Conference Welcome & Opening Keynote

NOW IS THE TIME OF FACING MONSTERS 

Slides

Session Recording (Available until end of 2026)

This keynote will address the contemporary intersection of technology and academic libraries using the framework of Eric Zimmerman's Manifesto of the Ludic Century. Zimmerman argues that games are the definitional cultural form of the 21st century and that the logic of games will increasingly shape culture.

Games are like libraries - interesting, beautiful, and useless -- useless until animated by others who decide to join in. Looking at the world through the lens of game design can be useful when exploring life with agentic systems, as games can be understood as an art form where agency itself is explored. Games allow us to explore systems that are already familiar to us while allowing us to also explore and co-create new potential futures. The qualities that make play so joyful and generative are not unlike the qualities of what Ursula Franklin called holistic technologies: technologies that allow the individual to change rules and conditions to better fit their immediate needs. Games show us that we can find freedom within constraint through a ludic approach. Indeed, our collective planetary survival may depend upon our ability to accept limitations and to change ourselves rather than our environment. Games model technologies that afford consent, a feature tragically missing from the encroaching Ai infrastructures that are currently taking root. And gamification illustrates the dangers of when we unduly focus on the score instead of the play. The Great Derangement is upon us and libraries will need allies more than ever. This talk will share strategies on how to recruit them from games in libraries. 

Now is the time of monsters. And games are where we can learn how to defeat them.

Break (15 minutes)

Concurrent Sessions
Three streams: Concurrent 1A, Concurrent 1B, Concurrent 1C

Slides

Speaker

Emily Carlisle, Acting Director – John & Dotsa Bitove Family Law Library, Western University

Emily Carlisle is the Acting Director of the John & Dotsa Bitove Family Law Library at Western University. She comes to this role having previously served as a Research and Scholarly Communication Librarian at Western, in which she provided education and support for researchers and authors to make their work Open Access. She also worked with faculty looking to incorporate Open Educational Resources in their teaching. She is currently a co-editor of the Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship, published by CAPAL.

Abstract

It’s no secret that acting and interim leadership positions are ubiquitous in academic libraries. Data from the Association of Research Libraries, for example, shows that “three times since 2012, the ARL has hired more interim leaders than permanent leaders in a single year” (Knievel, 2022)—not to mention the downstream vacancies created, and then temporarily filled, when leaders step into these interim roles. By their nature, acting positions are intended to be short-term solutions that provide stability and continued progress when an employee leaves or steps down. The reality, however, is that “interim leadership is frequently used, even unintentionally, as a long-term solution” (Knievel, 2022). To that point, challenges faced by those who take on the roles have been frequently addressed in existing literature: increased workload, unclear expectations, difficulty establishing trust and authority, and an inability to set or act on long term goals (Hoffman & Barker, 2022).

In my presentation, I’ll extend the discussion by considering acting leadership positions in academic librarianship through an “ethic of care” lens.

Ethics of care, as defined and developed by feminists in the 1980s, is an ethical framework—applying to individuals and our institutions—that emphasizes “relationships, empathy, and responsiveness in decision-making” (Hervieux et al., 2025). It foregrounds interdependence, reciprocity, and compassion in both our private and professional lives. Library practitioners have argued that as a profession often tasked with identifying need and meeting patrons where they’re at, an ethics of care is necessary and inherent to librarianship (and to educational settings more generally) (Jackson, 2025; Howard, 2017). Meanwhile, more recent feminist scholars have called on the post-pandemic university, where “care-full leadership and labor are often overlooked,” to re-examine practices and adopt an ethics of care as foundational, such that researchers, students, and staff may be able to “survive well” (Naylor, 2023).

I will argue that our profession’s overreliance on acting leadership positions is antithetical to an ethics of care. For those assuming an acting leadership role, service and care to the organization and to others may be a motivation (Knievel & Reynolds, 2022). Yet the very structure of acting leadership positions—temporary appointments with ambiguous, short-term timelines–complicates one’s ability to build the trusting and reciprocal relationships necessary to enact care. Likewise, the fact that research shows that interim leaders are frequently not provided with clear expectations, adequate training and mentorship opportunities, or transition plans (Cyrus et al., 2025), suggests that libraries are more concerned with operational continuity (or the appearance of) than with care for the incumbent and those that they serve. Drawing from an ethic of care framework, as I intend to do, requires critically examining the ways in which the leadership systems and structures that we uphold fail those that they intend to serve. At the same time, it requires collaboratively re-inventing our practices to better cultivate a supportive working environment, and so my presentation will end with a call to do just that.

Works Cited

Cyrus, J. W., Brown, R. E., Hurst, E. J., Alsaadawi, R., & Sabo, R. T. (2025). The structure and experience of interim roles in academic health sciences libraries. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 113(2). 148-157. dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2025.1924

Hervieux, C., Lu, H., McKee, M., Shourkaei, M., & Dunham, R. (2025). In C. Hervieux, H. Lu, M. McKee, M. Shourkaei, & R. Dunham, Acting responsibly: ethical decision-making in business. https://pressbooks.atlanticoer-relatlantique.ca/actingresponsibly/chapter/chapter-2-ethics-of-caring/

Hoffman, A. T., & Barker, A. E. G. (2022). The impact of the interim leadership experience on library middle managers. Journal of Library Administration 62(7), 863-886. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2022.2117952

Howard, S. (2017). Purposeful and productive care: The feminist ethic of care and the reference desk. In M. T. Accardi, The Feminist Reference Desk: Concepts, Critiques, and Conversations (pp. 61-71). Litwin Books, LLC.

Jackson, L. (2025). Nurturing student development in academic libraries: A practice in the ethics of care. In the Library with the Lead Pipe. https://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2025/nurturing-student-development/

Naylor, L. (2023, October 2). A feminist ethic of care in the Neoliberal university. Society + Space.

Knievel, J. E. (2022). Interim leadership by the numbers: Leadership turnover in academic libraries. In J. E. Knievel and L. J. Reynolds, Interim leadership in libraries: Building relationships, making decisions, and moving on (pp. 3-14). Association of College & Research Libraries.

Knievel, J. E., & Reynolds L. J. (2022). Question your assumptions about interim leadership. In J. E. Knievel and L. J. Reynolds, Interim leadership in libraries: Building relationships, making decisions, and moving on (pp. v-xi). Association of College & Research Libraries.

Slides

Speaker

Patti Ryan, Associate Librarian, Content & Analysis Department, York University Libraries

Patti Ryan has worked as a librarian at York University Libraries (YUL) for over 25 years. She has worn many different hats at YUL but currently works in the collections department. She is also a part-time graduate student in psycho-spiritual care at the Toronto School of Theology. Her current research interests centre on spiritual wellbeing in the workplace and the role of organizational leadership in fostering healthy workplaces.

Abstract

In recent years, many academic libraries have undertaken large-scale restructuring with the goal of better enabling strategic priorities. As part of this trend, there has been a shift away from subject liaison models towards functional designs that emphasize functional services across disciplines. A common theme in the library management discourse on functional models is their success with improving the visibility and value of librarians on the campus. Despite these claims, there has been very little research that critically examines the human dimensions of the shift to functional designs and the impact on the day-to-day working lives of academic librarians.

This session will discuss key findings from a recent phenomenological study that used semi-structured interviews to explore the affective dimensions of large-scale restructuring in academic libraries. It will give particular attention to commonalities in the lived experience of librarians who have transitioned from a subject librarian to a functional librarian role as a result of organizational restructuring. The presenter will share new insights about the emotional and spiritual struggles of academic workers that can contribute to burnout and disengagement. The goal of this session is to shine a critical light on a “concerning picture of our profession’s workplace well-being" (Newman, 2025, p. 188) and invite a conversation about how we might collectively enact a better ethic of care for those who have been adversely affected by organizational change.

Works Cited

Newman, B. (2025). Building psychological safety in academic libraries: Fostering innovation, well-being and engaged teams. College & Research Libraries News, 86(5), 188. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.86.5.188

Slides

Speaker

Lily Kwok, Advocacy & Research Officer, Ontario Library Association (OLA)

Lily Kwok (she/her) is the Advocacy & Research Officer at the Ontario Library Association (OLA), where she leads strategic initiatives that amplify the voices of library professionals and advance sector-wide priorities. She is the OLA staff lead on the Association’s equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) priority and serves as the liaison for the OLA Indigenous Advisory Council, Cultural Diversity and Inclusion Committee, and Anti-Racism Committee. Lily is passionate about driving change and creating meaningful impact through data, storytelling and strategy.

