (N = 10) included three faculty; four staff; two graduate students, and one respondent who preferred not to answer. Three respondents (30%) identified as disabled (one faculty, one staff, and one graduate student). 5.2 Quantitative Findings: Survey Items 1–4 Table 1 shows the percentage ratings regarding respondents’ endorsement of change for each of the four elements of allyship identified above, along with ratings of the degree to which the seminar met its stated goal of centering intersectional perspectives of disabled faculty/staff. Responses were slightly mixed when asked if participation in the series had resulted in increased general knowledge regarding disability and understanding of the impacts of ableism in academic workplaces (allyship elements one and two, namely issue-specific knowledge and understanding of associated impacts of social advantaging/disadvantaging). One respondent who identified as disabled indicated that they had not experienced any changes in knowledge of disability discrimination or in understanding of the impacts of ableism in academic workplaces. Thus, although 90% of participants did endorse increased knowledge and understanding, it may be noteworthy that nearly 80% of those respondents (seven of nine) did not endorse a disability identity in the optional demographics section. All respondents agreed that their participation in the seminar had improved their preparedness for promoting a more equitable campus climate for disabled faculty, staff, and graduate students (allyship element Table 1 Participants’ Ratings of Seminar Effectiveness Allyship Element Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 1) general topical knowledge “My participation in this seminar series increased my general knowledge regarding disability in academic workplaces.” 0% 10% 30% 60% 2) understanding of impacts of discrimination “My participation in this seminar series increased my understanding of the impacts of ableism in academic workplaces.” 0% 10% 50% 40% 3) skills for interrupting inequities “I feel prepared to promote a more equitable campus climate for disabled faculty, staff, and graduate students at XXXX as a result of my participation in this seminar series.” 0% 0% 90% 10% 4) personal/professional commitment to equity “My participation in this seminar series increased my personal commitment and motivation for addressing ableism and disability equity in my XXXX workplace.” 0% 0% 40% 60% 7) Intersectional perspectives of disabled faculty/staff were centered in this series “This seminar series was designed to center the perspectives and experiences of academic faculty who identify as disabled/having a disability and to simultaneously consider the intersections of individual and group identities (race, gender, class, etc). Please indicate the degree to which you feel this goal was met:” 10% 80% 10% Alt text: Table showing participants’ ratings of seminar effectiveness. three, suitable strategies for promoting equity). That level of endorsement—100%—was also indicated for the item asking if seminar participation had resulted in increased personal commitment and motivation for addressing ableism and disability equity on their campus (allyship element four, motivation to act on behalf of equity). 5.3 Retrospective Findings These positive changes were similarly reflected in the retrospective findings, though with more variability. Using a 10-point scale (1 = Minimal, 10 = High) respondents assessed the breadth of their learning in three areas: 1) awareness around disability stereotyping and discrimination, 2) awareness around ableism, and 3) personal commitment to addressing issues of ableism and disability discrimination on campus. Regarding awareness of disability stereotyping and discrimination, two respondents indicated high and unchanged levels of awareness at both pre and post series rating. Retrospective change for the remaining eight respondents averaged 3.25 (range of 2–4 points). See Fig. 2 and Table 2 . For awareness of ableism, one respondent did not enter a rating for prior to the series, rating their post series learning at six. Again, two respondents indicated high and unchanged levels of commitment and the point change for the remaining seven averaged 3.86 (range of 2–5 points). On commitment to addressing issues of ableism and disability discrimination on campus, three respondents indicated no change, reporting “10” for both pre and post series ratings. The remaining seven respondents averaged a 3.29 point change (range of 1–7 points) reflecting a 33% pre-post increase for participants who began the workshop with low to moderate ratings of commitment and motivation for disability equity. These results, detailed in Fig. 2 and summarized in Table 2 , highlight the expected gains in participants’ awareness and commitment. While some participants began with high levels of knowledge and motivation, the seminar had the greatest impact on those with lower initial awareness and commitment, fostering growth and building confidence in addressing disability inequity. Table 2 Summary of pre- and post-Seminar Scores, including mean, median, range, and point change, for awareness and commitment measures. Measure/Question Seminar Median Range (Min, Max) Mean Point Change Increase Pre/Post As we begin/end this seminar series, my Awareness of Stereotyping and Discrimination was/is... Pre- 5 (2, 10) 5.4 2.8 Post- 8 (6, 10) 8.2 To begin/As we endthis seminar series, my AwarenessAround Ableism was/is... Pre- 4 (2, 10) 5.0 3.5 Post 8 (6, 10) 8.0 As we begin/end this seminar series, my personal Commitment to Addressing Issues of Ableism and Disability Discrimination experienced on our campus was (is)... Pre- 6 (1, 10) 6.2 2.5 Post- 8 (7, 10) 8.6 5.4 Qualitative Findings To encourage participation, the survey was intentionally designed to allow respondents to swiftly provide their feedback through simple forced-choice quantifiable ratings. Qualitative data were collected from additional commentary invited following each forced-choice item, three open-ended queries, and a final invitation to offer any additional thoughts. While few comments were added to the forced-choice items most participants did offer one or more responses to the open-ended items. Regarding increased understanding of the impacts of ableism in academic workplaces one respondent noted that “This is not an 'ism' I had really given much thought to. This group helped me become aware of the ubiquitous nature of ableism, enabling me to re-frame my thinking and incorporate in applicable courses that I teach.” Most respondents did offer thoughtful reflections when asked about key ideas and understandings gained from participating in the series and ways that their learning has been or will be integrated into their personal and professional lives. One participant noted that “[t]here is no universal agreed upon definition of disability; ableism and disability is often forgotten about in DEI efforts.”Another stated that university policies often do not provide the accessibility and equity intended and mused about “how unaware most faculty and staff are about what disability means and its intersections.”We include the following two longer quotes from respondents regarding key ideas gained because they concisely reflect much of what we hoped would be ‘take-aways’ from the series: “A growing understanding of innumerable challenges faced by disabled people. The debate about usage of the terms "disabled" and "differently-abled" within the community, layered on terms and phrases that are obviously ableist. I also learnt a little about the history of the fight for appropriate accommodations, the successes, and the long way ahead—which is rather daunting.” “Essentially, I have become more open minded and try to see the world through the lens of others more often than just my own. I also did not know much of the history behind the [Americans with] Disability Act and how hard it was for those activists to achieve that.” A comment regarding feeling prepared, as a result of participating in the seminar,to promote a more equitable campus climate for disabled faculty, staff, and graduate students suggested a slight increased confidence in taking action for disability equity on campus, “I still feel a bit unsure of who to contact regarding certain concerns, but for the most part, I know who to reach out to for advice.”However, when asked about intentions to be involved in campus efforts to address ableism and disability equity it appeared that the series had not supported participants in articulating and animating clear pathways for action. Hope was expressed by one graduate student who intended to “figure out how to form a support group for students (both graduate and undergraduate) with disabilities.”Additional comments included “Continue my efforts,” “[Be p]art of PCDIR[President’s council on Diversity, Inclusion, and Respect],” and “I don't know of any initiatives that I may participate in beyond things I see and encounter in my daily work / life.” Even so, respondent comments regarding integration of learning gained during the series indicate that participants had already begun to apply seminar content into their personal and professional lives. One respondent reported on the intention to create and continuously adapt an “ongoing ‘accessibility policy’ with the students.” Another spoke of “commitment to learning more …helping my team talk …[and] increasing promotion of [disability services] in recruitment materials/initiatives.” One participant had already shared a video we discussed with others and another stated “I am trying to be more mindful of my language since I tend to use ableist phrases like ‘I am so blind’ when I cannot locate something that is right in front of me.” Two additional comments similarly reflected a heightened awareness of ableist language and a commitment to remedy it: “I think just being more self-aware, in addition to being curious and respectfully calling people out at times with comments that have the potential to be damaging” and “I am a lot more careful about what language I use, including not using terms that I did not even realize were problematic… I expect to keep speaking up about harmful/thoughtless behavior when I see it.” Survey items assessing the quality of the seminar series indicated that 90% Agreed (40% Agreed; 50% Strongly Agreed) that their participation was worthwhile and that they would recommend it to their colleagues. A majority (80%) indicated that this online seminar series was delivered effectively and participant comments noted appreciation for the opportunity to discuss the topic and for the resources shared. Schedule conflicts were noted by three respondents and one participant indicated they had experienced consistent technology difficulties. A participant who identified as having a physical disability indicated appreciation for the opportunity to attend virtually because the “campus is quite large and I sometimes have to take lengthy detours to get to certain buildings or rooms… I do think you should offer that option if you move this seminar to be more face-to-face.” A majority of respondents agreed that intersectional perspectives of disabled faculty/staff were centered in this series (see Table 1. Participants’ Ratings of Seminar Effectiveness). Taken together, the quantitative and qualitative data indicated that participants in the seminar series made meaningful gains in four fundamental aspects of allyship focused on disability (in)equities in academia: increased general topical knowledge of disability stereotyping and discrimination, improved understanding of discriminatory impacts of ableism, enhanced skills for interrupting disability discrimination and inequities, and amplified personal commitment and motivation for addressing disability equity in the workplace. 6. Discussion and Limitations The needs and perspectives of faculty, staff, and graduate students who identify as members of disability communities continue to be too rarely centered in academic workplace policy, practice, and professional development [ 10 , 11 , 21 ]. Overall, the post-seminar survey findings indicated foundational allyship knowledge and skills were increased by participants’ seminar engagement [ 76 – 80 ]. A broad majority of respondents indicated that their participation in the seminar had fostered deepened understandings of ableism and disableism and had contributed to their preparedness in addressing disability equity. Moreover, the 70% of participants who had not entered the series with already-high levels of commitment and motivation for disability equity reported substantially increased motivation—a 33% increase—to advocate for disability equity. Both qualitative and quantitative data indicated that the seminar’s content and format offered a meaningful professional development opportunity for the participants. Positive ratings and comments included in the items assessing seminar quality suggested that the series also created an important space for engagement and belonging for a majority of participants, which likely was key to persistent participation across the academic year. Although our participant pool is quite small, we interpreted the variation in responses among participants (those who identified as disabled compared to not disabled) to suggest the need for creating various types of professional development opportunities for faculty and staff to engage in based on intended outcomes: (increased knowledge versus community-building/networking), level of workplace responsibility and perceived need-to-know (individual/personal roles versus supervisory), or preferred format (lecture versus discussions). Next, we describe collective campus actions that have followed from the seminar, review lessons learned, and offer interpretations and recommendations. 6.1 Collective Actions that Emerged Post-Seminar In the final three meetings of the seminar series, participants enumerated campus needs for disability equity. During the academic year following the seminar an interdisciplinary workgroup, comprised of seminar participants and additional campus community members interested in disability equity came together to find pathways for addressing those local campus needs. The work group tackled one key and actionable issue: developing a model for convening fully inclusive and welcoming hybrid meeting spaces, with a primary focus on the needs of faculty and staff. This Making Space for Disability Equity work group identified space, technology, and design resources available on campus, hosted hybrid sessions to assess the functioning of currently available hybrid technology in two different workplace settings (a small conference room and a larger meeting room), developed a set of guidelines for convening inclusive hybrid meeting spaces, and created a final report describing those efforts [ 10 ]. More recently, a campus Coalition of Disabled Academics affinity group has been formed for faculty who identify as disabled to join in community with one another, and a Disability Equity Advocates, Allies, and Accomplices (DEA 3 ) Affinity/Work group has also been convened for faculty and staff to become more informed change agents for disability equity. 6.2 Lessons Learned As we consider a next iteration of this seminar series, we keep in mind several lessons learned. Scheduling for the full academic year limited participation due to semester changes in teaching or other duties; participation may be enhanced if seminars were scheduled each semester when work schedules were more firmly set. Alternately, if resources allowed, seminars could be offered over multiple days or time periods. Obtaining Institutional Review Board approval and participant informed consent at the beginning of the series would have allowed for analysis of the qualitative data obtained during the seminar. Collecting survey responses pre and post seminar,rather than only retrospectively, would have provided an opportunity to tailor the training based on participant awareness ratings. Finally, in a next iteration of the survey we would edit some items for clarity (e.g., on the final retrospective rating of commitment to addressing ableism the response label should replace “awareness” with “commitment”). Items assessing change in the four elements of disability equity allyship (found in section one forced choice and section three retrospective ratings) would also be edited to be more congruent with one another, or to include only the retrospective items. 6.3 Study Limitations The small number of participants, the single iteration of the seminar, and data limited to a single post-seminar survey precluded confident generalizability of our findings. The potential for reduced anonymity due to the small number of study participants may have caused reluctance to provide demographic data and the request to identify the number of sessions attended may also have impacted responses for that same reason. 