Conference Agenda (All times are shown in Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) unless otherwise noted)

Data Science is a burgeoning area in the iField. But Data Science practices have far outstripped the field’s ethical safeguards. We argue that Data Science graduate education programs must address this critical problem. In this theoretical and conceptual paper supported by documentary evidence, we develop an ordinary macroethics that we call data flourishing. We contend that this macroethics is most appropriately developed through a holistic, human-centered data science (HCDS)-based pedagogy that concentrates on cultivating communities of ethical practice (COEPs) through social learning. We favor embedding this principle throughout iField programs’ graduate data science curricula and by extension, throughout the entire data science education enterprise. This paper aligns with the 2023 ASIS&T annual meeting theme of translating research into practice, especially the twin themes of “improving decision-making” and “understanding the power of information to develop human happiness, equality, and wellbeing.”

The Z-Inspection® Process is a form of applied research for the ethical assessment of AI systems. It is quickly establishing itself as a robust method to ethically assess AI in Europe. The process is predicated on the European Union's Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI, outlining ethical principles intended to guide European AI development. In contrast, the United States has only recently released its holistic version of such guidelines, the Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights. The aim of this paper is to assess the suitability of the Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights as an ethical framework underpinning the use of the Z-Inspection® Process in the United States. This paper provides preliminary findings of comparative analysis of European and United States ethical frameworks for responsible AI development. Findings outline primary ethical concepts that are shared between respective frameworks. Findings suggest the US Blueprint is suitable as an ethical framework for the Z-Inspection® Process. There are notable omissions within the US framework which would require further development for Z-Inspection® use. Discussion will consider opportunities for adapting Z-Inspection® to the United States context, including contributions from the information professions and research.

This paper presents the history, internal processes, and finalized report of the Trans Metadata Collective (TMDC), founded to address the lack of attention paid to trans and gender diverse issues in galleries, archives, libraries, museums, and special collections (GLAMS). The TMDC, an ad-hoc group of nearly a hundred information professionals, developed best practices for the description and classification of trans and gender diverse information resources. These guidelines prioritize transparency, cultural sensitivity, correct identification, explicit descriptions of transphobia, and regular assessment of trans-related content. It examines the effects of commonly used standards and controlled vocabularies such as Resource Description and Access (RDA) and Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) on trans and gender diverse people and critiques the inadequacy of these standards’ representation of those communities. The TMDC provides guidance for using existing LCSHs, recommends alternative subject vocabularies, and proposes revisions to improve representation. The paper advocates individual agency in naming and gender identification, with recommendations on contacting creators and documenting their preferences. The TMDC emphasizes the importance of minimizing potential harm and protecting privacy in metadata creation. Overall, the report aims to enhance the representation and inclusion of trans and gender diverse communities in GLAMS institutions.

Extant discourses in Indigenous Knowledge Management [IKM] emphasize the need to support Indigenous self-determination, data sovereignty and self-governance. To channel archival attention in this manner contributes to a larger shift in IKM towards stewardship praxes that empower Indigenous communities through culturally responsive and responsible praxes. The role of radical empathy in motivating this change, however, remains under-explored. In this paper, we introduce eight mutually inclusive empathy-driven propositions to transform the stewardship of Indigenous knowledges through an ethics of care framework. Grounded in a te ao Māori worldview in Aotearoa (New Zealand), we discuss how orienting ourselves to empathy motivates specific kinds of dialogic engagement that gives voice to Indigenous peoples in diverse global Indigenous contexts to share what cultural values should shape their research and knowledge stewardship. In doing so, we offer actionable ways to make positive differences in the lived experiences of Indigenous individuals and communities as they interact with and lead contemporaneous stewardship praxes.