Abstract

Conducted in March 2025, the OLA Inclusive Libraries: State of the Sector Survey explored the state of equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) in Ontario’s library and information sector, with a specific focus on race and racism. The survey aimed to inform OLA’s anti-racism strategy and address barriers for Indigenous, Black, and People of Colour (IBPOC) in both the association and the sector. With responses from over 1,100 library professionals across the province, the survey provides insights into IBPOC experiences, persistent challenges to building an equitable and inclusive sector, and opportunities for OLA to leverage its role as a provincial association to drive meaningful change. Findings highlight the continued lack of demographic diversity within the sector, particularly the underrepresentation of IBPOC library professionals in senior management and decision-making roles. The final report provides a set of actionable recommendations for both the OLA and the broader sector, emphasizing the need for mentorship and leadership development, safer organizational processes for addressing racism, and targeted outreach to diversify the profession. As Canada’s demographics continue to shift and the sector seeks to reassert human value in librarianship, addressing longstanding racial inequities has become increasingly urgent. This presentation examines how a provincial library association is responding to these challenges, shares anti-racist actions attendees can take back to their workplaces, and invites discussion on the evolving role of professional associations in advancing equity and racial justice in librarianship.

Slides

Speakers

Annalisa Gatti (Moderator), Engineering Librarian, Engineering & Computer Science Library, University of Toronto

Annalisa Gatti is an Engineering Librarian at the University of Toronto’s Engineering & Computer Science Library. In this role, Annalisa oversees research support services and leads student engagement and outreach activities. Annalisa is passionate about developing community and building relationships within the faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, and the Department of Computer Science and more broadly across academic libraries. She holds a Master of Library and Information Science from Western University and prior to joining U of T, worked as a corporate librarian for an engineering consulting firm where she provided research and knowledge management support.

Ginny Ekvall, Biological Sciences Librarian, Earth Sciences Library & Mathematical Sciences Library, University of Toronto

Ginny Ekvall is a librarian at the University of Toronto’s Earth Sciences and Mathematical Sciences Libraries, where they provide collections, reference, and research support to biological sciences. They oversee engagement activities in the Earth and Math Libraries and seek out opportunities to build connections across biology programs and the sciences at U of T. They hold a Bachelor of Science from the University of Alberta and a Master of Information from the University of Toronto and worked previously as a professional geophysicist.

Amal Hussien, Outreach & Engagement Librarian for Black Studies, University of Toronto

Amal Hussien is the Outreach and Engagement Librarian for Black Studies at the University of Toronto Libraries. In this role, Amal is dedicated to fostering community connections and enhancing access to information. They lead initiatives to promote library resources, support diverse user needs, and develop innovative programs and partnerships.

Nat Johnson-Tyghter, Research and Engagement Librarian, OISE Library, University of Toronto

Nat Johnson-Tyghter is an academic librarian at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) Library within the University of Toronto. They hold a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Western Ontario and Masters of Arts, Museum Studies, and Information from the University of Toronto. In their current position at OISE Library, Nat manages the Ontario Historical Education Collections, consisting of non-circulating library materials and archival collections. They oversee collections projects, provide research support, and organize outreach and engagement events at OISE and across the university.

Avery Brzobohaty, Reference Specialist, Music Library, University of Toronto

Avery Brzobohaty is the Reference Specialist for the University of Toronto Music Library. They hold a Bachelor of Music from the University of Ottawa, a Masters degree in Musicology from West Virginia University, and a Master of Information from the University of Toronto. Previously, Avery served as Library Services Manager at The Royal Conservatory of Music, where she was recognized for service excellence and community engagement. She has experience co-managing events both within and beyond library spaces. Avery is passionate about fostering vibrant academic libraries that are equitable, inclusive, and resilient. As an active scholar, instructor, and creative problem solver, they are always happy to answer questions—or help connect you with someone who can.


Abstract

In an increasingly digital world, efforts to increase student engagement have seen academic library outreach include creative activities alongside traditional, academic offerings. Whether using interest in AI events as a bridge into relationship-building, developing programming for diverse and underserved user groups, or experimenting with partnerships and collaboration, outreach is about more than just marketing our library services. Innovative engagement tactics prioritize human connection, care, and community-building. Supported by institutional commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion, student engagement and outreach actively seeks to ensure all students feel accepted and welcome within library spaces while showcasing the unique value that librarians can offer in support of our academic communities. This panel brings together librarians from throughout the University of Toronto Library system who create and deliver unique outreach activities and events with the goal to create spaces for students to connect in real life and foster community across diverse groups.

In this session, panelists will share examples of the role U of T libraries play in creating opportunities for connection through outreach activities such as Zine-making, sticker sharing, AI playdates, unstudy spots, Pride programming, Science Literacy Week events, and more. They will explore the challenges of getting these programs off the ground, share their successful promotion and engagement strategies, talk about the benefits, feedback, lessons learned and positive outcomes they’ve seen, and discuss their visions for the future of outreach within academic libraries. Ultimately, the panelists will share practical experiences that demonstrate why outreach and engagement remains a core focus of libraries within the increasingly digital academic landscape. By the end of the session, attendees will gain a nuanced view of academic library engagement strategies, as well as inspiration to develop unique and experimental outreach events for their own communities.

Slides

Speaker

Emily C. Wild, Chemistry, Geosciences and Environmental Studies Librarian, Princeton University

Emily C. Wild is the Chemistry, Geosciences and Environmental Studies Librarian in the Princeton University Library. In 2022, Emily received the Geosciences Information Society’s (GSIS) 2022 Mary B. Ansari Distinguished Service Award for Geosciences Librarianship. From 1996 to 2018, Emily was a hydrologist (1996-2008) and librarian (2008-2018) at the United States Geological Survey (USGS), researching the interactions of minerals, rocks, and water for local, state, national, international community projects and programs. Emily has a Bachelor of Arts in Geology from Hartwick College, and a Master of Library and Information Studies from the University of Rhode Island. She is working towards a doctorate in education at Drexel University, with an interest assessing the availability and use of mineral extraction publications, worldwide. 

Abstract

Growing up in Franklin County, New York, just down the road from the Six Nations Indian Museum, now the Six Nations Iroquois Cultural Center, my earliest understandings of landscapes, water resources, and community were shaped by the teachings curated by local Mohawk educators. These lessons were integrated into my formal education, one that framed the Adirondack Mountains not simply as a geological landscape but as a cultural artifacts and historical diplomacies. Long before I learned about the local rock anorthosite, mountain building events, or post-glacial isotactic rebound in a classroom, I was taught that the Adirondacks were a space for Indigenous communities long before the forests that now define them.

Mohawk knowledges clarify relations between the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) and Algonquin peoples, whose histories include periods of conflict followed by diplomacy, alliance, and coexistence. I did not know until adulthood that the Beaver Wars and the Great Peace of Montreal (1701) were not known to many of my colleagues in academic libraries. Over the years, I have been sharing experiences from my K–12 education, where Indigenous perspectives were not peripheral, they were foundational.

Local histories and Haudenosaunee teachings shaped how I understood the Saranac and Ausable River Basins, the Richelieu River drainage system, and the broader St. Lawrence watershed in Canada and the United States. These frameworks emphasized relationships rather than resources, especially through the “Haudenosaunee Thanksgiving Address, Greetings to the Natural World.” Most importantly, the Seventh-Generation philosophy of making decisions with the well-being of descendants seven generations into the future became my earliest model for environmental conservation. Before I encountered sustainability as a scientific or policy term, I understood it as a cultural responsibility growing up as an Adirondacker.

This presentation is a summary of how I use my informal community education from childhood in my academic library instruction and research consultations sessions. Examples of how Indigenous knowledge systems of the Northeast, particularly Haudenosaunee teachings, offer essential insights for geology, ecology, and environmental ethics. By tracing my own educational path, learning from local Mohawk educators to academic scientific frameworks, I highlight how these knowledge systems can coexist, enrich one another, and challenge the limitations in higher education spaces. In doing so, I aim to show that the “unseen roots” of Indigenous knowledge are not only historically significant but immediately relevant to contemporary conversations about land, climate, and sustainability. I will also share how my own family’s history is interwoven into Quebec history during the Beaver Wars; and, how my family’s history shaped my career as a hydrologist and librarian at the United States Geological Survey (USGS) from 1996 to 2018. Sharing these personal experiences of my childhood reassert how conversations as in-person library inquiries are the bedrock to human values in librarianship.

CAPAL AGM (1-hour Meeting)

Attendance Optional for CAPAL Members

Speakers

Sarah Woods-Gagnon, CAPAL Chair (2025/2026)
Jennie Fallis, CAPAL Vice Chair (2025/2026) / CAPAL Chair (2026/2027)

Link to Agenda

DAY 1 Lunch & CAPAL Census Review Presentation (1-hour Presentation)

A Review of the 2025 CAPAL Census of Canadian Academic Librarians / ACBES Recensement des bibliothécaires en enseignement supérieur du Canada 2025 (1-hour Presentation)

Slides

Speakers

Jennie Fallis, Liaison Librarian, McGill University

Jennie Fallis is a liaison librarian at McGill University. She holds a Master of Library Science from Western University. Jennie has worked as a librarian in both public and academic libraries and previously taught English as a second language in Thailand and Spain. Jennie's research areas of interest include gamification, game-based learning, and information ethics. Since joining CAPAL, Jennie has become an active member of several CAPAL committees and working groups. She has also taken on many tasks and projects which include acting as Primary Investigator for the 2025 CAPAL Census. Jennie is current holds position as CAPAL Vice-Chair, and will take on position of CAPAL Chair in June 2026. When Jennie is not working, she is most likely spending time with her five-year-old Australian German Shepherd mix, Manuel.