6.4 Interpretations and Recommendations Keeping in mind that volunteer/self-selection bias is clearly present given that participants responded to an open invitation to all faculty and staff, we turn our attention now to interpretations and recommendations. If disability equity is to be garnered, we assert that it will be essential to identify multiple pathways for meaningful professional engagement and support for all employees. It is likely that disabled faculty and staff would benefit from professional spaces in which they could disclose and discuss disability concerns with trusted disability-savvy colleagues (e.g., an affinity group). Yet, it is also crucial to enlist all campus stakeholders in pursuing disability equity. Circling back to our opening paragraphs in which we reviewed the need for the perspectives of disabled faculty and staff in academic workplaces to be integrated into institutional equity efforts, we broaden our interpretations and recommendations further: providing a wide range of professional development options promoting disability equity with varying content, process, and expected outcomes can encourage participation by a larger number and broader range of campus stakeholders. This view was reminiscent of analyses we had completed for the institutional transformation ADVANCE FORWARD initiative that inaugurated our current efforts. That earlier work, focused on gender equity, characterized the myriad programs within the ADVANCE FORWARD initiative as “a long-haul approach in which the campus community was/is iteratively invited to engage in an ongoing change process” [98]. The overall model that informed the initiative was summarized in an Organizational Transformation Matrix in which programming approaches were placed within the body of the matrix based on where the activity intersected with two broad categories culled from institutional transformation literatures: diversity orientation of program participants (diversity positive, neutral, or negative subcultures) and the intended influence of the activity on elements of institutional life (structure, engagement, or culture). Using that same matrix of diversity subcultures intersecting with institutional elements, Table 3 plots various interventions conducted for disability equity on our campus. We included previous efforts undertaken between 2008 and 2019, our recent efforts from 2020 to 2024, and an enumeration of actions on our yet-to-do agenda. Although we located the seminar series reviewed in this case study at the intersection of the institutional element of Engagement and the Diversity-Neutral Subculture (Table 3 ), we note that this seminar and other “awareness/educational” actions could be in multiple intersections within the matrix, depending on the audience or participants. For example, a small percentage of the participants in this case study indicated that they began the seminar with very high commitment to address ableism in the workplace and likely would identify as diversity-positive rather than diversity-neutral. While this matrix summarized a number of disability equity interventions taken or planned on our campus, we want to also recognize that many additional actions were taken by individual faculty or staff as they quietly worked to promote principles of universal design and disability equity within their own work and/or departments. Certainly, the actions of individuals and small groups are meaningful and formed the foundation upon which institutional change can be built. However, without a network of leadership that prioritizes equity and supports collective institutional efforts, those actions were limited in time and overall organizational impacts. Our hope is that this visual representation of a long-haul campus-wide approach may offer a template for other organizations to assess the status of taken or planned disability equity interventions, then serve to map out additional actions likely to attract a broadened representation of stakeholders. By evolving a campus-wide network of disability equity advocates, allies, and accomplices, we have greater potential for more effectively addressing institutional transformation for disability equity. The reported rates of disability among faculty and staff on our campus are comparable to national estimates of disability prevalence. We attribute this representation, in part, to an increasing willingness of faculty and staff to self-identify their disabilities in campus surveys due to increasing awareness and commitment to disability equity on campus. This shift reflects the cumulative impact of long-term efforts, beginning with the ADVANCE FORWARD initiative in 2008, to foster a supportive campus climate that included disability as an integral part of DEI initiatives. Additionally, the normalization of disability accommodations during the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with annual notices, workshops, and policy changes, has fostered an environment where faculty and staff felt more comfortable self-identifying their disabilities in campus surveys. Table 3 Institutional Transformation Matrix for Disability Equity, Circa 2008–2024 Diversity Subcultures Elements of Successful Accessibility Efforts Diversity-Positive Diversity-Neutral Diversity-Averse Structure • Centralized faculty accommodations to HR • Policy revisions Promotion and Tenure extensions & confidentiality • Reimagining of Center for Accessibility and Diversity Resources (CADR) • Central Accommodation Fund • Specialist for Faculty Accommodations & move from HR to CADR • IT/LAIC support for accessibility • UD approach to accommodations • Iterative reviews of Accommodations policy Engagement • Women Faculty with Disability Task Force • Faculty Fellows • Formation of CODA disabled faculty affinity group • Accommodations Policy Task Force • Making Space Work Group • Disability Equity Advocates, Allies, and Accomplices Learning Community • Intersections of Disability and Academic Faculty seminar series • Disability Equity Advocacy 4-part seminar series • Faculty with Disabilities Survey& Forum • Addition of disability related questions to climate surveys Culture • Workshops for faculty and administrators on Essential Functions of Faculty Positions • IncludingU, Equity at the Intersections virtual brownbag luncheons • Faculty DEIA Research Series • Faculty and Academic Leaders orientations include faculty accommodations request process • Pedagogical Luncheon on Design for Universal Access: Teaching All Students • Professional Development programming from Office of Teaching and Learning Table Notes: Text format indicates timeframes (Previous Efforts [2008–2019] , Recent Efforts [2020–2024] ,Yet-to-do List ); Alt Text: Matrix of previous efforts [2008–2019], recent efforts [2020–2024],and yet-to-do actions for disability equity. 7. Conclusion To summarize, we reiterate that disability is one aspect of an always multifaceted and intersectional social identity, and thus is one interdependent aspect of the equity work needed to create more welcoming and creative workplaces. Moreover, the presumptive focus on students with disabilities occludes the presence and talents of disabled faculty and staff in academia. It is essential that the knowledge and perspectives of disabled colleagues in academic workplaces are centered. It is also crucial not to burden disabled faculty or staff with expectations that they are the sole providers of disability equity leadership or are expected to educate their colleagues. Rather, it is the place of policy and practice to provide a workplace that welcomes and values the contributions of all employees. Providing a wide range of professional support options including engagements similar to the seminar series investigated in this case study, can support organizational stakeholders in becoming more informed and influential disability equity allies/accomplices. And more disability-equitable workplaces make for a more just and equitable world for us all. We offer this case study in the spirit of practical research that can be applied by institutions in their work for inclusive excellence. Declarations Funding: Access ADVANCE is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF Award HRD-2017017, HRD-2017054). Any questions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. Competing Interests: The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests, no conflicts of interest, nor competing interests to declare relevant to the content of this article. Code availability: Not applicable. Author Contribution: All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Cali L. Anicha, Larry Napoleon, Jr. and Canan Bilen-Green. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Cali L. Anicha. All authors read, edited, commented on and approved the final manuscript. Ethical Statement and Consent to Participate: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND USA (IRB approval number: Protocol #IRB0004413). Informed consent was obtained electronically from all participants who voluntarily agreed to participate in the study after the survey and objectives of the study were explained in clear language. Participants were reassured that the data collected would be confidential and would be used for research purposes only. It was clearly explained that participation in this study was voluntary, and the participant had the right to withdraw at any time without any deprivation. This research was performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. Data Availability: De-identified data may be made available upon request. Acknowledgments AccessADVANCE is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF Award HRD-). Any questions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Disability and Health Data System (DHDS). 2024; http://dhds.cdc.gov Bernard MA. Advancing disability inclusion in the scientific workforce. National Institute of Health. 2021; https://diversity.nih.gov/blog/2021-07-21-advancing-disability-inclusion-scientific-workforce National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Spec Rep NSF 23-315 . National Science Foundation. 2021. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf23315/report Vance ML, Harrison EG, eds. Disabled faculty & staff: Intersecting identities in higher education (Vol. 2). Huntersville, NC: AHEAD; 2023. Brown N, Leigh J. Ableism in higher education: Theorising experiences of disabilities and chronic illnesses in higher education . London: UCL Press; 2020. Lindsay S, Fuentes K. It is time to address ableism in academia: A systematic review of the experiences and impact of ableism among faculty and staff. Disabilities . 2022; https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities2020014 Khanmalek T. Navigating the faculty disability accommodations process. 2022. https://ideasonfire.net/faculty-disability-accommodations/ Kim E, Aquino KC. Disability as diversity in higher education: Policies and practices to enhance student success . New York, NY: Routledge; 2017. Kwon C-K, Guadalupe SS, Archer M, Groomes DA. Understanding career development pathways of college students with disabilities using crip theory and the theory of whole self. J Divers High Educ . 2023; https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000464 Authors; 2023 Ball, KB, Traxler RE. “Things can be tough”: A qualitative analysis of disability disclosure in graduate school. J Divers High Educ . 2023; https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000488 Jain D, Potluri V, Sharif A. Navigating graduate school with a disability. In: Proceedings from ASSETS '20: The 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility . Virtual Event, Greece. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1145/3373625.3416986 Burke L. Disability as diversity. Inside Higher Ed . 2020; https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/11/12/could-disability-be-further-included-diversity-efforts Exec. Order No. 14035, 3 C.F.R. 34593–603. 2021; https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-14127. Annamma SA, Connor D, Ferri B. Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race Ethnicity Educ. 2013; https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2012.730511 Barnes C. What a difference a decade makes: Reflections on doing ‘emancipatory’ disability research. Disabil Soc, 2003 ; https://doi.org/10.1080/713662197 Bassler S. "But you don’t look sick": Dismodernism, disability studies and music therapy on invisible illness and the unstable body. Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy Special Issue on Music Therapy and Disabiityl Studies. 2014; https://doi.org/10.15845/voices.v14i3.802 Campbell FK. Contours of ableism: The production of disability and abledness. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan; 2009. Dudley-Marling C, Gurn A, eds. The myth of the normal curve . Vol. 11. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.; 2010. Nielsen KE. A disability history of the United States . Boston, MA: Beacon Press; 2012. Price M. Crip spacetime: Access, failure, and accountability in academic life . Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2024. SinsInvalid. Skin, tooth, and bone: The basis of movement is our people . 2nd ed. Berkeley, CA: Sins Invalid; 2019. Titchkosky T, Cagulada E, DeWelles M, Gold E, eds. DisAppearing: Encounters in disability studies . Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholars; 2022. Finkelstein V. The social model repossessed. The Disability Studies Archive UK . 2001; http://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/files/library/finkelstein-soc-mod-repossessed.pdf. Garland-Thomson R. Extraordinary bodies: Figuring physical disability in American culture and literature . New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 1997. Meekosha H. Decolonising disability: Thinking and acting globally. Disabil Soc . 2011; https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2011.602860 Schalk SD. Bodyminds reimagined: (Dis)ability race and gender in Black women's speculative fiction . Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2018. Shakespeare T, Watson N. Defending the social model. Disabil Soc . 1997; https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599727380 McIntosh P. Reflections and future directions for privilege studies. J Soc Issues . 2012; https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01744.x. Combahee River Collective. The Combahee River Collective statement: Black feminist organizing in the seventies and eighties. Albany, NY: Kitchen Table: Women of Color Press; 1986. Combahee River Collective. Combahee River Collective statement. In: Smith B, editor. Home girls: A Black feminist anthology . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press; 2000. pp. 264–74. Crenshaw K. Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Rev . 1991; https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039 Hill Collins P. It's all in the family: Intersections of gender, race, and nation. In: Narayan U, Harding S, editors. Decentering the center: Philosophy for a multicultural, postcolonial, and feminist world . Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press; 2000. p. 62–82. Moore Jr LF, Lewis TA, Brown LXZ. Accountable reporting on disability, race, & police violence: A community response to the “Ruderman white paper on the media coverage of use of force and disability.” 2016. https://docs.google.com/document/d/117eoVeJVP594L6-1bgL8zpZrzgojfsveJwcWuHpkNcs/edit. Savolainen J, Casey PJ, McBrayer JP, Schwerdtle PN. Positionality and its problems: Questioning the value of reflexivity statements in research. Perspect Psychol Sci . 2023; https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916221144988 Gambrell J, Bright A. Epistemology of radical love: A critical race framework for dismantling the uncomfortable complexities of educator privilege. In: Diem J, editor. The social and cultural foundations of education: A reader . 1st ed. San Diego, CA: Cognella Academic Publishing; 2016. p. 108–33. Kezar A, Lester J. Breaking the barriers of essentialism in leadership research: Positionality as a promising approach. Fem Formations . 2010; https://doi.org/10.1353/nwsa.0.0121 Massoud MF. The price of positionality: Assessing the benefits and burdens of self-identification in research methods. J Law Soc . 2022; https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12372 Torres Fremlin P. How many disabled people are there? Why the complexity of disability can't be reduced to one number. In: Disability Debrief . 2023. https://www.disabilitydebrief.org/debrief/how-many-disabled-people/?ref=disability-debrief-newsletter. Andrews, EE, Forber-Pratt AJ, Mona LR, Lund EM, Pilarski CR, Balter R. #SaytheWord: A disability culture commentary on the erasure of “disability.” Rehab Psych. 2019; https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000258 Zoeglossia Fellows, eds. We are not your metaphor: A disability poetry anthology . Minneapolis, MN: Squares & Rebels; 2019. Clare E. Exile & pride: Disability, queerness, & liberation. Cambridge, MA: South End Press; 2009. Kafer A. Feminist, queer, crip . Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press; 2013. McRuer R. Crip theory: Cultural signs of queerness and disability . New York, NY: New York University Press; 2006. Reynolds JM. Disability and white supremacy. Crit Philos Race . 2022; https://doi.org/10.5325/critphilrace.10.1.0048 Mingus M. Changing the framework: Disability justice: How our communities can move beyond access to wholeness. In: Leaving Evidence . 2011. https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/changing-the-framework-disability-justice/ Palacios MR. Naming ableism. In: Cripstory . 2017. https://cripstory.wordpress.com/2017/04/01/naming-ableism/ Clare E. Eli joy and resistance. https://eliclare.com/ Chronicle Staff. DEI legislation tracker: Explore where college diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts are under attack. Politics and Race. The Chronicle of Higher Education . 2024. https://www.chronicle.com/article/here-are-the-states-where-lawmakers-are-seeking-to-ban-colleges-dei-efforts Wynn CE, Ziff E. Broken promises? Colleges and universities responded to the death of George Floyd with public commitments to racial justice, but two years later, too little has changed. In: Inside High Ed . 2022. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2022/06/24/too-many-efforts-racial-justice-remain-performative-opinion Blair J. COVID likely to peak in colder months as virus becomes endemic in the US. Yale School of Public Health . 2023; https://ysph.yale.edu/news-article/covid-likely-to-peak-in-colder-months-as-virus-becomes-endemic-in-the-us/ Olsen SH, Cork SJ, Anders P, Padrón R, Peterson A, Strausser A, Jaeger, PT. The disability tax and the accessibility tax: The extra intellectual, emotional, and technological labor and financial expenditures required of disabled people in a world gone wrong…and mostly online. Including Disabil . 2022; https://doi.org/10.51357/id.vi1.170 Herder L. The return to in-person instruction worries disability community. In: Diverse: Issues In Higher Education . 