Search

This collaborative and reflective inquiry-based paper critically examines accessibility within the research realm. We focus this inquiry on the principles of equity, diversity and inclusion and specifically address the challenges of establishing accessibility as part of the research enterprise. We acknowledge and reflect on the pivotal role accessibility for persons with disabilities play in an equitable research enterprise and reflect on how nuances in language, behavior, and power dynamics all play a role in creating inclusive environments. This reflective inquiry is a result of a facilitated workshop that took place at a conference attended by professionals working within research administration. Using an inquiry-based workshop approach, facilitators worked with workshop colleagues to discuss, regardless of job title, an ability to influence and shape a more inclusive and accessible system at all levels. Our desired outcomes of this workshop were to collate the collective experiences of our colleagues to uncover barriers and facilitators related to accessibility and to support and learn from our colleagues around ways to create an accessible environment that is a norm. What we find is that accessibility impacts everyone in some way, but it is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Collaboration and communication strategies present possible support pathways to more accessible environments.

Background: Education is often the primary arena for exploring and integrating new technologies. AI and human-machine communication (HMC) are prevalent in the classroom, yet we are still learning how student perceptions of these tools will impact education. Objectives: We sought to understand student perceptions of credibility related to written feedback attributed to a human or an AI grader (Study One). We also investigated how corrective messages containing verbal immediacy and social support influenced student perceptions of an AI grader's credibility based on feedback in an evaluated essay (Study Two). Methods: We used an online experimental design to assess the perceived credibility of a grader. In Study One, we randomly assigned students (N = 155) to a condition that contained a paragraph they were told was evaluated by a human or an AI grader. In Study Two (N = 222), we investigated ways of increasing perceptions of an AI grader's credibility by writing messages with higher/lower levels of immediacy and social support. Results: In Study One, the students rated both the human and AI grader as credible (yet rated the AI grader lower on goodwill). The data suggest that students in Study Two attributed more goodwill (i.e., caring) to the AI grader when the feedback included more verbal immediacy. Conclusions: Our results highlight the importance of student perceptions and communication styles when integrating technology into education. The two studies imply that students viewed the human and AI graders as competent, caring, and trustworthy, specifically when feedback included more immediacy cues.