Tina Liu, Cataloguing Librarian, McGill University

Tina Liu is a Cataloguing Librarian at McGill University and is the recipient of the Canadian Association of Professional Academic Librarians’ 2025 Early Career Researcher Award. She has been the recipient of grants and scholarships from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL), and was an ALA Spectrum Scholar. Her research interests include critical librarianship and critical cataloguing, library and labour history, and representations of diasporic and marginalized communities in library collections.

Abstract

The first iteration of the Census of Academic Librarians was conducted in 2016 by CAPAL/ACBES. This survey collects demographic information of academic librarians working at post-secondary institutions across Canada. The demographic data collected through this survey will provide a better understanding of workplace, and policy trends in academic librarianship across Canada. Data collected includes characteristics such as age, sex, marital status, language, ethnicity, education, rank, and salary. Through the iterative collection of this information, researchers can build on the data, cross analyze with other data sets, e.g. Statistics Canada.

During this session, the researchers will discuss the various aspects of the census research process including development of the questionnaire, data collection, and participant commentary. Session attendees will have the opportunity to ask questions and provide feedback. This research is intended to benefit academic librarians, especially in the context of discussing shared challenges and opportunities across Canadian higher education. These issues include cuts to library budgets, growing workload pressures, evolving roles, and changing workplace environments. This research will also highlight trends in workplace experiences, equity, representation, and role responsibilities. Not only will this research address issues faced across the profession, we hope our work will also illustrate approaches and goals for workplace organizing and expectations for working environment.

Dataset Citation

Fallis, Jennie; Liu, Tina; Zhu, Cheng Yin; Pinard, Mylène, 2026, "2025 Census of Canadian Academic Librarians / Recensement des bibliothécaires en enseignement supérieur du Canada 2025", https://doi.org/10.5683/SP3/CC5RPD, Borealis, V1

Concurrent Sessions
Three streams: Concurrent 2A, Concurrent 2B, Concurrent 2C

Slides

Speaker

Caitlin Lindsay, Access Services Librarian, University of British Columbia

Caitlin Lindsay (she/her/hers) is the Access Services Librarian at the University of British Columbia. In her role she works closely with the Borrower Services team and oversees circulation, physical course reserves, patron account management, overdue items, physical collections maintenance, and identity and access management for the library. Prior to her role at UBC, Caitlin has experience working in public libraries, most recently as an Adult & Senior Services Librarian at Richmond Public Library. Caitlin also spent several years as the Vancouver Campus Librarian at Alexander College.

Abstract

It has become standard in many institutions for patrons to interact with academic library services through technology. Basics around circulation and managing one’s own library account are mediated by virtual account platforms; course reserves, even physical items located on-site and accessed in person, are facilitated by course reserve software; discovery of and access to library resources is frequently dependant on online catalogues and vendor platforms. Students, researchers, and faculty at academic institutions now navigate their information seeking journey through overlapping layers of technology interfaces.

Previous research has indicated that over the past several decades there has also been a shift in the type of work institutions prioritize for librarians, often with the implication that the day-to-day duties of a librarian’s role have become less public facing. This change has long been discussed around reference services and desk staffing models, where many institutions have implemented triage reference, removing librarians as the first point of contact at frontline desks. This change, risen in conjunction with the use of virtual reference platforms, budget and staffing constraints, a shift in the types of reference questions being asked, and changes to job expectations and responsibilities for librarians has meant that many institutions have turned to staff in other departments, such as Access Services, to fill the informational gap.

As libraries move towards increasingly entrenched digital-first environments, and as librarians find themselves less frequently the first point of contact for patrons, questions arise around who in the library is providing the human touch? Who is on the other end of the phone assisting with questions, responding manually to inquiries sent to a shared inbox, or acting as the face of the library at a physical service point? What does it mean for library staff to be the first (and possibly only) point of contact when patrons request help navigating the digital tools and platforms which facilitate their access to services?

This presentation will include discussions from several Library Specialists on the Borrower Services team at the University of British Columbia, and will provide examples of what the ‘human touch’ looks like in the day-to-day interactions' library staff have with patrons. This presentation will also outline the some of the challenges faced by library staff in these digital-first environments and will provide examples of how libraries can support staff who are frequently tasked with the difficult work of centering humanness.

Slides

Speakers

Adair Harper, Instruction Librarian and Librarian for Interactive Arts & Technology and Publishing, Simon Fraser University Library

Adair Harper (she/her) is a settler librarian working on the unceded territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, Tsleil-Waututh, Katzie, Kwikwetlem, Qayqayt, Kwantlen, Semiahmoo and Tsawwassen. She is currently on contract at Simon Fraser University as Instruction Librarian and Librarian for Interactive Arts & Technology and Publishing. Adair has previously worked in public libraries as a community and public services librarian and has a professional background in museum exhibitions. She is passionate about critical and community-oriented librarianship practices with strong interests in equitable and inclusive approaches to instruction, outreach and engagement. Adair holds an MA in Public History from Western University and a MLIS from the University of British Columbia.

Shiyi Xie, Librarian for Applied Sciences, Simon Fraser University Library

Shiyi Xie is a liaison librarian for Applied Sciences at Simon Fraser University (SFU) Library, located on the unceded traditional territories of Coast Salish Peoples. Prior to joining SFU, she was an academic librarian at Western University. She also previously worked as a university lecturer in materials engineering and as an information specialist in a corporate library. Her research interests include issues in science librarianship, information literacy instruction, and Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in library services. Shiyi holds an MSc in Metallurgy Engineering from Northeastern University (China) and an MLIS from the University of Western Ontario.

Abstract

One way that academic libraries support their users is through their spaces, and these environments are far from neutral. Elements such as architectural features, lighting, furniture, and behavioural policies all influence users’ sensory experiences within the library. The literature shows that people with sensory sensitivities value having detailed information about the sensory qualities of library spaces (Brunskill, 2020; Svaler, 2024). By highlighting key sensory elements such as lighting, noise and crowding levels, sensory maps offer one potential solution to meet this need. While increasing numbers of libraries and other cultural institutions provide sensory maps of their space, there is little written on this topic in the library literature.

The study being presented seeks to address this gap by exploring how user perspectives can inform the development of a sensory map. The project did so by gathering input on a draft sensory map from library users, including those who identify as neurodivergent and/or sensory sensitive. The aims of the study were to understand the potential impact of such a map, to gather users’ observations of the library’s sensory environment, and to assess what improvements could make a sensory map and the library space more supportive and inclusive. The presentation will outline the study design and methodological approach, including the map development and design process. In addition, the presenters will share key findings and discuss their implications for practice and future research.
Works Cited

Brunskill, A. (2020). “Without that detail, I’m not coming”: The perspectives of students with disabilities on accessibility information provided on academic library websites. College & Research Libraries,81(5). 768-788. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.81.5.768

Svaler, T. B. (2024). On making libraries and museums more accessible for autistic people. IFLA Journal, 50(1), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352231202516

Slides

Speaker

Dr. Ben Mitchell, Campus Librarian, Williams Lake Campus, Thompson Rivers University Library

Dr. Ben Mitchell is a scholar and librarian interested in making historical and contemporary medical humanities and neurodiversity studies more accessible. As the assistant curator at the Lakeshore Grounds Interpretive Centre, they helped design and deliver exhibits, tours, and other public programming related to the history of mental health and neurodivergence at the former Lakeshore Psychiatric Hospital in Etobicoke, Ontario.

They have been an invited speaker at half a dozen venues on topics related to neurodiversity in libraries and education, including the Waterloo Public Library, Mount Royal University, Thompson Rivers University, and Maskwacis Cultural College. In 2025 they were the keynote speaker at the Atlantic Provinces Library Associations 2025 annual conference, “Breaking Barriers,” and at San José State University’s School of Information’s Disability Pride Month Virtual Symposium.

Dr. Mitchell helps to organize the Neuro-GLAM-erous Discord server for neurodivergent gallery, library, archives, and museum (GLAM) workers.

Abstract

Within one short year academia went from cracking down on Large Language Model use by students to functionally mandating their use with all the fervour of a Bitcoin enthusiast who was late to the speculative party and now really needs people to buy in (so that they can cash out). With this newfound enthusiasm has come increased demands that librarians participate in the promotion of “AI literacy,” with recent job postings featuring it in job titles and workshops that often feel more like commercials than displays of critical understanding. “Conform to the bot, or else be prepared to be replaced by the bot.”