2022. https://www.diverseeducation.com/demographics/disabilties/article/15295832/the-return-to-inperson-instruction-worries-disability-community. Krebs E. A sour taste of sick chronicity: pandemic time and the violence of “returning to normal.” Commun Crit/Cult Stud . 2022; https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2022.2063354 Burghardt M. The human bottom of non-human things: On critical theory and its contributions to critical disability studies. Crit Disabil Discourse . 2011; 3:1–16. https://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/cdd/article/view/31560 Yee S. From civil rights to human rights. 30th Anniversary of the 504 Sit-In. DREDF. 2007. https://dredf.org/news/publications/from-civil-rights-to-human-rights/ Price M. Time harms: Disabled faculty navigating the accommodations loop. South Atl Q . 2021; https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-8915966 Yee S. Where prejudice, disability, and "disablism" meet. In: Breslin ML, Yee S, eds. Disability Rights Law and Policy: International and National Perspectives . Berkeley, CA: Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF); 2002. https://dredf.org/news/publications/disability-rights-law-and-policy/where-prejudice-disability-and-disabilism-meet/ Hill Collins P. On intellectual activism . Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press; 2013. Brashear RP. Fixed: The science/fiction of human enhancement . New Day Films. 2013; https://www.newday.com/films/fixed-the-sciencefiction-of-human-enhancement LeBrecht J, Newnham N. Crip camp: A disability revolution . United States: Higher Ground Productions; 2020. https://cripcamp.com/ Kafer A. Film review: Fixed: The Science/Fiction of Human Enhancement. Disabil Stud Q . 2015; 35(4). https://dsq-sds.org/index.php/dsq/article/view/4985/4115 Sedgwick M. Review of: Crip Camp. Disabil Stud Q . 2021; https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/7843/5878 Heder S. CODA . Vendôme Pictures; Apple TV+; 2021. Parsloe SM, Smith EM. The threat of returning to “normal”: Resisting ableism in the post-COVID classroom. Fem Pedagogy . 2022; https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/feministpedagogy/vol2/iss3/8 Swenor B. A need for disability data justice. Forefront . 2022; https://doi.org/10.1377/forefront.20220818.426231 Torabi F (host), Black ER (interviewee). The financial cost of having a disability [Audio podcast episode 1203]. In So Money . 2021. https://podcast.farnoosh.tv/episode/emily-rapp-black/ Walton DR. What’s a leg got to do with it? Black, female, and disabled in America. Rain Thunder . 2011; Spring:26–31. Yusuf D. Why multiply marginalized people with disabilities should be prioritized before, during and after disasters and emergencies. In: World Institute on Disability (WID) . 2022. https://wid.org/why-multiply-marginalized-people-with-disabilities-should-be-prioritized-before-during-and-after-disasters-and-emergencies/ Gabel SL, editor. Disability studies in education: Readings in theory and method . New York, NY: Peter Lang; 2005. Hernández-Saca DI. Reframing the master narratives of disability at my intersections: An outline of an educational equity research agenda. Crit Disabil Discourse . 2017. https://cdd.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/cdd/article/view/39723 McDonald-Morken CA. Mainstreaming critical disability studies: Towards undoing the last prejudice [dissertation]. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University; 2014 Price M. Cripping revolution: A crazed essay. In: Proceedings from the Society for Disability Studies Annual Conference. San Jose, CA; 2011. Price M. Mad at school: Rhetorics of mental disability and academic life . Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press; 2011. Arif S, Afolabi T, Mitrzyk B, Thomas T, Borja-Hart N, Wade L, et al. Engaging in authentic allyship as part of our professional development. Am J Pharm Educ . 2022; https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8690 Bishop A. Becoming an ally: breaking the cycle of oppression in people . Halifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood; 2002. Casey EA, Allen CT, Tolman RM, Carlson JM, Leek C. Walking the walk or just talk?: A global examination of men’s intentions to take violence preventative action. J Aggress Maltreat Trauma . 2019; https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2018.1446480 Guess R. The idea of a critical theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt school . New York, NY: Syndicate of the Cambridge University Press; 1981. Ponce de Leon R, Carter JT, Rosette AS. Sincere solidarity or performative pretense? Evaluations of organizational allyship. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process . 2024; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104296 Reason RD, Davis TL. Antecedents, precursors, and concurrent concepts in the development of social justice attitudes and actions. New Dir Stud Serv . 2005; https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.161 McKenzie M. No more "allies." In: Black Girl Dangerous (BGD) . 2013. https://www.bgdblog.org/2013/09/no-more-allies/ Abes ES, Zahneis ME. A duoethnographic exploration of disability ally development. Disabil Stud Q. 2020; https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v40i3.7038 Powell J, Kelly A. Accomplices in the academy in the age of Black Lives Matter. J Crit Thought Pract . 2017; https://doi.org/10.31274/jctp-180810-73 Rudy. Accomplices not allies: Abolishing the ally industrial complex. In: Indigenous Action Media . 2014. https://www.indigenousaction.org/accomplices-not-allies-abolishing-the-ally-industrial-complex/ Authors, 2020 Advance FORWARD: Transforming a gendered institution. NSF HRD 0811239. NSF ADVANCE Institutional Transformation Proposal . 2008. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0811239 Berg E, Besse R. 2021 XXXX Campus climate survey . XXXXX. 2021; https://www.XXXX.edu/oira/institutional_reports/campus_climate_survey/. Authors, 2022 Authors, 2024 AccessADVANCE. Equal access: Universal design of your ADVANCE project . DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology). 2022;https://www.washington.edu/doit/equal-access-universal-design-your-advance-project Authors, 2018 Authors, 2015 Authors, 2013 National SEED. The National SEED Project: Creating conversational communities that drive change. https://www.nationalseedproject.org/ McIntosh P. White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. In: Peace and Freedom Magazine . 1989; https://www.nationalseedproject.org/key-seed-texts/white-privilege-unpacking-the-invisible-knapsack Style EJ. Curriculum as encounter: Selves and shelves. Engl J . 2014; http://www.jstor.org/stable/24484250 Authors, 2017 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 12 May, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 06 May, 2025 Reviews received at journal 17 Apr, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 13 Apr, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 11 Apr, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 11 Apr, 2025 First submitted to journal 01 Apr, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5160614","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Case Report","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":442396588,"identity":"95e85522-9bc4-4140-a469-f2e8303d92e8","order_by":0,"name":"Cali Anicha","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"North Dakota State University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Cali","middleName":"","lastName":"Anicha","suffix":""},{"id":442396589,"identity":"d10a7c4b-8f7c-4154-85e3-6c304e15c4a6","order_by":1,"name":"Canan Bilen-Green","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"North Dakota State University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Canan","middleName":"","lastName":"Bilen-Green","suffix":""},{"id":442396590,"identity":"df363266-ab65-4ad5-ba60-b162a5bc841f","order_by":2,"name":"Larry Napoleon, Jr.","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"North Dakota State University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Larry","middleName":"","lastName":"Napoleon","suffix":"Jr."}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-09-26 18:38:13","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5160614/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5160614/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":80587926,"identity":"6ffd101e-49a6-4446-bcfc-fa5f792f8b74","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-15 01:27:53","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":308456,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCourse Outline for Intersections of Disability and Academic Faculty\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlt text: Course outline for Intersections of Disability and Academic Faculty seminar series.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5160614/v1/7537f496c5f072e264e208d4.png"},{"id":80588475,"identity":"3b8282f1-b518-4e56-9e31-c0e5407fe945","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-15 01:43:53","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":474686,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRetrospective Ratings of Change Pre Post Seminar Series, 1 = Minimal, 10 = High\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlt text: Bar graphs showing ratings of growth in awareness of disability stereotyping/discrimination, awareness of ableism, and commitment to address ableism over the series.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5160614/v1/52765c97e01a062d67a0b5dc.png"},{"id":80588616,"identity":"d0192681-1d53-40bd-9b28-302f425dbae1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-15 01:52:02","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2116179,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5160614/v1/92ade10f-354b-40d8-b2ff-85c0d528967d.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Advancing Disability Equity in Academic Workplaces: A Professional Development Seminar Case Study","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eMore than a quarter of working age adults in the United States (US) identify as disabled[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. Even so, representative numbers have not been found in most workplaces, including academic and scientific workplaces [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR3\" citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. Indeed, due to social stigmas associated with disability, \u0026ldquo;disclosure\u0026rdquo; of disability in academic workplaces is rife with consequential risk [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e]. A systematic review of studies in six countries revealed that \u0026ldquo;[f]aculty and staff with disabilities are significantly underrepresented within academia and experience alarming rates of discrimination, social exclusion and marginalization\u0026rdquo;[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e]. In higher education, disability-focused policies, programming, professional development, and research have been predominantly oriented toward disabled undergraduate learners [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR8\" citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. While research on the experiences of graduate students (who may also fill roles of both faculty and staff) has sometimes reflected workplace rather than classroom concerns [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR11\" citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e], the by-default attention to the needs of disabled students implicitly signals that disabled faculty, staff, and graduate students are not expected to be present, and/or are not welcomed and valued employees.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUntil quite recently, the substantial contributions of educational equity and institutional transformation research in higher education had not addressed disability as a marginalized social identity in extracurricular and/or workplace settings [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. Nor, until recently, had disability been included in much of the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) work undertaken in wider cultural contexts (see Exec.OrderNo.14035, in which \u0026ldquo;A\u0026rdquo; for Accessibility (DEIA) was added) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. However, expressly intersectional, inclusive, and liberatory disability equity scholarship is burgeoning (for a sampling see [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR16 CR17 CR18 CR19 CR20\" citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. In tandem, the social movement for disability justice [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e] that led to and has continued since, the passage of the 1990 ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), is also expanding thanks to persistent activism by members of disabled communities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo encourage the development ofa community motivated to advance disability awareness and equityon our campus, we created a year-long professional development seminar designed to address disability equity knowledge and allyship skills in the academic workplace. Because academic workplaces are comprised of faculty, staff and graduate students, campus community members in those roles were invited to participate. In this article, we 1) provide an overview of the seminar content and process and 2) review findings from a post-seminar survey structured to determine if/to what degree seminar participants found themselves better prepared and motivated to enact disability equity allyship in their interpersonal and professional lives. The research objectiveof this study was to examine if a professional development course designed to uncover overlapping interpersonal and systemic disability bias and discrimination may contribute to knowledge of, and motivation to act for, disability equity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eEssential upfront sidebar\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs the authors of this case study, we would be remiss if we did not acknowledge that research is never truly objective because all aspects, including what is studied and what sources of knowledge and experience are engaged, are influenced by researcher positionality(ies). Our positions within social structures always inform what and how we know, and how we see ourselves and others [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR31 CR32 CR33\" citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e]. Those positions influence all aspects of our lives, and it is important to acknowledge and reflect on one\u0026rsquo;s own social identities in order to locate the impacts of those life experiences on knowledge production efforts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile there are reasoned arguments resisting the use of reflexivity or positionality statements [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e], we find recent scholarship that champions the inclusion of such statements to be compelling [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR37\" citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e]. To share with our readers \u0026ldquo;where [we] write from and how [our] perspectives are formed\u0026rdquo;[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e],we briefly take note of several social identities we believe are salient to the work described in this article.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors bring diverse perspectives, identifying as follows: a cisgender white woman and a disability ally/accomplice in training, a cisgender Black man, participating in disability work as a learner and as a member of the community under scrutiny, and a cisgender woman who has firsthand experience in her own career of the impacts of gender and disability inequity in higher education and the negative effects experienced by faculty, staff, and students, including BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color), LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans, Questioning+) individuals, and those with disabilities. At least one of the authors identifies as having a disability, offering valuable personal insight.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the following sections, we begin with a review of the literature on disability as an essential component of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts and disability equity in higher education, with particular attention to systemic ableism, intersectionality, and allyship. This review provides background and highlights the models and content that informed the year-long professional development seminar, emphasizing its importance in promoting disability equity. We then describe the seminar that serves as the focus of this evaluative case study. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings for advancing disability equity in academic workplaces, offer recommendations for fostering inclusive institutional practices, and explore the broader relevance of these efforts for systemic change in higher education.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Literature Review","content":"\u003cp\u003eDue to pervasive negative biases and resultant disability stigma and discrimination, most people know too little about disability in general and have minimal awareness of systemic ableism/disableism. This lack of knowledge can include people with disabilities because experiences of disability are so multifaceted and because the prevailing cultural view of disability effectively obfuscates the structural dimensions of disability discrimination. In majority culture contexts disability is generally medicalized, seen as an individual issue in need of fixing or accommodating. In disability culture contexts, most disability-related concerns faced by individuals are understood as socio-cultural issues, the result of barriers erected through discriminatory beliefs and social practices [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. A frequently cited example of such barriers identified the lack of an elevator\u0026mdash;and the lack of planning to have a (working) elevator\u0026mdash;as a causative factor that \u0026ldquo;disables\u0026rdquo; the person using wheeled mobility (think scooter, wheelchair, child stroller).