Conference Agenda (All times are shown in Eastern Daylight Time)

Despite industrial initiatives and government regulations to ensure fairness in AI, gender bias remains a concerning issue, causing bad user experience, injustices, and mental harm to women. Computing education has incorporated ethics discussions to prepare students to design more ethical AI systems. However, through interviews with 18 AI practitioners/learners, we revealed limitations of the current gender bias education in the computing curricula – the education is absent, sporadic, abstract, or tech-oriented. We designed and evaluated hands-on tutorials to raise AI practitioners/learners’ awareness and knowledge of gender bias – such tutorials have the potential to complement the insufficient education on AI gender bias in computing/AI courses. By reflecting on the lessons from the design and evaluation process, we synthesized design implications and a rubric to guide future research, education, and design.

This study explores the use of handheld whiteboards as a low-tech, active learning strategy in a large undergraduate Information Science course. Grounded in Cognitive Apprenticeship and Situated Learning theories, the study investigates how whiteboard-based activities support student engagement, peer collaboration, and visualization of abstract concepts. Using a mixed-methods approach, survey responses from 184 students revealed that most participants perceived the whiteboard exercises as helpful for enhancing participation and conceptual understanding. Thematic analysis of qualitative feedback highlighted benefits such as increased attentiveness, real-time feedback, and peer learning, alongside challenges related to note-taking and anxiety. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of how simple, physical tools can complement technology-driven instructional strategies and inform inclusive, scalable approaches in information science education.

The debut of Generative AI (GAI) tools in late 2022 profoundly unsettled higher education institutions (HEIs), including the iSchools. This exploratory study is the first to scrutinize the 130 iSchools’ GAI engagement. Consulting each iSchool’s website, we conducted a qualitative content analysis of their GAI policies. Eighty-seven (66.9%) have public-facing GAI policies; the other third do not. We teased out seven themes in these 87 iSchools’ policies: the ecology of GAI, opportunities and affordances, risk and concerns, conditions of use, best practices, compliance measures, and aspirations. We urge the iSchools to develop and implement a policy predicated on human-centered GAI literacy. This research ultimately represents both a call for self-reflexivity and a call to action.