“AI literacy” remains a murky concept in the discourse, further obscured by the way that hype-peddlers often equate almost any algorithm with AI, from actual components like neural networks and large language models, to related but different concepts like machine learning, to even more basic algorithms like chatbots, automation scripts, or simple marketing gimmicks like “smart” appliances.

This purposeful conflation could help us make sense of a recent study by Tully, et. al. in The Journal of Marketing which finds that “Lower Artificial Intelligence Literacy Predicts Greater AI Receptivity.” The negative correlation between AI literacy and AI receptivity does not correlate to perceptions of either capability or ethical implications, but rather, as the authors in their marketing fashion go on to say, is influenced by the perceived “magic” of AI.

Using examples from textual, historical, and ludic literacy, as well as the history of chatbots, this talk will explore the ways that the current AI literacy discourse often hampers, rather than enhances, our collective understanding of digital systems, infrastructures, and the concept of literacy itself. It is the difference between literacy as an understanding of knowledge systems and how to creatively navigate them for your own ends, or a vision of literacy as simply knowing how to use a pre-prescribed tool in a pre-prescribed way.

Slides

Speaker

Alison Pitcher, Librarian, MacEwan University

Alison is a neurodivergent librarian at MacEwan University in Edmonton, where she acts as both an English liaison librarian and a collections management librarian. She has a passion for creating space for neurodivergent experiences in the workplace and for engaging with undergraduate students in accessible ways.

Abstract

Neurodivergent academic librarians exist (neurodivergent meaning having a brain that functions in ways that differ from what is considered the norm). But it sometimes feels like there’s an awareness gap around neurodivergent academic librarians – anecdotally, they might exist, but do we know much about their various experiences and their perceptions?

Focusing on centring neurodivergent people holistically, with identities that are more nuanced than just a single umbrella label, this session will share some preliminary survey and interview results from the self-relevant 2025/26 study, Frequency, Perceptions, and Experiences of Neurodivergent Academic Librarians in Publicly Funded Canadian Post-Secondary Institutions. This session will help to provide context for, and recognition of, neurodivergent academic librarians in Canada (i.e. what kind of neurodiversity labels do people apply to themselves, what are some of the intersecting identities that people have, are there some common barriers that they identify in the workplace, etc.) while also focusing on the fact that no single experience is the same (i.e. how common is it to be openly neurodivergent at work, how many believe that their neurodivergence has a positive versus a negative impact on their work, are the impacts that people described quite varied, etc.).

Highlighting and celebrating the variety of lived experiences within this community, this interactive session seeks to raise awareness of this often-overlooked group of librarians, identify themes arising from their experiences, point out some of the many ways that experiences can vary, and suggest ways that academic libraries can begin to implement workplace changes in response to findings.

Slides

Speakers

Ruby Lindsay, Health Sciences Librarian, University of Saskatchewan

Ruby Lindsay is a Health Sciences Librarian at the University of Saskatchewan. Her research interests include academic librarian labour, data management, and scholarly communication.

Jordan Pedersen, Acting Head, Research & Scholarship, University of Guelph

Jordan Pedersen is Acting Head of Research & Scholarship at the University of Guelph. Her current research interests centre around labour and art.

Abstract

This in-progress research project investigates the historical conditions of the mid-20th century, and their impact on academic librarianship in Canada. This period is particularly important because it was the origin of academic status for librarians along with high levels of unionizing activity across higher education institutions. During this time, foundational relationships were built between librarians and the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT), and membership organizations such as the Canadian Library Association (CLA) were formed. Our research draws primarily from archival material from these organizations housed at Library and Archives Canada.

While an account of this history has been given in In Solidarity: Academic Librarian Labour Activism and Union Participation in Canada (2014), our project focuses on the discussions,

priorities, and ultimately the decisions made which impacted the conditions of library labour. Our research questions are:

• RQ1: What institutional and political contexts influenced discussions and decisions about labour organizing of Canadian academic librarians in the mid 20th century?

• RQ2: How were various opinions and objectives prioritized, and are there perspectives that appear to be excluded?

• RQ3: What lessons can be learned and applied to critical issues facing academic librarians today, such as precarious labour conditions, attacks on equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI), and public doubt on the value of higher education?

When thinking about defining and defending the value of librarianship in a shifting landscape, we can learn a lot from our past. For example, noticing who was excluded or who experienced limited gains during post-war rights movements can help contextualize current EDI efforts and dynamics. Similarly, understanding historical parallels in the connection between nationalism and education in Canada, or the fight for academic status for librarians can provide insight into how we might advocate for ourselves today, and make decisions that will create a future we can be proud of.

Break (15 minutes)

Concurrent Sessions
Three streams: Concurrent 3A, Concurrent 3B, Concurrent 3C

Slides

Speakers

Ana Rogers-Butterworth, Liaison Librarian, Nahum Gelber Law Library, McGill University Law Library

Ana Rogers-Butterworth is a liaison librarian at the Nahum Gelber Law Library at McGill University in Montreal, where she has developed an integrated information literacy program for undergraduate law students. She is also the co-founder of the Free Association for Legal Literacy Canada (FALLCan). Her research areas include open legal scholarships, legal AI tools, and information literacy.

Sandy Hervieux (she/her), Head Librarian, Nahum Gelber Law Library, McGill University Law Library

Sandy Hervieux is the head of the Nahum Gelber Law Library at McGill University in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Prior to this she was the liaison librarian for political science, public policy, and religious studies. Her research interests include reference services, information literacy, and the impact of artificial intelligence on user services. She is currently pursuing her PhD in Information Studies at McGill.

Abstract

Generative AI is rapidly reshaping legal research and practice, making AI literacy an urgent and indispensable skill for future legal professionals. With coursework in Canadian law schools already rigorous and demanding, this raises a pressing question: who will teach these skills?

Most law schools in Canada include at least one mandatory legal research and writing course. Instructors in these courses have been forced to rapidly update their curricula to include training on AI, regardless of prior expertise, bandwidth, or personal ethics. AI literacy instruction is important across all disciplines, but in professional programs such as law, where new graduates will enter a world in which using AI is not merely an option but an expectation, it is becoming an essential academic qualification. As is often the case, librarians are stepping in to fill this knowledge gap, reasserting their human value as experts in information and knowledge work in an increasingly AI-driven world.

This presentation will discuss how law librarians in general have stepped up to this challenge, and will focus in particular on the presenters’ institution, a top law school in Canada. Here, the necessity of AI training in legal research posed an additional challenge. Due to an extra-heavy course load for students completing a dual common/civil law degree, the law faculty does not offer a dedicated legal research course. In the absence of a natural curricular space for AI literacy training, librarians were initially limited to one-off instructional sessions.

By 2025, the law librarians concluded that a more in-depth and structured offering was crucial. To achieve this, they leveraged the law faculty’s “Focus Week” program, which cancels all upper-year courses for one week per semester to allow students to complete 12-hour intensive courses for one credit. The presentation will focus on how these librarians, accustomed to one-off sessions, designed and delivered a 12-hour structured course with graded assignments, and how they collaborated with faculty to work within existing academic structures. This case study illustrates the evolving and irreplaceable role of academic law librarians in shaping knowledge work and leading AI literacy in legal education.

AI Statement

GPT‑5.1 was used to refine the presentation title. 

Slides

Speakers

Sarah Miller, Law Librarian, University of Victoria Libraires

Sarah Miller has worked at the University of Victoria Libraries in her current role as Law Librarian since August 2023. She previously worked at the University of Victoria Law Library between 2018-2022 in contract positions, and at the BC Attorney General Law Library between 2022 and 2023.

Emily Nickerson, Law and Business Librarian, University of Victoria Libraries

Emily Nickerson holds an MLIS from the University of British Columbia and has served as the Law and Business Librarian at the University of Victoria Libraries since September 2019. She brings experience from both government and law firm libraries.

Keilah Abello, former GenAI and Digital Literacy Intern, University of Victoria Libraries

Keilah Abello worked as a GenAI and Digital Literacy Intern at the University of Victoria Libraries. She has experience with training AI through Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), as well as an academic background in Computer Science, Sociology, and Psychology.

Abstract

Navigating Legal Research with GenAI: An Open Tutorial Seriesis a collection of four concise, interactive modules designed to help legal researchers critically, ethically, and effectively engage with generative AI tools. These modules were developed due to a need at the UVic Faculty of Law as GenAI features rolled out quickly in our legal research databases. As an open educational resource, the modules invite adaptation and reuse, so that other institutions can customize the modules to their local contexts and needs.

The proliferation of GenAI, and legal specific GenAI tools, has quickly reached legal practice and is impacting law schools. These tools offer new starting points in legal research that bypass traditional legal research methods, prompting questions on the role of legal research skills.