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eViewing disability through such environmental accessibility and impacts-focused social models [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR25 CR26 CR27\" citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e] connects disability with other systems of unearned over-advantaging and disadvantaging [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e], such as those grounded in notions of race and gender. That shift in perspective changes how disability is understood and addressed. Indeed, from this vantage point, disability equity demands an informed and motivated public, that is, a community of advocates, allies, and accomplices, intentionally inclusive of both disabled and nondisabled people.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Disability and Allyship in Broad Cultural and Higher Education Contexts\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsing the lenses of language and intersectionality, we first offer an overview of current macro-cultural contexts related to disability (in)equity. We then review overlaps across larger cultural and higher education contexts by asking and answering \u0026ldquo;why disability and why now?\u0026rdquo; Next, a brief reprise of allyship literatures to foreground and establish our rationale for seminar and survey content. To set the stage for the current study, this is followed by a recounting of several campus disability equity measures taken at our institution prior to the seminar series.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e2.2 Language\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePerson-first language (e.g., person with a disability) invites the recognition of disability as (only) one aspect of a whole person, whereas identity-first language (identifying as disabled) lays claim to a valued membership in a social group. Andrews and colleagues developed a social media campaign, \u003cem\u003e#SaytheWord\u003c/em\u003e, noting that positive disability identities are erased through use of euphemisms (e.g., differently-abled) and advocating for a recognition of disability as a rich cultural identity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]. We use both person-first and identity-first language in this article.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn agreement with the assertion that language choices are \u0026ldquo;crucial in the struggle against disability degradation\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e], in this paper we endeavored to avoid ableist metaphors. Specifically, we eschewed language that links human variations conventionally identified as disabilities with problematic outcomes or morals such as \u0026ldquo;that\u0026rsquo;s so lame,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;falling on deaf ears,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;blind faith,\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;crippling rage\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e]. We also explicitly reject medicalized models in which disability is imagined as an individual pathology or problem.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Intersectionality\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbleism, the devaluation and/or discrimination of people perceived as disabled, does not exist apart from and cannot be experienced in isolation from other forms of systemic unearned advantaging and disadvantaging [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR43 CR44\" citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e], thus it is essential to be always mindful of intersectionality [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR31\" citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Just as racialized discrimination is an expected outcome of racism, a social model lens views disability discrimination (disableism) as the expected outcome of ableism, that is, ableist beliefs and concomitant political, economic, and cultural practices [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e]. We offer the following sources for concise, compelling, and intersectional short courses on ableism: \u003cem\u003eCripStory\u003c/em\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e]; \u003cem\u003eSins Invalid: An Unshamed Claim to Beauty in the Face of Invisibility\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]; and \u003cem\u003eJoy and Resistance\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e]; we encourage readers to visit one or more of these rich digital resources no matter how familiar you may be with disability topics.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4 Timing: Why Disability and Why Now?\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhy focus on disability? As detailed above, the inclusion of disability in DEI efforts to date has been limited in scope and prevalence, and this has been especially true in academic workplaces. In the context of growing political divisiveness around DEI in higher education [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e], disability may be one social identity category around which there is less cultural backlash. Yet, the ongoing, lopsided, and harmful impacts of the not-yet endemic COVID-19 pandemic for disabled people [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e] have put disability equity \u0026lsquo;on the radar\u0026rsquo; of most human resource departments, including those in educational institutions. Perhaps more pointedly, the loss of the accommodations hastily installed as the pandemic first raged\u0026mdash;accommodations that often benefited all employees\u0026mdash;were just as hastily purged in (misguided) efforts to return to a \u0026lsquo;normal\u0026rsquo; in which access barriers are ubiquitous [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR54\" citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e]. Disabled workers continue to be left behind because in dominant US culture disability is most often understood as an individual medical issue and discrimination has primarily been addressed through a civil rights approach, leaving aside questions of biased beliefs and their contributions to inequitable systems [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e]. This have resulted in disability accommodations being viewed through legalistic lenses [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e], a set-up for burdensome and ineffective policies and practices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhy center disability now? There has been a notable uptick in disability-related media content over the past few years. This is by design. Disability activists, including intellectual activists in higher education [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e], have been working nonstop to claim rights, demand respect, and seek recompense for generations of harmful discrimination. Some examples include \u003cem\u003eFixed: The Science/Fiction of Human Enhancement\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e], a film that invites viewers to ponder the epistemological and ontological assumptions that undergird notions of what it means to be human. Another recent award-winning documentary film, \u003cem\u003eCrip Camp: A Disability Revolution\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e] chronicles disability activism in the US since the late 1970s (informatively reviewed by Kafer in 2015 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e63\u003c/span\u003e]; though see Sedgwick\u0026rsquo;s important critique in 2021 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e]). In 2022, motion picture awards were given to \u003cem\u003eCODA\u003c/em\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e], notable for featuring a deaf actor authentically playing a deaf character; an important step toward greater disability representation in the media. In 2021, the US Office of Personnel Management, for the first time, included \u0026ldquo;Accessibility\u0026rdquo; in its diversity, equity, and inclusion strategic plan making \u0026ldquo;DEIA\u0026rdquo; the law of the land. This grassroots groundswell is finding its way to academia, partly also due to the impact of COVID-19 on faculty workload and student learning [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR67\" citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e]. Our seminar series leveraged this growing interest to promote disability equity allyship.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5 Allyship\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt bears noting that \u003cem\u003eall\u003c/em\u003e systems of advantaging and disadvantaging interdependently rely upon one another [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e69\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e70\u003c/span\u003e]. Similar to critical race or gender studies, critical disability studies center notions of disability as a lens through which to view the myriad ways in which human differences have been deemed deviant, when in fact, human difference just \u003cem\u003eare\u003c/em\u003e [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR72 CR73 CR74\" citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e71\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e75\u003c/span\u003e]. Acknowledging the common roots of systemic advantaging and disadvantaging leads us to recognize that the foundational allyship skills needed to interrupt bias and promote equity are shared across forms of social inequities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAllyship has been the focus of much scholarship and social analyses in efforts to parse the essential aspects of what constitutes effective ally behaviors and practices. Earlier research focused on underlying beliefs, knowledge, and skills, with more recent work amplifying the need for consistency, authenticity, and \u003cem\u003eaction\u003c/em\u003e in both interpersonal and institutional allyship[\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR77 CR78 CR79\" citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e76\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e80\u003c/span\u003e]. Allyship is generally understood to occur when \u0026ldquo;members of dominant social groups (e.g., men, Whites, heterosexuals) [work] to end the system of oppression that gives them greater privilege and power based on their social-group membership\u0026rdquo;[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e81\u003c/span\u003e]. It is important to note that, as McKenzie has articulated, acting as an ally is \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip;not an identity. It\u0026rsquo;s a practice\u0026hellip; that must be done over and over again, in the largest and smallest ways, every day\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e82\u003c/span\u003e]. Indeed, understanding allyship as accomplice-ship may move us closer to meaningful and effective disability equity praxis [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR84\" citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e83\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR85\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e85\u003c/span\u003e]. From this body of scholarship we synthesized four key elements of allyship [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e86\u003c/span\u003e]: 1) issue-specific knowledge, 2) understanding of associated impacts of social advantaging/disadvantaging, 3) suitable strategies for promoting equity, and 4)motivation to act on behalf of equity. While these elements reflect essential foundations for action, they do not guarantee action. Nonetheless, these foundational perspectives are prerequisites for the development of equitable policies and praxis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Recent Historical Contexts on One Midwestern Campus","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo redress institutional inattention regarding disabled faculty and resultant discriminations, more than a decade ago our campus established a Women Faculty with Disabilities task force as part of a larger National Science Foundation (NSF) institutional transformation initiative, ADVANCE FORWARD (NSF) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e87\u003c/span\u003e]. Following an investigation of disability policies and practices at other higher education institutions and a literature review regarding the experiences of faculty with disabilities, the task force developed a campus-wide survey to assess the status of disability knowledge, attitudes, and experiences of faculty at our institution. The task force hosted a Faculty Forum to share survey findings and additional faculty perceptions, concerns, and questions were discussed and included in a final report. Equipped with these data, the task force provided recommendations to university administrators, resulting in substantial changes to the faculty and staff ADA (American with Disabilities Act) accommodations request and grievance policy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring that project period, several disability-focused professional development opportunities were hosted on campus including invited speakers who provided workshops, keynoted pedagogical luncheons, and facilitated working meetings. In addition to the ADA policy change, the ADVANCE FORWARD initiative and task force engendered increased campus awareness regarding disability and has prompted a number of follow-on developments: the inclusion of disability in demographics and workplace satisfaction queries on campus climate surveys; the provision of a wider range of professional development opportunities that intentionally included the views and lived experiences of faculty, staff, and students who identify as disabled; the establishment of a campus-wide Accessibility Committee; the rebranding of our student disability services unit to reflect a shift away from a medical/compliance model toward a more comprehensive campus-wide center for accessibility and disability resources approach; and the convening of a new task force to again review and enhance our staff and faculty ADA accommodations request and grievance policy and practices, including encouragement for institutional adoption of a Universal Design approach to employee accommodations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe inclusion of disability demographics and workplace satisfaction queries on campus climate surveys has highlighted the ongoing need for attention to accommodation processes, climate measures, and supports for individuals with disabilities. The following findings from our most recent campus climate survey included disaggregated responses by women, people of color, not a US citizen, and disability/chronic health condition [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR88\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e88\u003c/span\u003e]. Campus surveys completed over the past several years showed a steady rise in faculty and staff identifying as disabled. In 2017, 16.5%; staff identified as disabled and in 2021 nearly 24% of staff survey respondents did so. For faculty there was a similar rise in identifying as disabled from 12.8% in 2017 to 19.4% in 2021. Disaggregated survey results underscored that individuals with disabilities were the least satisfied group. When asked about satisfaction with the work environment at the institution the collective ratings for all staff were 73.9% and 54.5% for all faculty, whereas satisfaction ratings were noticeably lower for both staff (60.3%) and faculty (41.2%) with disabilities or chronic conditions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis trend persisted when asked about being treated with respect by their department head, with staff with disabilities or chronic conditions at 77% compared to all staff ratings of 83.7% and faculty with disabilities or chronic conditions at 75.8% compared to all faculty ratings of 77.1%.When staff/faculty with disabilities or chronic conditions were asked if hostile or intimidating behavior was treated seriously on campus, 51.6% of staff and 25.8% of faculty agreed, whereas 63% of all staff and 44% of all faculty positively endorsed that item. These climate data continue to provide crucial information on the experiences of disabled faculty and staff and to inform disability equity policy and practice advocacy efforts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA recent partnership with the University of Washington on an NSF initiative, \u003cem\u003eAccessADVANCE\u003c/em\u003e, has created further disability equity awareness and has prompted new professional development activities on our campus [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e89\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR90\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e90\u003c/span\u003e]. \u003cem\u003eAccessADVANCE\u003c/em\u003e works to develop systemic and intersectional approaches for increasing the participation and advancement of STEM faculty with disabilities. The project has launched a range of national programs to address issues impacting the career advancement and success of faculty with disabilities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThose programs include individual and team engagement in an online asynchronous Community of Practice listserv; access to webinars and capacity building institutes, as well asa searchable, frequently updated, and extensive clearinghouse of disability-related content; direct mentoring support to individuals and organizational cohorts; and minigrants for activities to expand, replicate, and disseminate best practices[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR90\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e90\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e91\u003c/span\u003e]. While the knowledge and perspectives of disabled faculty are centered, \u003cem\u003eAccessADVANCE\u003c/em\u003e programming intentionally invites all campus stakeholders to engage in advancing disability equity in academic workplaces. To bring the national focus of \u003cem\u003eAccessADVANCE\u003c/em\u003e on disabled faculty to scale on our own campus, we hosted a year-long seminar series, \u003cem\u003eIntersections of Disability and Academic Faculty\u003c/em\u003e, focused on investigating the views and experiences of disabled faculty and staff in academic workplaces (specific content and resources available upon request). Additional collective actions that have been incited in follow up to that series are described in the interpretations and recommendations section below.