Law librarians often act as the intermediary between researchers and these resources, liaising with the vendors and offering expert instruction. Therefore, the law faculty looked to the library team for guidance on critically, ethically, and effectively engaging with generative AI tools.

The four module topics were developed in consultation with faculty members:

• Introduction to AI

• Using GenAI in legal and academic work

• Crafting effective prompts for legal research using GenAI

• Critical evaluation of GenAI outputs

The foundational skills of legal research are imperative to critically evaluating GenAI output. Librarians are more important than ever in teaching traditional legal research skills alongside digital literacy, information literacy, and critical thinking skills that are essential when using GenAI tools. The modules are an interactive way to build these skills by providing a base understanding of what GenAI is and how to use it, then delving into the complexities of ethical use of GenAI tools in law school and legal practice and how crucial critical evaluation of GenAI outputs is.

This presentation will outline the project’s development process, highlight lessons learned, and reflect on the continued importance of librarians in the context of how rapidly evolving technologies have reshaped legal research support.

Slides

Speaker

Michael Chee, Liaison Librarian, University of Waterloo

Mike Chee (he/him) is the Liaison Librarian for History, Political Science, and Public Service at the University of Waterloo. He holds a B.A.H. and an M.Ed. from Queen’s University, and an M.A. in History and an M.L.I.S. from the University of Western Ontario. He has worked in various Librarian roles at Waterloo since 2020. His current teaching focus is on exploring the use of GenAI and digital research methods in the humanities. His research interests include accessible instructional design, information literacy, and faculty perceptions of OER.

Abstract

This 20-minute presentation shares the one-shot approach used by the presenter to teach undergraduate Social Science and Humanities students about the strengths, weaknesses, and limits of GenAI within the literature review process. This approach is underpinned by ACRL’s Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, which extends to use as a valuable tool for framing GenAI literacy; particularly the frames that “Authority Is Constructed and Contextual”, “Scholarship as Conversation”, and “Searching as Strategic Exploration”. Students are presented with 3 main questions over the course of the one-shot:

• How is knowledge created?

• What is the purpose of a literature review?

• What information is GenAI able to provide?

By facilitating discussion and leading structured activities that invite students to actively engage with GenAI during class time, students are able to realize that finding the answers they want from GenAI is predicated on asking questions that align with where they are in the research process. Students’ metacognitive reflection on their learning and research process is facilitated by the instructor: an information professional who draws on fundamentals from the profession (e.g. the reference interview) to surface students’ information needs. This instructor intervention is an essential value-add within the GenAI context, which is otherwise an exchange between student and the void of the GenAI platform, with potential for an echo chamber effect.

In a structured activity, each student is provided the same prompt and time is given to share back responses from GenAI. Students realize that responses seem “good enough” at a cursory look, but fall short of the level of engagement required for a scholarly project. While GenAI is alluring in its potential to streamline the development of research proposals and bibliographies, that potential can only be leveraged properly if students can see that scholarship is a human-centered and mediated conversation, rather than a world of consistent consensus and objective truths. GenAI can be a useful tool for moving a research project forward, but glaring pitfalls (e.g. potential for hallucinations and incorrect citations) should raise serious concern about unmitigated reliance on GenAI outputs.

Attendees will be able:

• to articulate how the intervention of a human information professional is essential for developing the metacognitive reflection skills of undergraduate students.

• to apply a framework for teaching undergraduate students about GenAI through the lens of the literature review process.

AI Statement

Microsoft Co-Pilot was used as part of the brainstorming phase, to surface a series of potential proposal topics. The presenter then selected aspects that resonated to build out the finalized proposal.

Slides

Speakers

Charlotte Kiger Price, Humanities & Social Sciences Librarian, Carnegie Mellon University

Charlotte Kiger Price is a humanities & social sciences liaison librarian for Carnegie Mellon University Libraries, where she acts as liaison librarian for the departments of History, English, the Carnegie Mellon Institute for Strategy & Technology, and Languages, Cultures, & Applied Linguistics and co-liaison to First-Year Writing. Her research ranges from information, media, and memetic literacies in adolescents and young adults to classification systems, library-community partnerships, children’s literature, and primary source instruction. She holds a BA in liberal arts from Sarah Lawrence College and an MLIS from Drexel University and is currently enrolled in an EdD program for Instructional Technology & Media at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Jill Chisnell, Arts & Humanities Librarian, Carnegie Mellon University

Jill Chisnell, Arts and Humanities Librarian at Carnegie Mellon University, is a liaison to the Schools of Art and Design. She provides reference, instruction, and collection services using both traditional and creative techniques such as button-and zine-making and Speed Databasing. She is the creator and keeper of the Libraries’ zine cart, a mobile self-publication studio. Jill’s library practice and research interests explore playful methods to support creative inquiry, critical thinking, and curiosity. As an artist and crafter, Jill uses reclaimed materials and found objects in her work which is heavily influenced by her love of libraries and archives.

Ashley Werlinich, Arts & Humanities Librarian, Carnegie Mellon University

Ashley Werlinich currently serves as the Liaison to Drama and IDeATe and as the co-liaison to the Entertainment Technology Center and First-Year Writing. She aims to develop collaborations between the humanities, arts, creative technologies, and library spaces on campus. She has a background in interdisciplinary humanities research and instruction and has taught undergraduate students both as a library instructor and an English instructor. In her work, she seeks out ways to incorporate special collections, makerspaces, and artistic practices alongside traditional research methods. She has a passion for art, tinkering, and creative collaboration, and strives to build on these skills (and help others build upon them) in her work as a librarian. She holds an MLIS and an MA in English literature from UNC Chapel Hill, with a focus on early modern literature, book history, and history of medicine.

Abstract

As university communities increasingly turn to digital technologies — including generative AI — for research, creative work, and daily life, there is growing value in programming that centers physical media, human connection, and hands-on making. At Carnegie Mellon University, an institution defined by technological innovation and a siloed departmental culture, librarians have been running a series of creative pop-up events and workshops that do exactly that — using books and images drawn from our own deaccessioned collections as the raw materials for creative community programming.

Our programming takes several forms. "Remixing the Book: from Medieval Manuscripts to Meme Culture" is a workshop that invites participants to explore the long history of remaking, remixing, and collage — from cut-up medieval manuscripts to digital meme culture — before creating their own remixed objects from manuscript images and discarded library materials. We have also designed larger-scale drop-in events, including a library orientation featuring stations for hands-on making — button-making and a DIY garland craft from discarded books, crafting using deaccessioned slides, and an obsolete media petting zoo where students could physically interact with technologies ranging from VHS to laser discs. This programming is developed and run collaboratively by faculty librarians, staff, and student workers.

Working with physical materials in a shared space offers something qualitatively different from screen-based engagement. In a community where AI can generate text, images, and ideas on demand, the act of choosing, cutting, arranging, and constructing something by hand becomes more meaningful — a way of grounding participants in physical presence and human connection. Scholars of embodied learning have noted that making-oriented activities lower participation barriers while fostering connection across institutional boundaries (Sheridan et al., 2014; Lotts, 2016). Because this programming is open to everyone — students, faculty, and staff alike, with no prerequisite skills or coursework required — it draws participants who might not attend a more traditional library session, creating space to connect with librarians, with physical materials, and with each other, and to leave with something tangible.

We also want to reframe how librarians and their communities think about deaccessioned collections. Weeding is often a fraught process, met with anxiety about beloved books being discarded. This programming offers a different story: that the materials leaving our shelves carry meaning because librarians selected, stewarded, and knowingly deaccessioned them, and that curatorial expertise is what makes their repurposing purposeful rather than arbitrary. The discarded book is not the end of a collection's life, but can be the beginning of a community experience.

This presentation shares the practical design and evolution of our programming, reflects on what has and has not worked, and offers a transferable model for hands-on, collection-rooted community engagement that any academic library can adapt, regardless of institutional focus or available budget. The human element — the librarian's knowledge, judgment, and physical presence alongside the community — is not incidental to this work. In an era of digital overwhelm, it is the irreplaceable part.

Works Cited

Lotts, M. (2016). Playing with LEGO, learning about the library and "making" campus connections: The Rutgers Art Library Lego Playing Station, Part One. Journal of Library Administration, 56(4), 359–380.

Sheridan, K., Halverson, E., Litts, B., Brahms, L., Jacobs-Priebe, L., & Owens, T. (2014). Learning in the making: A comparative case study of three makerspaces. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 505–531.

Slides

Speakers

Romany Craig, University of Lethbridge

Romany Craig works as Information Literacy and Instruction Coordinator and liaison to various subjects at the University of Lethbridge, in Treaty 7 territory and Metis Region 3, Alberta.

Emily Villanueva, University of Lethbridge

Emily Villanueva is the Science and Scholarly Communication librarian at the University of Lethbridge, in Treaty 7 territory and Metis Region 3, Alberta.

Abstract

How do post-secondary libraries connect with prospective patrons who are unaware of the services and supports a library can provide them? Amid growing evidence that students are struggling to develop library research skills, one might expect an increase in the number of students seeking reference help from the library. And yet, statistics show a significant decline in reference queries in Alberta’s post-secondary institutions over the last several years (Alberta Association of Academic Libraries, 2025). This decline was notably exacerbated by changing and limited library services during the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated lockdowns. The emergence of Artificial Intelligence tools is an additional contributing factor. At the University of Lethbridge Library, these changes have been acutely felt, and a pop-up reference service was designed to connect with students who were unaware of the resources available at the library. Aligning with an ethic of care, a balance of in-person and virtual services can equalize opportunities for interaction and learning for people impacted by the digital divide, people with accessibility concerns, and equity-deserving communities. This session will highlight that students and staff benefit from face-to-face interaction as a catalyst for building relationships. The first three rounds of the pop-up will be discussed as a case study, including outcomes, early feedback, and challenges. Attendees of this session will explore how librarian-on-location initiatives, such as roving reference, embedded librarianship, and pop-up libraries, not only provide opportunities to answer questions from the campus community in a novel and accessible way, but serve important outreach purposes to connect with a broader range of patrons.

Slides

Speaker

Megan Palmer, Reference and Instruction Librarian at SUNY Oneonta’s Milne Library

Megan Palmer, BSc, MLIS (she/her), is a Reference and Instruction Librarian at SUNY Oneonta, where she supports information literacy and research practices for students, staff and faculty in hard science and social science fields. In addition to these responsibilities, Megan also spends time supporting student success through her role on the Milne Library’s Marketing and Outreach Team, where she plans programming such as For the Love of Books, Fall in Love with Reading, and Milne Library Study Day events.

Abstract

What do members of a university’s Library, Counselling Center, Office of Student Experience, and Office of Student Care and Wellbeing, have in common, other than a deep care for student success? A love of books of course!

Through a shared love of reading and a mission to host collaborative events to encourage student engagement and wellbeing, SUNY Oneonta’s campus support departments joined forces to create a bookish craft program called “For the Love of Books.” In the first iteration of this event, we invited students to submit their own personal to-be-read (TBR) lists and then gather to create tiny book versions of these titles to see their TBR lists in three-dimensional format. The library created an associated “Blind Date with a Book” display, the Counselling Center brought over part of their new “Mental Health Little Library,” and together we provided some tea and cookies to fuel our cozy crafter-noon.

This event occurred on Valentine’s Day of 2025 and set the stage for various related themed programs throughout the 2025 and 2026 academic year. These other events included Fall into Focus: Craft Your Dream Semester, Fall in Love with Reading, and the second annual For the Love of Books. Event after event, these programs have become more successful, not only in student attendance and engagement, invitations to our trusted therapy dog partners, and integration of a sustainability theme to our crafts, but also in the collaboration across campus support departments, and in the refining of planning and marketing practices. In a time of digital overwhelm and online engagement, these events have provided a space where students can unplug, engage in a bookish craft, unwind with therapy dogs, and spend time building relationships in real life (IRL) with their peers, all contributing to their feeling of belonging at SUNY Oneonta.

In this presentation, I will discuss how these book loving events have integrated care, compassion, and a human touch, into library programming, as well as encouraged a love of leisure reading at SUNY Oneonta’s Milne Library.

Slides

Speaker

Liam Baker, Digital Strategies, Learning and Engagement Librarian, University of Calgary

Liam is a Digital Strategies, Learning and Engagement Librarian in Library and Cultural Resources at the University of Calgary. He is currently the librarian for Geography, History, and the School of Architecture, Planning, and Landscaping (SAPL). He also has experience with covering for Engineering. He also works as a part of the Centre for Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, Literacy, and Integrity.

Abstract

GenAI has the potential to have a profound impact upon the learning and careers of students. Its existence reiterates the need for the cultivation of information competencies for students and faculty, but this time applied to the context of GenAI. That being said, teaching students about GenAI is difficult. The topic is variable and often existentially intimidating for educators to engage with. Guidelines and resources for educators discussing GenAI offer innumerable options which are often contradictory to each other. This leads to increasing levels of interpretive load amongst students and faculty, on top of the rigours of the academy. Lastly, Students also have contrasting relationships with GenAI based on personal experience, motivations, their discipline, etc. As trusted stewards of information, librarians need to assert themselves into conversation about GenAI in their institutions. We need to leverage our professional reputation to become a trust resource for AI education. This way, we can better ensure that students and faculty members can encounter AI ethically, and productively while feeling supported in their learning.

In Library and Cultural Resources, UofC librarians from our AI working group have been championing an agency informed perspective regarding AI literacy. Much of this work is done through the fostering of connections with faculty and students, dispelling the arcane qualities of GenAI in an approachable manner for students. This allows us to provide students with the opportunity to engage with AI’s capabilities critically to better understand how GenAI might fit into their future careers as students and emerging professionals.

Over the past year, I have delivered instruction sessions covering AI topics in both STEM and Humanities. I’d like to discuss observations, what worked, what didn’t work, etc. My instruction sessions are partially based on ideas from Naomi Baron’s Who Wrote This? How AI and the Lure of Efficiency Threaten Human Writing. Baron discusses how different technologies throughout human history have intervened in humanity’s various creative processes. Baron offers an approach to think about how we can utilize technology in our creative pursuits without surrendering our human creativity.

Slides

Speakers

Julie Burrell, Academic Liaison Librarian, Manchester Metropolitan University

Julie Burrell is an Academic Liaison Librarian at Manchester Metropolitan University, where she provides support for the People and Performance and Operations, Technology, Events and Hospitality Management departments within the University’s Business School. She is a Fellow of Advance HE and regularly provides information literacy training via both embedded teaching sessions and 1-2-1 appointments. Julie has been involved with the Library’s media literacy offering for several years and is keen to continue adapting and developing their response to the ongoing challenges that misinformation presents.

Rachel Donlon, Academic Liaison Librarian, Manchester Metropolitan University

Rachel Donlon is an Academic Liaison Librarian at Manchester Metropolitan University and a Fellow of Advance HE. Passionate about media literacy, she has spent the past 7 years developing resources, knowledge and expertise in this area, co-developing a successful online media literacy course. Beginning her career in public library roles, she now works primarily with the Health and Education faculty at the University, dedicated to providing excellent support to academics and students.

Sarah Webb, Academic Liaison Librarian, Manchester Metropolitan University

Sarah Webb FHEA is an Academic Liaison Librarian at Manchester Metropolitan University supporting the Manchester Fashion Institute, School of Theatre, Politics and Philosophy. She provides embedded teaching and 1-2-1 support. In 2018, Sarah co-created the library’s original Fake News workshop and has been responding to and tracking the changes and developments within media literacy since that date.

Abstract

Librarians often feel they should be at the forefront of the ‘battle’ against misinformation, yet there have been some recent challenges to this traditional view. Exploring how we view the role of the HE sector in empowering students to be confident and positive consumers of digital media, we present insights into our more holistic approach to teaching media literacy through the development of a self-paced course. The course was partially co-created with student partners and it expands the focus beyond traditional critical evaluation models and definitions of fake news/misinformation. It provides students with a greater degree of context to the digital landscape, addressing some of the psychological influences underpinning media consumption which are so key to critical understanding, as well as delving into the everyday relevance of media literacy in students’ personal and professional lives. We will discuss how it links in with our University’s employability programme as well as sharing some of the headline insights from interviews undertaken with students who have completed the course. These interviews provided some interesting insights into our approach that will help inform our future practice and hopefully that of others’ too.

Speakers

Sara Klein , Law Librarian, Toronto Metropolitan University

Sara Klein is Law Librarian at the Lincoln Alexander School of Law at Toronto Metropolitan University. Sara completed her Master of Philosophy at York University, her law degree at the University of New Brunswick, and her Master of Information at the University of Toronto. Her research interests lie in communitarianism in library spaces and broadening law student information literacy.

Bartlomiej Lenart, Librarian, University of Calgary

Bartlomiej Lenart is a Research and Learning Librarian (Education) at the University of Calgary. In addition to his MLIS, Bart earned his PhD in philosophy, where he focused on questions of identity formation, maintenance, and change. His other research interests include information literacy, source credibility evaluation, and issues surrounding accessibility and user marginalization.

Abstract

This presentation explores the concept of authorship as proposed by the following thinkers: John Searle, Roland Barthes, and Michel Foucault. Searle’s Chinese Room thought experiment explains that rote computer translation (for example) does not assign authorship to the technology; Barthes argues that no text should be read with any thought to the author behind it, that all meaning is created in the reader; and Foucault suggests that society has a need and habit of creating an author even for many authorless items and that authors (positively or negatively) are now required to take a work seriously, which limits meaning. The presentation will explore these philosophical analyses of what it means to be an author and will argue that at least some human intention, however undefinable, is a requirement for something to have an author as we understand it in academia. We then will argue that this is why generative artificial intelligence output, while explicitly being derived from the work of authors, does not have an author itself and should instead be treated as an aggregator in an academic context. We will then go on to describe what this means for the philosophy of citation and plagiarism and how our “intentionalist authorship philosophy” should be expressed in the purpose of academic citation systems with respect to generative artificial intelligence.