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eWe will now describe our approach to a year-long \u003cem\u003eIntersections of Disability and Academic Faculty\u003c/em\u003e seminar series that investigated the views and experiences of disabled faculty and staff in academic workplaces, then describe the post-seminar survey. After reviewing the quantitative and qualitative findings collected from participants in the post-seminar survey, we consider study limitations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1 Participant Recruitment, Seminar Model and Content\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeminar participants included academic faculty, staff, and graduate students interested in promoting disability equity. The post-seminar survey assessed participant ratings of learning in four key elements synthesized from allyship literatures: issue-specific knowledge, understanding of associated impacts of social advantaging/disadvantaging, suitable strategies for promoting equity, and motivation to act on behalf of equity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeminar invitations came from one of the authors in her role as Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs and Equity via campus-wide listservs to all faculty, staff, and graduate students. The invite indicated that the seminars were designed for faculty and staff interested in broadening their own understandings of disability and in developing skills and strategies for disability equity advocacy and activism. Commitment to consistent participation in all nine 90-minute seminars was requested. Although scheduled with our academic calendar in mind, semester and/or work-duty changes made commitment to a specified day and time across the academic year difficult for some; 12 of 17 initial respondents attended at least three seminars.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe seminar series was conducted at a university located in the Upper Midwest region of the United States. The university iscomprised of over 600faculty and lecturers. Additionally, it has an enrollment of over11,900 undergraduate and graduate students.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe seminar approached disability equity as a shared community need. In recognition that inequities for any group undergird and perpetuate inequities for all, seminar content was designed to reflect intersectional social models of disability. Disability equity must be addressed through the efforts of all of us, whether we identify as disabled or not. Moreover, because disability may not be apparent to others, and because experiences of disability are profoundly mediated by social contexts, we emphasized that it is crucial that disability status never be assumed or expected to be disclosed or shared. Ableist biases abound in many world cultures [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e], and it is incumbent on us all to become aware of and eradicate those foundational discriminatory practices from our personal and professional communications and practices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur series of nine monthly online seminars was modeled on a blend of two programs: the Advocates and Allies (A\u0026amp;A) program [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e89\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR93\" citationid=\"CR92\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e92\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e94\u003c/span\u003e] and the National SEED Project [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR95\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e95\u003c/span\u003e]. The A\u0026amp;A model was developed on our campus during previous NSF ADVANCE projects and the approach guides men faculty in leveraging their gendered privilege in service to gender equity. This prioritization of supporting members of an advantaged group (men) to evolve knowledge and skills for leveraging personal and positional power to promote equity for members of disadvantaged groups (women) has proven demonstrably effective [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR89\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e89\u003c/span\u003e] and has been adopted by over 30 organizations to date. The National SEED Project is a professional development model that supports learning and skill-building through structured dialogues and systemic analyses [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR96\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e96\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR97\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e97\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollowing the SEED model, seminar content was intentionally selected to be authored by people who identified as disabled and who represented a broad and intersectional set of disability experiences and perspectives, and in this case, by faculty and staff who identified as disabled. One seminar co-facilitator identified as a member of the disability community and the other as a nondisabled advocate for disability equity. The SEED seminar model also encouraged participants to share and examine their own lived experiences through the lenses of social systems of advantaging and disadvantaging (e.g., ableism, racism, sexism) and to commit to maintaining confidentiality of seminar discussions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR97\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e97\u003c/span\u003e]. Figure\u0026nbsp;1 displays a course outline highlighting the intended scope of each three-month segment, including focusing questions used to initiate discussions. In general, topics included the need for nondisabled people to listen to and believe disabled people; interdependencies among ableism, racism, sexism/gendered biases and discriminations;and actions we can take, individually and collectively, in our offices, departments, colleges to promote disability justice.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThough experiences of disabled faculty were the intended focus of this seminar series, we simultaneously explicitly acknowledged that concepts of disability, ableism, and social justice emerged from and existed within much wider, and necessarily intersectional, contexts. Seminar content included articles, books, videos and a variety of blogs and websites. Assigned content and optional resources were made available on a shared drive for asynchronous access and participants were encouraged to engage as their schedules allowed. When pondering the key concepts and questions noted in Fig.\u0026nbsp;1, we reflected on those wider intersectional contexts while prioritizing the perspectives of faculty/staff who identify as members of disability communities. Additionally, informal data provided formative guidance for adjusting seminar content to meet participant interests (from seminar chat transcripts, group activities, and instructor notes taken during seminars). To maintain confidentiality, these informal data are not included in our analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Survey Instrument\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo assess participants\u0026rsquo; self-reported learning regarding the aforementioned elements of allyship, application of seminar content to personal and/or professional lives, and satisfaction with the course delivery, a brief survey was developed. Early in the fall semester following the \u003cem\u003eIntersections of Disability and Academic Faculty\u003c/em\u003e seminar series, participants who attended three or more seminars (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12) were emailed an invitation to complete an online Informed Consent and Final Evaluation/Participant Feedback assessment.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eItems in the first section of the survey used four forced-choice options: Strongly Agree; Agree; Disagree; Strongly Disagree. Those first four items appraised the four aspects of allyship identified above: 1) general topical knowledge, 2) understanding of impacts of discrimination, 3) skills for interrupting inequities, and 4) personal/professional commitment to equity. Items five through seven invited forced-choice ratings of the overall quality and value of the seminar course, followed by five open-ended items to further assess participants\u0026rsquo; learning and views regarding the quality, manageability, and value of the course as a professional development offering.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNext, participants were asked to retrospectively rate the breadth of their own learning by indicating the degree to which their awareness had changed from prior to and then following their participation in the seminars. Using a 10-point scale (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Minimal to 10\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;High), the six survey items asked for pre and post series ratings for awareness of a) disability stereotyping and discrimination, b) ableism, and c) commitment to addressing issues of ableism and disability discrimination.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOpen comments were invited following all items. The final section included two optional demographic questions (roles in academia and if the respondent identified as disabled or not).To best address anonymity and confidentiality given the small group and the participatory nature of this seminar we limited the number of demographics requested and have only included disabled/not disabled status in our findings when that demographic is particularly salient.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.1 Study Participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eEleven of the 12 seminar participants responded to an anonymous survey. Inconsistencies in one survey prompted us to remove that record from our analyses. In that record, all responses to the items asking about increased disability equity knowledge, understanding, skills, and commitment/motivation were \u0026ldquo;Strongly Disagree,\u0026rdquo; however, in each of the retrospective items asking about pre-post growth in disability equity knowledge, understanding, and commitment they indicated a positive change of four or more points. The final respondent pool for summative analyses (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10) included three faculty; four staff; two graduate students, and one respondent who preferred not to answer. Three respondents (30%) identified as disabled (one faculty, one staff, and one graduate student).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2 Quantitative Findings: Survey Items 1\u0026ndash;4\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e shows the percentage ratings regarding respondents\u0026rsquo; endorsement of change for each of the four elements of allyship identified above, along with ratings of the degree to which the seminar met its stated goal of centering intersectional perspectives of disabled faculty/staff. Responses were slightly mixed when asked if participation in the series had resulted in increased general knowledge regarding disability and understanding of the impacts of ableism in academic workplaces (allyship elements one and two, namely issue-specific knowledge and understanding of associated impacts of social advantaging/disadvantaging).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne respondent who identified as disabled indicated that they had not experienced any changes in knowledge of disability discrimination or in understanding of the impacts of ableism in academic workplaces. Thus, although 90% of participants did endorse increased knowledge and understanding, it may be noteworthy that nearly 80% of those respondents (seven of nine) did not endorse a disability identity in the optional demographics section. All respondents agreed that their participation in the seminar had improved their preparedness for promoting a more equitable campus climate for disabled faculty, staff, and graduate students (allyship element\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eParticipants\u0026rsquo; Ratings of Seminar Effectiveness\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAllyship Element\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrongly disagree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisagree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAgree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrongly Agree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1) general topical knowledge\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;My participation in this seminar series increased my general knowledge regarding disability in academic workplaces.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2) understanding of impacts of discrimination\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;My participation in this seminar series increased my understanding of the impacts of ableism in academic workplaces.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e3) skills for interrupting inequities\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;I feel prepared to promote a more equitable campus climate for disabled faculty, staff, and graduate students at XXXX as a result of my participation in this seminar series.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e90%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e4) personal/professional commitment to equity\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;My participation in this seminar series increased my personal commitment and motivation for addressing ableism and disability equity in my XXXX workplace.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e7) Intersectional perspectives of disabled faculty/staff were centered in this series\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;This seminar series was designed to center the perspectives and experiences of academic faculty who identify as disabled/having a disability and to simultaneously consider the intersections of individual and group identities (race, gender, class, etc). Please indicate the degree to which you feel this goal was met:\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e80%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlt text: Table showing participants\u0026rsquo; ratings of seminar effectiveness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ethree, suitable strategies for promoting equity). That level of endorsement\u0026mdash;100%\u0026mdash;was also indicated for the item asking if seminar participation had resulted in increased personal commitment and motivation for addressing ableism and disability equity on their campus (allyship element four, motivation to act on behalf of equity).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.3 Retrospective Findings\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese positive changes were similarly reflected in the retrospective findings, though with more variability. Using a 10-point scale (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Minimal, 10\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;High) respondents assessed the breadth of their learning in three areas: 1) awareness around disability stereotyping and discrimination, 2) awareness around ableism, and 3) personal commitment to addressing issues of ableism and disability discrimination on campus. Regarding awareness of disability stereotyping and discrimination, two respondents indicated high and unchanged levels of awareness at both pre and post series rating. Retrospective change for the remaining eight respondents averaged 3.25 (range of 2\u0026ndash;4 points). See Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor awareness of ableism, one respondent did not enter a rating for prior to the series, rating their post series learning at six. Again, two respondents indicated high and unchanged levels of commitment and the point change for the remaining seven averaged 3.86 (range of 2\u0026ndash;5 points). On commitment to addressing issues of ableism and disability discrimination on campus, three respondents indicated no change, reporting \u0026ldquo;10\u0026rdquo; for both pre and post series ratings. The remaining seven respondents averaged a 3.29 point change (range of 1\u0026ndash;7 points) reflecting a 33% pre-post increase for participants who began the workshop with low to moderate ratings of commitment and motivation for disability equity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese results, detailed in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, highlight the expected gains in participants\u0026rsquo; awareness and commitment. While some participants began with high levels of knowledge and motivation, the seminar had the greatest impact on those with lower initial awareness and commitment, fostering growth and building confidence in addressing disability inequity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSummary of pre- and post-Seminar Scores, including mean, median, range, and point change, for awareness and commitment measures.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMeasure/Question\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeminar\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMedian\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRange\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Min, Max)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePoint\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChange Increase Pre/Post\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAs we begin/end this seminar series, my \u003cstrong\u003eAwareness of Stereotyping and Discrimination\u003c/strong\u003ewas/is...\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePre-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2, 10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePost-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(6, 10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo begin/As we endthis seminar series, my\u003cstrong\u003eAwarenessAround Ableism\u003c/strong\u003e was/is...\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePre-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2, 10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePost\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(6, 10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAs we begin/end this seminar series, my personal \u003cstrong\u003eCommitment to Addressing Issues of Ableism and Disability Discrimination\u003c/strong\u003e experienced on our campus was (is)...\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePre-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(1, 10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePost-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(7, 10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e5.4 Qualitative Findings\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo encourage participation, the survey was intentionally designed to allow respondents to swiftly provide their feedback through simple forced-choice quantifiable ratings. Qualitative data were collected from additional commentary invited following each forced-choice item, three open-ended queries, and a final invitation to offer any additional thoughts. While few comments were added to the forced-choice items most participants did offer one or more responses to the open-ended items. \u0026nbsp;Regarding increased understanding of the impacts of ableism in academic workplaces one respondent noted that \u0026ldquo;This is not an \u0026apos;ism\u0026apos; I had really given much thought to. This group helped me become aware of the ubiquitous nature of ableism, enabling me to re-frame my thinking and incorporate in applicable courses that I teach.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost respondents did offer thoughtful reflections when asked about key ideas and understandings gained from participating in the series and ways that their learning has been or will be integrated into their personal and professional lives. One participant noted that \u0026ldquo;[t]here is no universal agreed upon definition of disability; ableism and disability is often forgotten about in DEI efforts.\u0026rdquo;Another stated that university policies often do not provide the accessibility and equity intended and mused about \u0026ldquo;how unaware most faculty and staff are about what disability means and its intersections.\u0026rdquo;We include the following two longer quotes from respondents regarding key ideas gained because they concisely reflect much of what we hoped would be \u0026lsquo;take-aways\u0026rsquo; from the series:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;A growing understanding of innumerable challenges faced by disabled people. The debate about usage of the terms \u0026quot;disabled\u0026quot; and \u0026quot;differently-abled\u0026quot; within the community, layered on terms and phrases that are obviously ableist. I also learnt a little about the history of the fight for appropriate accommodations, the successes, and the long way ahead\u0026mdash;which is rather daunting.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Essentially, I have become more open minded and try to see the world through the lens of others more often than just my own. I also did not know much of the history behind the [Americans with] Disability Act and how hard it was for those activists to achieve that.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA comment regarding feeling prepared, as a result of participating in the seminar,to promote a more equitable campus climate for disabled faculty, staff, and graduate students suggested a slight increased confidence in taking action for disability equity on campus, \u0026ldquo;I still feel a bit unsure of who to contact regarding certain concerns, but for the most part, I know who to reach out to for advice.\u0026rdquo;However, when asked about intentions to be involved in campus efforts to address ableism and disability equity it appeared that the series had not supported participants in articulating and animating clear pathways for action. Hope was expressed by one graduate student who intended to \u0026ldquo;figure out how to form a support group for students (both graduate and undergraduate) with disabilities.\u0026rdquo;Additional comments included \u0026ldquo;Continue my efforts,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;[Be p]art of PCDIR[President\u0026rsquo;s council on Diversity, Inclusion, and Respect],\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I don\u0026apos;t know of any initiatives that I may participate in beyond things I see and encounter in my daily work / life.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEven so, respondent comments regarding integration of learning gained during the series indicate that participants had already begun to apply seminar content into their personal and professional lives. One respondent reported on the intention to create and continuously adapt an \u0026ldquo;ongoing \u0026lsquo;accessibility policy\u0026rsquo; with the students.\u0026rdquo; Another spoke of \u0026ldquo;commitment to learning more \u0026hellip;helping my team talk \u0026hellip;[and] increasing promotion of [disability services] in recruitment materials/initiatives.\u0026rdquo; One participant had already shared a video we discussed with others and another stated \u0026ldquo;I am trying to be more mindful of my language since I tend to use ableist phrases like \u0026lsquo;I am so blind\u0026rsquo; when I cannot locate something that is right in front of me.\u0026rdquo; Two additional comments similarly reflected a heightened awareness of ableist language and a commitment to remedy it: \u0026ldquo;I think just being more self-aware, in addition to being curious and respectfully calling people out at times with comments that have the potential to be damaging\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I am a lot more careful about what language I use, including not using terms that I did not even realize were problematic\u0026hellip; I expect to keep speaking up about harmful/thoughtless behavior when I see it.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSurvey items assessing the quality of the seminar series indicated that 90% Agreed (40% Agreed; 50% Strongly Agreed) that their participation was worthwhile and that they would recommend it to their colleagues. A majority (80%) indicated that this online seminar series was delivered effectively and participant comments noted appreciation for the opportunity to discuss the topic and for the resources shared. Schedule conflicts were noted by three respondents and one participant indicated they had experienced consistent technology difficulties. A participant\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ewho identified as having a physical disability indicated appreciation for the opportunity to attend virtually because the \u0026ldquo;campus is quite large and I sometimes have to take lengthy detours to get to certain buildings or rooms\u0026hellip; I do think you should offer that option if you move this seminar to be more face-to-face.\u0026rdquo; A majority of respondents agreed that intersectional perspectives of disabled faculty/staff were centered in this series (see Table 1. Participants\u0026rsquo; Ratings of Seminar Effectiveness). \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTaken together, the quantitative and qualitative data indicated that participants in the seminar series made meaningful gains in four fundamental aspects of allyship focused on disability (in)equities in academia: increased general topical knowledge of disability stereotyping and discrimination, improved understanding of discriminatory impacts of ableism, enhanced skills for interrupting disability discrimination and inequities, and amplified personal commitment and motivation for addressing disability equity in the workplace.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6. Discussion and Limitations","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe needs and perspectives of faculty, staff, and graduate students who identify as members of disability communities continue to be too rarely centered in academic workplace policy, practice, and professional development [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. Overall, the post-seminar survey findings indicated foundational allyship knowledge and skills were increased by participants\u0026rsquo; seminar engagement [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR77 CR78 CR79\" citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e76\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e80\u003c/span\u003e]. A broad majority of respondents indicated that their participation in the seminar had fostered deepened understandings of ableism and disableism and had contributed to their preparedness in addressing disability equity. Moreover, the 70% of participants who had not entered the series with already-high levels of commitment and motivation for disability equity reported substantially increased motivation\u0026mdash;a 33% increase\u0026mdash;to advocate for disability equity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBoth qualitative and quantitative data indicated that the seminar\u0026rsquo;s content and format offered a meaningful professional development opportunity for the participants. Positive ratings and comments included in the items assessing seminar quality suggested that the series also created an important space for engagement and belonging for a majority of participants, which likely was key to persistent participation across the academic year. Although our participant pool is quite small, we interpreted the variation in responses among participants (those who identified as disabled compared to not disabled) to suggest the need for creating various types of professional development opportunities for faculty and staff to engage in based on intended outcomes: (increased knowledge versus community-building/networking), level of workplace responsibility and perceived need-to-know (individual/personal roles versus supervisory), or preferred format (lecture versus discussions). Next, we describe collective campus actions that have followed from the seminar, review lessons learned, and offer interpretations and recommendations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.1 Collective Actions that Emerged Post-Seminar\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the final three meetings of the seminar series, participants enumerated campus needs for disability equity. During the academic year following the seminar an interdisciplinary workgroup, comprised of seminar participants and additional campus community members interested in disability equity came together to find pathways for addressing those local campus needs. The work group tackled one key and actionable issue: developing a model for convening fully inclusive and welcoming hybrid meeting spaces, with a primary focus on the needs of faculty and staff. This \u003cem\u003eMaking Space for Disability Equity\u003c/em\u003e work group identified space, technology, and design resources available on campus, hosted hybrid sessions to assess the functioning of currently available hybrid technology in two different workplace settings (a small conference room and a larger meeting room), developed a set of guidelines for convening inclusive hybrid meeting spaces, and created a final report describing those efforts [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. More recently, a campus Coalition of Disabled Academics affinity group has been formed for faculty who identify as disabled to join in community with one another, and a Disability Equity Advocates, Allies, and Accomplices (DEA\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e) Affinity/Work group has also been convened for faculty and staff to become more informed change agents for disability equity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.2 Lessons Learned\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs we consider a next iteration of this seminar series, we keep in mind several lessons learned. Scheduling for the full academic year limited participation due to semester changes in teaching or other duties; participation may be enhanced if seminars were scheduled each semester when work schedules were more firmly set. Alternately, if resources allowed, seminars could be offered over multiple days or time periods. Obtaining Institutional Review Board approval and participant informed consent at the beginning of the series would have allowed for analysis of the qualitative data obtained during the seminar. Collecting survey responses pre and post seminar,rather than only retrospectively, would have provided an opportunity to tailor the training based on participant awareness ratings. Finally, in a next iteration of the survey we would edit some items for clarity (e.g., on the final retrospective rating of commitment to addressing ableism the response label should replace \u0026ldquo;awareness\u0026rdquo; with \u0026ldquo;commitment\u0026rdquo;). Items assessing change in the four elements of disability equity allyship (found in section one forced choice and section three retrospective ratings) would also be edited to be more congruent with one another, or to include only the retrospective items.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.3 Study Limitations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe small number of participants, the single iteration of the seminar, and data limited to a single post-seminar survey precluded confident generalizability of our findings. The potential for reduced anonymity due to the small number of study participants may have caused reluctance to provide demographic data and the request to identify the number of sessions attended may also have impacted responses for that same reason.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e6.4 Interpretations and Recommendations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eKeeping in mind that volunteer/self-selection bias is clearly present given that participants responded to an open invitation to all faculty and staff, we turn our attention now to interpretations and recommendations. If disability equity is to be garnered, we assert that it will be essential to identify multiple pathways for meaningful professional engagement and support for \u003cem\u003eall\u003c/em\u003e employees. It is likely that disabled faculty and staff would benefit from professional spaces in which they could disclose and discuss disability concerns with trusted disability-savvy colleagues (e.g., an affinity group). Yet, it is also crucial to enlist all campus stakeholders in pursuing disability equity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e Circling back to our opening paragraphs in which we reviewed the need for the perspectives of disabled faculty and staff in academic workplaces to be integrated into institutional equity efforts, we broaden our interpretations and recommendations further: providing a wide range of professional development options promoting disability equity with varying content, process, and expected outcomes can encourage participation by a larger number and broader range of campus stakeholders. This view was reminiscent of analyses we had completed for the institutional transformation ADVANCE FORWARD initiative that inaugurated our current efforts. That earlier work, focused on gender equity, characterized the myriad programs within the ADVANCE FORWARD initiative as \u0026ldquo;a long-haul approach in which the campus community was/is iteratively invited to engage in an ongoing change process\u0026rdquo; [98]. The overall model that informed the initiative was summarized in an Organizational Transformation Matrix in which programming approaches were placed within the body of the matrix based on where the activity intersected with two broad categories culled from institutional transformation literatures: diversity orientation of program participants (diversity positive, neutral, or negative subcultures) and the intended influence of the activity on elements of institutional life (structure, engagement, or culture).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsing that same matrix of diversity subcultures intersecting with institutional elements, Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e plots various interventions conducted for disability equity on our campus. We included previous efforts undertaken between 2008 and 2019, our recent efforts from 2020 to 2024, and an enumeration of actions on our yet-to-do agenda. Although we located the seminar series reviewed in this case study at the intersection of the institutional element of Engagement and the Diversity-Neutral Subculture (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), we note that this seminar and other \u0026ldquo;awareness/educational\u0026rdquo; actions could be in multiple intersections within the matrix, depending on the audience or participants. For example, a small percentage of the participants in this case study indicated that they began the seminar with very high commitment to address ableism in the workplace and likely would identify as diversity-positive rather than diversity-neutral.