Slides

Speaker

Joel Blechinger, Critical AI Literacy Librarian, MacEwan University

Joel Blechinger is a Critical AI Literacy Librarian with MacEwan University. He holds degrees in English literature and Library and Information Studies. His professional and scholarly interests are in critical information literacy, the philosophy of information, generative artificial intelligence and library instruction, conspiracist information behaviour, and labour and information work.

Abstract

Though much writing and thinking about generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools in higher education has focused on general-purpose large language model (LLM) chatbots like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude, and Google’s Gemini, there is now an emerging body of literature that evaluates the efficacy of GenAI integration specifically as part of vendor-developed library information retrieval and access systems (Bevara et al., 2025; Magesh et al., 2025; Tay, 2025a; Tay, 2025b; Tay, 2026).

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is frequently a component of AI-powered library search and retrieval systems. Useful for mitigating so-called “hallucination” or fabrication rates in AI-generated textual outputs (Genesis, 2025), RAG is “an AI framework for improving the quality of LLM-generated responses by grounding the model on external sources of knowledge to supplement the LLM’s internal representation of information” (Martineau, 2023, para. 2). Though librarians have understandable reservations about RAG integration in library systems (Birkhoff, 2025)—many of which I share—two concepts from the RAG literature have proven to be useful in my own AI-related library instruction with students: “source faithfulness” and “negative rejection.”

According to Tay (2025a), source faithfulness refers to “whether a cited source actually supports the generated claim” (para. 4) in an AI-generated response. As stated above, though RAG may have reduced the occurrence of completely fabricated sources in chatbot outputs, more complicated questions of source faithfulness remain. This both presents a pedagogical opportunity for librarians that connects back to foundational information literacy source evaluation questions (Carroll & Borycz, 2024), and, more profoundly, helps students interrogate AI models as thoroughly “cultural and social technologies” (Farrell et al., 2025) generating constructed texts that can be evaluated and questioned as opposed to accepted at face value as “magic” (Delistraty, 2025).

Negative rejection describes when “a LLM should reject to answer the [user’s] question when the required knowledge is not present in any retrieved document” (Chen et al., 2024, p. 17755). Where the student analysis of source faithfulness hones careful textual analysis, testing for negative rejection encourages students to try to “break” the tool by exploring its limits and boundaries. For example, if a GenAI tool “fails” at negative rejection and provides a confident answer about a non-existent famous physicist and their theory, how might this change students’ perception of these tools and the way that they function?

This lightning talk will first provide an overview of these two concepts with specific, illustrative examples from GenAI search tools. I will then describe how I have used the concepts in my own AI-related library instruction, and what I see as pedagogical avenues for future exploration. My goal in using these concepts with students to cultivate their AI literacy has been to help them hone practical skills that highlight their own, human agency in interactions with synthetic text and AI-powered tools. In this way, the human value that the instructional librarian can still bring to this AI-powered academic conjuncture is to help students practice their own human judgment through critical thinking, metacognition, and self reflection in their engagements with AI tools.

Works Cited

Bevara, R. V. K., Lund, B. D., Mannuru, N. R., Karedla, S. P., Mohammed, Y., Kolapudi, S. T., & Mannuru, A. (2025). Prospects of retrieval augmented generation (RAG) for academic library search and retrieval. Information Technology and Libraries, 44(2). https://doi.org/10.5860/ital.v44i2.17361

Birkhoff, F. (2025, May 8). Guest post: Eight hypotheses why librarians don’t like retrieval augmented generation (RAG). The Scholarly Kitchen. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2025/05/08/guest-post-eight-hypotheses-why-librarians-dont-like-retrieval-augmented-generation-rag/

Carroll, A. J., & Borycz, J. (2024). Integrating large language models and generative artificial intelligence tools into information literacy instruction. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 50(4), Article 102899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102899

Chen, J., Lin, H., Han, X., & Sun, L. (2024). Benchmarking large language models in retrieval-augmented generation. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 38(16), 17754–62. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v38i16.29728

Delistraty, C. (2025, September 25). A.I. Isn’t magic. Lots of people are acting like it is. The New York Times.https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/25/opinion/artificial-intelligence-magical-thinking.html

Farrell, H., Gopnik, A., Shalizi, C., & Evans, J. (2025). Large AI models are cultural and social technologies. Science, 387(6739), 1153-1156. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adt9819

Genesis, J. (2025). Retrieval-augmented text generation: Methods, challenges, and applications. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202504.0443.v1

Magesh, V., Surani, F., Dahl, M., Suzgun, M., Manning, C.D., & Ho, D.E. (2025). Hallucination-free? Assessing the reliability of leading AI legal research tools. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 22(2), 216-242. https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12413

Martineau, K. (2023, August 22). What is retrieval-augmented generation? IBM Research. https://research.ibm.com/blog/retrieval-augmented-generation-RAG

Tay, A. (2025a, August 11). What academic “deep research” is really for. Aaron Tay’s Musings About Librarianship. https://aarontay.substack.com/p/what-academic-deep-research-is-really

Tay, A. (2025b, December 27). What do we actually mean by “AI-powered search”? Aaron Tay’s Musings About Librarianship. https://aarontay.substack.com/p/what-do-we-actually-mean-by-ai-powered

Tay, A. (2026, January 24). Classifying the ways LLMs summarise in academic search. Aaron Tay’s Musings About Librarianship. https://aarontay.substack.com/p/classifying-the-ways-llms-summarise

Slides

Speaker

Sarah Shaughnessy, Faculty Engagement Librarian, University of Alberta

Sarah Shaughnessy is a Faculty Engagement Librarian at the University of Alberta, where she works with the College of Social Sciences & Humanities and the Campus Saint-Jean.

Abstract

Like construction projects, translation projects often prove to be more complicated than they first appear. In this presentation I will describe an undertaking to collaboratively translate Library Research Skills modules for a French-speaking audience using an AI tool (DeepL). Although DeepL has been beneficial in our library for bridging gaps in linguistic competence and speeding up translation and composition tasks, a “straight” translation which circumvents the need for a librarian’s involvement does not exist. The process of working through problems on this project brought to light the need for unique search strategies directed towards minority language audiences, underlying issues with the use of customized Boolean operators in Primo/Alma, and ultimately, the value of librarian expertise. With an eye to validating the labour involved in translation and the necessity for it, this talk will highlight the benefits and challenges of using AI translation tools as partners in language equity.

Slides

Speakers

Susanna Galbraith, Digital Experience and Learning Librarian, Health Sciences, McMaster University Libraries

Susanna Galbraith is the Digital Experience and Learning Librarian at the Health Sciences Library at McMaster University Libraries, where she focuses on enhancing user engagement through thoughtful web governance and instructional design. She manages LibGuides, contributes to the strategic development of the library’s web presence, and supports learners through teaching and research consultations. Susanna brings a user-centered approach to digital library services, aiming to create accessible, intuitive, and pedagogically sound online experiences. Her work bridges technology and learning, with a commitment to improving how students and researchers interact with library resources in health sciences and beyond.
Abstract

Introduction
Academic library websites are sites where institutional priorities often intersect with the very human-centred dimensions of user experience and professional librarians’ relationships with students, faculty and researchers. Drawing on research conducted interviewing academic library administrators, this presentation explores the perceptions of website purpose, highlighting both alignment with librarian user-centered perspectives and differing interpretations of institutional priorities. Some administrators emphasized institutional and organizational goals, and others foregrounded the student and faculty user-experience, reflecting back values gained through professional librarian practice. By analyzing these perspectives, this study illuminates how a human-centered approach and institutional priorities are perceived, offering insights into library web strategy.

Description
Approved by the university’s research ethics board, the study used semi-structured interviews with associate university librarians and directors overseeing teaching and learning, special collections, digital initiatives, access and discovery and health sciences. Conducted over three months in 2025 via video conferencing, interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed. The interview protocol explored website purpose, shared values, content priorities and institutional context.

Outcomes
Analysis revealed the following themes of library website purpose: to engage with users, to help and guide users in a complex information landscape, to inform and facilitate use of spaces and services, to strategically promote services, events and resources, to serve as a functional research tool, to uphold the libraries’ reputation, and to support the institutional mandate.

AI Statement

AI Tools [Microsoft Copilot] were used in at least one step of creating this submission; brainstorming, analysis, or writing support.