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile this matrix summarized a number of disability equity interventions taken or planned on our campus, we want to also recognize that many additional actions were taken by individual faculty or staff as they quietly worked to promote principles of universal design and disability equity within their own work and/or departments. Certainly, the actions of individuals and small groups are meaningful and formed the foundation upon which institutional change can be built. However, without a network of leadership that prioritizes equity and supports collective institutional efforts, those actions were limited in time and overall organizational impacts. Our hope is that this visual representation of a long-haul campus-wide approach may offer a template for other organizations to assess the status of taken or planned disability equity interventions, then serve to map out additional actions likely to attract a broadened representation of stakeholders. By evolving a campus-wide network of disability equity advocates, allies, and accomplices, we have greater potential for more effectively addressing institutional transformation for disability equity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe reported rates of disability among faculty and staff on our campus are comparable to national estimates of disability prevalence. We attribute this representation, in part, to an increasing willingness of faculty and staff to self-identify their disabilities in campus surveys due to increasing awareness and commitment to disability equity on campus. This shift reflects the cumulative impact of long-term efforts, beginning with the ADVANCE FORWARD initiative in 2008, to foster a supportive campus climate that included disability as an integral part of DEI initiatives. Additionally, the normalization of disability accommodations during the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with annual notices, workshops, and policy changes, has fostered an environment where faculty and staff felt more comfortable self-identifying their disabilities in campus surveys.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eInstitutional Transformation Matrix for Disability Equity, Circa 2008\u0026ndash;2024\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiversity Subcultures\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eElements of Successful Accessibility Efforts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiversity-Positive\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiversity-Neutral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiversity-Averse\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eStructure\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cem\u003eCentralized faculty accommodations to HR\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cem\u003ePolicy revisions Promotion and Tenure extensions \u0026amp; confidentiality\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eReimagining of Center for Accessibility and Diversity Resources (CADR)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Central Accommodation Fund\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Specialist for Faculty Accommodations \u0026amp; move from HR to CADR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eIT/LAIC support for accessibility\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; UD approach to accommodations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Iterative reviews of Accommodations policy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEngagement\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cem\u003eWomen Faculty with Disability Task Force\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eFaculty Fellows\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eFormation of CODA disabled faculty affinity group\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eAccommodations Policy Task Force\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eMaking Space Work Group\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eDisability Equity Advocates, Allies, and Accomplices Learning Community\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eIntersections of Disability and Academic Faculty seminar series\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eDisability Equity Advocacy 4-part seminar series\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cem\u003eFaculty with Disabilities Survey\u0026amp; Forum\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cem\u003eAddition of disability related questions to climate surveys\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCulture\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cem\u003eWorkshops for faculty and administrators on Essential Functions of Faculty Positions\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cem\u003eIncludingU, Equity at the Intersections virtual brownbag luncheons\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cem\u003eFaculty DEIA Research Series\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eFaculty and Academic Leaders orientations include faculty accommodations request process\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cem\u003ePedagogical Luncheon on Design for Universal Access: Teaching All Students\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eProfessional Development programming from Office of Teaching and Learning\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable Notes: Text format indicates timeframes \u003cem\u003e(Previous Efforts [2008\u0026ndash;2019]\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cb\u003eRecent Efforts [2020\u0026ndash;2024]\u003c/b\u003e,Yet-to-do List\u003cem\u003e);\u003c/em\u003e Alt Text: Matrix of previous efforts [2008\u0026ndash;2019], recent efforts [2020\u0026ndash;2024],and yet-to-do actions for disability equity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"7. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo summarize, we reiterate that disability is one aspect of an always multifaceted and intersectional social identity, and thus is one interdependent aspect of the equity work needed to create more welcoming and creative workplaces. Moreover, the presumptive focus on students with disabilities occludes the presence and talents of disabled faculty and staff in academia. It is essential that the knowledge and perspectives of disabled colleagues in academic workplaces are centered. It is also crucial not to burden disabled faculty or staff with expectations that they are the sole providers of disability equity leadership or are expected to educate their colleagues. Rather, it is the place of policy and practice to provide a workplace that welcomes and values the contributions of all employees. Providing a wide range of professional support options including engagements similar to the seminar series investigated in this case study, can support organizational stakeholders in becoming more informed and influential disability equity allies/accomplices. And more disability-equitable workplaces make for a more just and equitable world for us all. We offer this case study in the spirit of practical research that can be applied by institutions in their work for inclusive excellence.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003eFunding: Access ADVANCE is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF Award HRD-2017017, HRD-2017054). Any questions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCompeting Interests: The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests, no conflicts of interest, nor competing interests to declare relevant to the content of this article.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCode availability:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAuthor Contribution: All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Cali L. Anicha, Larry Napoleon, Jr. and Canan Bilen-Green. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Cali L. Anicha. All authors read, edited, commented on and approved the final manuscript.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEthical Statement and Consent to Participate: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB)\u0026nbsp;of North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND USA (IRB approval number: Protocol #IRB0004413). Informed consent was obtained electronically from all participants who voluntarily agreed to participate in the study after the survey and objectives of the study were explained in clear language. Participants were reassured that the data collected would be confidential and would be used for research purposes only. It was clearly explained that participation in this study was voluntary, and the participant had the right to withdraw at any time without any deprivation. This research was performed in accordance\u0026nbsp;with relevant guidelines and regulations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData Availability: De-identified data may be made available upon request.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAccessADVANCE is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF Award HRD-). Any questions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.\u003c/p\u003e\n"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCenters for Disease Control and Prevention. Disability and Health Data System (DHDS). 2024; http://dhds.cdc.gov\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBernard MA. Advancing disability inclusion in the scientific workforce. National Institute of Health. 2021; https://diversity.nih.gov/blog/2021-07-21-advancing-disability-inclusion-scientific-workforce\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNational Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. \u003cem\u003eSpec Rep NSF 23-315\u003c/em\u003e. National Science Foundation. 2021. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf23315/report\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVance ML, Harrison EG, eds. \u003cem\u003eDisabled faculty \u0026amp; staff: Intersecting identities in higher education\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 2). Huntersville, NC: AHEAD; 2023.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrown N, Leigh J. \u003cem\u003eAbleism in higher education: Theorising experiences of disabilities and chronic illnesses in higher education\u003c/em\u003e. London: UCL Press; 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLindsay S, Fuentes K. It is time to address ableism in academia: A systematic review of the experiences and impact of ableism among faculty and staff. \u003cem\u003eDisabilities\u003c/em\u003e. 2022; https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities2020014\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhanmalek T. Navigating the faculty disability accommodations process. 2022. https://ideasonfire.net/faculty-disability-accommodations/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim E, Aquino KC. \u003cem\u003eDisability as diversity in higher education: Policies and practices to enhance student success\u003c/em\u003e. New York, NY: Routledge; 2017.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKwon C-K, Guadalupe SS, Archer M, Groomes DA. Understanding career development pathways of college students with disabilities using crip theory and the theory of whole self. \u003cem\u003eJ Divers High Educ\u003c/em\u003e. 2023; https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000464\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthors; 2023\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBall, KB, Traxler RE. \u0026ldquo;Things can be tough\u0026rdquo;: A qualitative analysis of disability disclosure in graduate school. \u003cem\u003eJ Divers High Educ\u003c/em\u003e. 2023; https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000488\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJain D, Potluri V, Sharif A. Navigating graduate school with a disability. In: Proceedings from \u003cem\u003eASSETS \u0026apos;20: The 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility\u003c/em\u003e. Virtual Event, Greece. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1145/3373625.3416986\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBurke L. Disability as diversity. \u003cem\u003eInside Higher Ed\u003c/em\u003e. 2020; https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/11/12/could-disability-be-further-included-diversity-efforts\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eExec. Order No. 14035, 3 C.F.R. 34593\u0026ndash;603. 2021; https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-14127.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnnamma SA, Connor D, Ferri B. Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. \u003cem\u003eRace Ethnicity Educ. 2013; \u003c/em\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2012.730511\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarnes C. What a difference a decade makes: Reflections on doing \u0026lsquo;emancipatory\u0026rsquo; disability research. \u003cem\u003eDisabil Soc, 2003\u003c/em\u003e; https://doi.org/10.1080/713662197\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBassler S. \u0026quot;But you don\u0026rsquo;t look sick\u0026quot;: Dismodernism, disability studies and music therapy on invisible illness and the unstable body. \u003cem\u003eVoices: A World Forum for Music Therapy Special Issue on Music Therapy and Disabiityl Studies. 2014;\u003c/em\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.15845/voices.v14i3.802\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCampbell FK. Contours of ableism: The production of disability and abledness. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan; 2009. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDudley-Marling C, Gurn A, eds. \u003cem\u003eThe myth of the normal curve\u003c/em\u003e. Vol. 11. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.; 2010.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNielsen KE. \u003cem\u003eA disability history of the United States\u003c/em\u003e. Boston, MA: Beacon Press; 2012.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePrice M. \u003cem\u003eCrip spacetime: Access, failure, and accountability in academic life\u003c/em\u003e. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2024.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSinsInvalid. \u003cem\u003eSkin, tooth, and bone: The basis of movement is our people\u003c/em\u003e. 2nd ed. Berkeley, CA: Sins Invalid; 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTitchkosky T, Cagulada E, DeWelles M, Gold E, eds. \u003cem\u003eDisAppearing: Encounters in disability studies\u003c/em\u003e. Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholars; 2022.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFinkelstein V. The social model repossessed. \u003cem\u003eThe Disability Studies Archive UK\u003c/em\u003e. 2001; http://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/files/library/finkelstein-soc-mod-repossessed.pdf. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGarland-Thomson R. \u003cem\u003eExtraordinary bodies: Figuring physical disability in American culture and literature\u003c/em\u003e. New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 1997.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMeekosha H. Decolonising disability: Thinking and acting globally. \u003cem\u003eDisabil Soc\u003c/em\u003e. 2011; https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2011.602860 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchalk SD. \u003cem\u003eBodyminds reimagined: (Dis)ability race and gender in Black women\u0026apos;s speculative fiction\u003c/em\u003e. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2018. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShakespeare T, Watson N. Defending the social model. \u003cem\u003eDisabil Soc\u003c/em\u003e. 1997; https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599727380\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcIntosh P. Reflections and future directions for privilege studies. \u003cem\u003eJ Soc Issues\u003c/em\u003e. 2012; https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01744.x.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCombahee River Collective. The Combahee River Collective statement: Black feminist organizing in the seventies and eighties. Albany, NY: Kitchen Table: Women of Color Press; 1986.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCombahee River Collective. Combahee River Collective statement. In: Smith B, editor. \u003cem\u003eHome girls: A Black feminist anthology\u003c/em\u003e. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press; 2000. pp. 264\u0026ndash;74.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCrenshaw K. Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. \u003cem\u003eStanford Law Rev\u003c/em\u003e. 1991; https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHill Collins P. It\u0026apos;s all in the family: Intersections of gender, race, and nation. In: Narayan U, Harding S, editors. \u003cem\u003eDecentering the center: Philosophy for a multicultural, postcolonial, and feminist world\u003c/em\u003e. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press; 2000. p. 62\u0026ndash;82.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoore Jr LF, Lewis TA, Brown LXZ. Accountable reporting on disability, race, \u0026amp; police violence: A community response to the \u0026ldquo;Ruderman white paper on the media coverage of use of force and disability.\u0026rdquo; 2016. https://docs.google.com/document/d/117eoVeJVP594L6-1bgL8zpZrzgojfsveJwcWuHpkNcs/edit.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSavolainen J, Casey PJ, McBrayer JP, Schwerdtle PN. Positionality and its problems: Questioning the value of reflexivity statements in research. \u003cem\u003ePerspect Psychol Sci\u003c/em\u003e. 2023; https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916221144988\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGambrell J, Bright A. Epistemology of radical love: A critical race framework for dismantling the uncomfortable complexities of educator privilege. In: Diem J, editor. \u003cem\u003eThe social and cultural foundations of education: A reader\u003c/em\u003e. 1st ed. San Diego, CA: Cognella Academic Publishing; 2016. p. 108\u0026ndash;33.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKezar A, Lester J. Breaking the barriers of essentialism in leadership research: Positionality as a promising approach. \u003cem\u003eFem Formations\u003c/em\u003e. 2010; https://doi.org/10.1353/nwsa.0.0121\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMassoud MF. The price of positionality: Assessing the benefits and burdens of self-identification in research methods. \u003cem\u003eJ Law Soc\u003c/em\u003e. 2022; https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12372\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTorres Fremlin P. How many disabled people are there? Why the complexity of disability can\u0026apos;t be reduced to one number. In: \u003cem\u003eDisability Debrief\u003c/em\u003e. 2023. https://www.disabilitydebrief.org/debrief/how-many-disabled-people/?ref=disability-debrief-newsletter.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAndrews, EE, Forber-Pratt AJ, Mona LR, Lund EM, Pilarski CR, Balter R. #SaytheWord: A disability culture commentary on the erasure of \u0026ldquo;disability.\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eRehab Psych. \u003c/em\u003e2019; https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000258\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZoeglossia Fellows, eds. \u003cem\u003eWe are not your metaphor: A disability poetry anthology\u003c/em\u003e. Minneapolis, MN: Squares \u0026amp; Rebels; 2019.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eClare E. Exile \u0026amp; pride: Disability, queerness, \u0026amp; liberation. Cambridge, MA: South End Press; 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKafer A. \u003cem\u003eFeminist, queer, crip\u003c/em\u003e. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press; 2013.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcRuer R. \u003cem\u003eCrip theory: Cultural signs of queerness and disability\u003c/em\u003e. New York, NY: New York University Press; 2006.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReynolds JM. Disability and white supremacy. \u003cem\u003eCrit Philos Race\u003c/em\u003e. 2022; https://doi.org/10.5325/critphilrace.10.1.0048\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMingus M. Changing the framework: Disability justice: How our communities can move beyond access to wholeness. In: \u003cem\u003eLeaving Evidence\u003c/em\u003e. 2011. https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/changing-the-framework-disability-justice/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePalacios MR. Naming ableism. In: \u003cem\u003eCripstory\u003c/em\u003e. 2017. https://cripstory.wordpress.com/2017/04/01/naming-ableism/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eClare E. Eli joy and resistance. https://eliclare.com/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChronicle Staff. DEI legislation tracker: Explore where college diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts are under attack. \u003cem\u003ePolitics and Race. The Chronicle of Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e. 2024. https://www.chronicle.com/article/here-are-the-states-where-lawmakers-are-seeking-to-ban-colleges-dei-efforts\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWynn CE, Ziff E. Broken promises? Colleges and universities responded to the death of George Floyd with public commitments to racial justice, but two years later, too little has changed. In: \u003cem\u003eInside High Ed\u003c/em\u003e. 2022. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2022/06/24/too-many-efforts-racial-justice-remain-performative-opinion\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBlair J. COVID likely to peak in colder months as virus becomes endemic in the US. \u003cem\u003eYale School of Public Health\u003c/em\u003e. 2023; https://ysph.yale.edu/news-article/covid-likely-to-peak-in-colder-months-as-virus-becomes-endemic-in-the-us/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOlsen SH, Cork SJ, Anders P, Padr\u0026oacute;n R, Peterson A, Strausser A, Jaeger, PT. The disability tax and the accessibility tax: The extra intellectual, emotional, and technological labor and financial expenditures required of disabled people in a world gone wrong\u0026hellip;and mostly online. \u003cem\u003eIncluding Disabil\u003c/em\u003e. 2022; https://doi.org/10.51357/id.vi1.170\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHerder L. The return to in-person instruction worries disability community. In: \u003cem\u003eDiverse: Issues In Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e. 2022. https://www.diverseeducation.com/demographics/disabilties/article/15295832/the-return-to-inperson-instruction-worries-disability-community. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKrebs E. A sour taste of sick chronicity: pandemic time and the violence of \u0026ldquo;returning to normal.\u0026rdquo; \u003cem\u003eCommun Crit/Cult Stud\u003c/em\u003e. 2022; https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2022.2063354\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBurghardt M. The human bottom of non-human things: On critical theory and its contributions to critical disability studies. \u003cem\u003eCrit Disabil Discourse\u003c/em\u003e. 2011; 3:1\u0026ndash;16. https://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/cdd/article/view/31560\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYee S. From civil rights to human rights. 30th Anniversary of the 504 Sit-In. DREDF. 2007. https://dredf.org/news/publications/from-civil-rights-to-human-rights/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePrice M. Time harms: Disabled faculty navigating the accommodations loop. \u003cem\u003eSouth Atl Q\u003c/em\u003e. 2021; https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-8915966\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYee S. Where prejudice, disability, and \u0026quot;disablism\u0026quot; meet. In: Breslin ML, Yee S, eds. \u003cem\u003eDisability Rights Law and Policy: International and National Perspectives\u003c/em\u003e. Berkeley, CA: Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF); 2002. https://dredf.org/news/publications/disability-rights-law-and-policy/where-prejudice-disability-and-disabilism-meet/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHill Collins P. \u003cem\u003eOn intellectual activism\u003c/em\u003e. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press; 2013.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrashear RP. \u003cem\u003eFixed: The science/fiction of human enhancement\u003c/em\u003e. New Day Films. 2013; https://www.newday.com/films/fixed-the-sciencefiction-of-human-enhancement\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLeBrecht J, Newnham N. \u003cem\u003eCrip camp: A disability revolution\u003c/em\u003e. United States: Higher Ground Productions; 2020. https://cripcamp.com/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKafer A. Film review: Fixed: The Science/Fiction of Human Enhancement. \u003cem\u003eDisabil Stud Q\u003c/em\u003e. 2015; 35(4). https://dsq-sds.org/index.php/dsq/article/view/4985/4115\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSedgwick M. Review of: Crip Camp. \u003cem\u003eDisabil Stud Q\u003c/em\u003e. 2021; https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/7843/5878\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHeder S. \u003cem\u003eCODA\u003c/em\u003e. Vend\u0026ocirc;me Pictures; Apple TV+; 2021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eParsloe SM, Smith EM. The threat of returning to \u0026ldquo;normal\u0026rdquo;: Resisting ableism in the post-COVID classroom. \u003cem\u003eFem Pedagogy\u003c/em\u003e. 2022; https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/feministpedagogy/vol2/iss3/8\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSwenor B. A need for disability data justice. \u003cem\u003eForefront\u003c/em\u003e. 2022; https://doi.org/10.1377/forefront.20220818.426231\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTorabi F (host), Black ER (interviewee). The financial cost of having a disability [Audio podcast episode 1203]. In \u003cem\u003eSo Money\u003c/em\u003e. 2021. https://podcast.farnoosh.tv/episode/emily-rapp-black/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWalton DR. What\u0026rsquo;s a leg got to do with it? Black, female, and disabled in America. \u003cem\u003eRain Thunder\u003c/em\u003e. 2011; Spring:26\u0026ndash;31. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYusuf D. Why multiply marginalized people with disabilities should be prioritized before, during and after disasters and emergencies. In: \u003cem\u003eWorld Institute on Disability (WID)\u003c/em\u003e. 2022. https://wid.org/why-multiply-marginalized-people-with-disabilities-should-be-prioritized-before-during-and-after-disasters-and-emergencies/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGabel SL, editor. \u003cem\u003eDisability studies in education: Readings in theory and method\u003c/em\u003e. New York, NY: Peter Lang; 2005. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHern\u0026aacute;ndez-Saca DI. Reframing the master narratives of disability at my intersections: An outline of an educational equity research agenda. \u003cem\u003eCrit Disabil Discourse\u003c/em\u003e. 2017. https://cdd.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/cdd/article/view/39723\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcDonald-Morken CA. \u003cem\u003eMainstreaming critical disability studies: Towards undoing the last prejudice\u003c/em\u003e [dissertation]. Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University; 2014\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePrice M. Cripping revolution: A crazed essay. In: Proceedings from the Society for Disability Studies Annual Conference. San Jose, CA; 2011.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePrice M. \u003cem\u003eMad at school: Rhetorics of mental disability and academic life\u003c/em\u003e. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press; 2011.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArif S, Afolabi T, Mitrzyk B, Thomas T, Borja-Hart N, Wade L, et al. Engaging in authentic allyship as part of our professional development. \u003cem\u003eAm J Pharm Educ\u003c/em\u003e. 2022; https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8690\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBishop A. \u003cem\u003eBecoming an ally: breaking the cycle of oppression in people\u003c/em\u003e. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood; 2002. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCasey EA, Allen CT, Tolman RM, Carlson JM, Leek C. Walking the walk or just talk?: A global examination of men\u0026rsquo;s intentions to take violence preventative action. \u003cem\u003eJ Aggress Maltreat Trauma\u003c/em\u003e. 2019; https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2018.1446480\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuess R. \u003cem\u003eThe idea of a critical theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt school\u003c/em\u003e. New York, NY: Syndicate of the Cambridge University Press; 1981.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePonce de Leon R, Carter JT, Rosette AS. Sincere solidarity or performative pretense? Evaluations of organizational allyship. \u003cem\u003eOrgan Behav Hum Decis Process\u003c/em\u003e. 2024; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2023.104296\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReason RD, Davis TL. Antecedents, precursors, and concurrent concepts in the development of social justice attitudes and actions. \u003cem\u003eNew Dir Stud Serv\u003c/em\u003e. 2005; https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.161\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcKenzie M. No more \u0026quot;allies.\u0026quot; In: \u003cem\u003eBlack Girl Dangerous (BGD)\u003c/em\u003e. 2013. https://www.bgdblog.org/2013/09/no-more-allies/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbes ES, Zahneis ME. A duoethnographic exploration of disability ally development. \u003cem\u003eDisabil Stud Q. \u003c/em\u003e2020; https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v40i3.7038\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePowell J, Kelly A. Accomplices in the academy in the age of Black Lives Matter. \u003cem\u003eJ Crit Thought Pract\u003c/em\u003e. 2017; https://doi.org/10.31274/jctp-180810-73\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRudy. Accomplices not allies: Abolishing the ally industrial complex. In: \u003cem\u003eIndigenous Action Media\u003c/em\u003e. 2014. https://www.indigenousaction.org/accomplices-not-allies-abolishing-the-ally-industrial-complex/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthors, 2020\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdvance FORWARD: Transforming a gendered institution. NSF HRD 0811239. \u003cem\u003eNSF ADVANCE Institutional Transformation Proposal\u003c/em\u003e. 2008. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0811239\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBerg E, Besse R. \u003cem\u003e2021 XXXX Campus climate survey\u003c/em\u003e. XXXXX. 2021; https://www.XXXX.edu/oira/institutional_reports/campus_climate_survey/.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthors, 2022\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthors, 2024\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAccessADVANCE. \u003cem\u003eEqual access: Universal design of your ADVANCE project\u003c/em\u003e. DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology). 2022;https://www.washington.edu/doit/equal-access-universal-design-your-advance-project\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthors, 2018\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthors, 2015\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthors, 2013\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNational SEED. The National SEED Project: Creating conversational communities that drive change. https://www.nationalseedproject.org/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcIntosh P. White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. \u003cem\u003eIn: Peace and Freedom Magazine\u003c/em\u003e. 1989; https://www.nationalseedproject.org/key-seed-texts/white-privilege-unpacking-the-invisible-knapsack\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStyle EJ. Curriculum as encounter: Selves and shelves. \u003cem\u003eEngl J\u003c/em\u003e. 2014; http://www.jstor.org/stable/24484250\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthors, 2017\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5160614/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5160614/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eAlthough about a quarter of working age adults in the United States identify as disabled, representative numbers are not found in most workplaces, including academic and scientific workplaces. In higher education, disability-focused policies, programming, professional development, as well as research, have been predominantly oriented toward disabled learners. This by-default attention to the needs of disabled students implicitly signals that disabled faculty and staff are not expected to be present, and/or are not welcomed and valued employees. In this evaluative case study, we detailed a year-long professional development seminar investigating experiences of academic faculty who identify as disabled and reviewed findings from a post-seminar survey. Taken together, the quantitative and qualitative survey data indicated that participants in the seminar series made meaningful gains in four fundamental aspects of allyship focused on disability (in)equities in academic workplaces: increased general topical knowledge of disability stereotyping and discrimination, improved understanding of discriminatory impacts of ableism, enhanced skills for interrupting disability discrimination and inequities, and amplified personal commitment and motivation for addressing disability equity in the workplace.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Advancing Disability Equity in Academic Workplaces: A Professional Development Seminar Case Study","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-04-15 01:19:48","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5160614/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-05-12T11:19:54+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-05-06T15:48:37+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-04-17T19:45:36+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"82144853372549209650038074950977772176","date":"2025-04-14T00:10:33+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-04-11T15:42:43+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-04-11T05:36:48+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Education","date":"2025-04-01T16:45:23+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"086be4a0-6f17-47df-b0f9-8f76a30d2638","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 15th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-07-19T16:53:24+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-04-15 01:19:48","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5160614","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5160614","identity":"rs-5160614","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}