Slides

Speaker

Muga Miyakawa, Senior Library Technician, Lambton College

Muga Miyakawa is an early‐career library professional at Lambton College. Their academic background spans philosophy of education, curriculum theory, social sciences, and interdisciplinary studies. In prior scholarship, Muga explored how neoliberal policy and market pressures intersect with educational practices, and how those intersections reframe aims, ethics, and interpretation. In their current library work, they continue this conceptual thread— treating everyday encounters with information as opportunities to notice uncertainty, invite inquiry, and surface the often‐hidden work of interpretation. Current interests include non‐linear learning, grounded and rhizomatic approaches to inquiry, and gentle methods for making thinking visible in AI‐saturated environments.

Abstract

“Are you a real breathing person?”—the opening question from a student in an online text chat help session—has lingered with me. The question invites reflection: how are students learning to recognize (or misrecognize) human help? And how might early‐career library workers respond without defaulting to either techno‐solutionism or nostalgia?

Situated at the intersection of reference and pedagogy, this short talk approaches the moment conceptually rather than prescriptively. Drawing on critical inquiry, constructivist and grounded theory sensibilities, and rhizomatic conceptualizations of learning, I consider reference as a site of becoming where identities—student, librarian, text—are co‐constituted in conditions marked by scarcity (time, budgets, grades), precarity (labour structures, again-grades), and accelerating technologies. In this account, learning does not proceed linearly from query to answer; it moves through connections, hesitations, and small negotiations of meaning.

Three lines of inquiry organize the reflection:

• Presence as pedagogy: What subtle moves help signal “a person is here,” not a vending machine—without slowing urgency? How might presence itself function as a curricular moment that invites engagement rather than merely delivering results?

• From prompts to problems: When chats begin with commands (“find me xyz” / “image of tree”), what relational questions re‐open inquiry, and how do those questions circulate back into discovery design?

• Human‐in‐the‐loop, with seams showing: If AI aids appear in the workflow, what does it mean to keep provenance and uncertainty visible—allowing learners to see the seams and practice discernment?

The talk closes by inviting participants to consider how early‐career identities are shaped in these entanglements—how we learn to teach, describe, and accompany others amid low‐quality autogenerated content (“AI slop”), uneven resources, and shifting expectations. My aim is not to settle questions but to name tensions and open space for shared sense‐making about what human help feels like—and why it matters—right now.

In that spirit, the opening question—“Are you a real breathing person?”—also becomes a prompt to re‐assert human value in an AI‐driven future: What forms of care, judgment, and accountability do we want to remain distinctly human? How might we make that value legible without reducing it to metrics? And what kinds of institutional supports would allow these capacities to flourish?

AI Statement

AI Tools [Microsoft Copilot] were used in at least one step of creating this submission; brainstorming, analysis, or writing support.

Slides

Speakers

Ian Gordon, Teaching & Learning Librarian, Brock University Library

A recently retired academic liaison librarian and researcher. Ian has 40+ years of extensive and hands-on experience supporting STEM researchers and can speak to the angst of providing support to new and emerging academic evidence-based researchers in the biological, ecology, and conservation sciences. This new type of research support requires librarians to take on new roles as mentors, collaborators, and trouble shooters when attempting to find good answers to difficult and shifting questions. The field of evidence synthesis in the biological and natural sciences is perceived to lack vetted and quality reporting standards, frameworks, and best practices. However, academic librarians are well positioned to respond to this challenge and shifting landscape with understanding, compassion, and empathy. Come hear about our research and comment on preliminary findings. Come to be better informed when attempting to respond to these types of novel requests.

Isobel Flindall, Graduate Co-op Student at Brock University Library; MLIS Student at Western University

Isobel (they/them) is a MLIS Student at Western University and Graduate Co-op Student at Brock University Library. Coming at this topic from a social science background, Isobel is interested in identifying the disciplinary nuances of evidence synthesis research, such that they (and other library professionals with non-science backgrounds) can better meet the needs of students, faculty, and staff in the sciences. Often pondering the interconnectedness of systems and the flaws of academia, Isobel is also curious about the ways that knowledge justice/injustice manifests in evidence synthesis, and what that might mean for librarians. New to librarianship, Isobel brings a fresh perspective that effectively complements Ian’s extensive experience. This duo’s combined expertise will engage librarians at all career stages – from students to seasoned librarians.

Abstract

Evidence synthesis research, well-established in the health sciences, is accelerating in popularity in other disciplines, such as the biological and natural sciences1. Attempting to support faculty, staff, and students in this rapidly developing area of research, academic librarians are challenged by minimal training and a lack of vetted best practices. While there are clear methodological guidelines for this type of research in the medical and health sciences (e.g. Campbell Collaboration, Cochrane Handbook, Joanna Briggs Library), this is not the case for many other disciplines. In this vacuum, the merit of librarian support has been underrecognized. Many librarians wanting to provide effective and sustainable support in these disciplines are left to figure this out themselves. This can lead to feelings of inadequacy and anxiety when attempting to support science- and evidence-based research teams, faculty, staff, and graduate students. This need not be the case.

The involvement of librarians in evidence syntheses is known to increase their quality in a multitude of ways. Librarian and library support would be profoundly beneficial to evidence synthesis researchers outside of the health sciences; however, developing effective support strategies requires an understanding of researcher needs. Sharing the preliminary data and findings from our research, which explored the evidence synthesis experiences of practitioners in the biological and natural sciences, this presentation will equip audience members with a better understanding of these researchers’ unique needs.

Drawing on the results of a mixed-method research study, we will discuss the range of experiences of practitioners in this field. In particular, we will highlight their evidence synthesis training (or lack thereof), their perceptions of what differentiates evidence synthesis in the biological and natural sciences from other disciplines, and their relative confidence with different stages of the evidence synthesis process3. This information will emphasize the need for librarian intervention and identify areas of focus that librarians should target in order to best meet researcher needs.

We will highlight prospective supports in alignment with these areas of focus, justify their relevance to evidence synthesis researchers in the biological and natural sciences, and situate librarians as the best possible providers of these supports. We will also briefly discuss an increasingly important and timely topic of research for practitioners and librarians alike - the use and limitations of GenAI tools as supports in the evidence synthesis process 4 or 5 as below.

Works Cited

1 Boice, J. (2019). An Exploration of Systematic Review Publication Trends in Conservation Biology Journals. Issues in Science & Technology Librarianship, 91, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.29173/istl2

1 Cooke, S. J., et. al. (2023). Environmental evidence in action: On the science and practice of evidence synthesis and evidence-based decision-making. Environmental Evidence, 12(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-023-00302-5

2 Kallaher, A., et al. (2020). Library systematic review service supports evidence-based practice outside of medicine. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(6), N.PAG. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102222

2 Mê-Linh Lê, Winkler, J., & Neilson, C. J. (2024). Training Needs and Preferences for Librarians Supporting Systematic Reviews in the Sciences, Humanities, and Social Sciences. College & Research Libraries, 85(7), 978–993. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.85.7.978

3 Boden, C., Bolton, S., & Gerrard, A. (2025). Health Sciences and Beyond: An Investigation into Canadian Librarian Participation in Systematic Reviews Across Disciplines. College & Research Libraries, 86(1), 79–100. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.86.1.79

3 Scott, M. C., & Vogus, B. (2022). Academic librarians and systematic reviews: trends and services. Public Services Quarterly, 18(3), 202–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2022.2086664

3 Slebodnik, M. (2022). Evidence Synthesis: Coming Soon to a Library near You? Portal: Libraries & the Academy, 22(2), 273–280. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2022.0016

4 Van Dijk, S. H. B., et al. (2023). Artificial intelligence in systematic reviews: Promising when appropriately used. BMJ Open, 13(7), e072254. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072254

4 Fabiano, N., et al. (2024). How to optimize the systematic review process using AI tools. JCPP Advances, 4(2), e12234. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcv2.12234

5 Riaz, I. B., Naqvi, S. A. A., Hasan, B., & Murad, M. H. (2024). Future of evidence synthesis: Automated, living, and interactive systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Digital Health, 2(3), 361–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcpdig.2024.05.023

5 Siemens, W., Von Elm, E., Binder, H., Böhringer, D., Eisele-Metzger, A., Gartlehner, G., Hanegraaf, P., Metzendorf, M.-I., Mosselman, J.-J., Nowak, A., Qureshi, R., Thomas, J., Waffenschmidt, S., Labonté, V., & Meerpohl, J. J. (2025). Opportunities, challenges and risks of using artificial intelligence for evidence synthesis. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, 30(6), 381–384. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2024-113320

5 Lieberum, J.-L., Toews, M., Metzendorf, M.-I., Heilmeyer, F., Siemens, W., Haverkamp, C., Böhringer, D., Meerpohl, J. J., & Eisele-Metzger, A. (2025). Large language models for conducting systematic reviews: On the rise, but not yet ready for use—a scoping review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 181, 111746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111746

AI Statement

The API/LLM search tool Undermind was used in a limited capacity to supplement traditional search strategies for the purposes of our literature review. No AI tools were used in our analysis or writing processes for this study, nor were they used in the creation of this presentation.