ZSR went to the 2024 Charleston Conference in a big way back in November with six attendees! Rather than submit six different blog reports, we’re giving a high-level overview here. Interested in learning more? Ask any of us and we’ll be happy to chat in detail!

Carol

Most interesting presentation/meeting: At the risk of being self-serving, I enjoyed Stopwatch Session #4 where I was one of 5 mini-presentations. The organizers did a good job of clustering these sessions thematically, in this specific case around accessibility and DEI. (Two separate things! One of my main points was that you shouldn’t use the abbreviation DEIA unless you want certain politicians to become opposed to accessibility.) I learned more about working on accessibility for e-resources in advance of a 2026 federal deadline, a DEI journal club for librarians, and an effort to increase supplier diversity.

What I’ve been thinking about most: “Do you want to be right or do you want to be funded?” I wasn’t taking notes, but the speaker was either Lidia Uziel, Emily Drabinski, or Jill Cirasella. The context was how to secure funding for community-led OA projects.

Best thing I ate: Build-your-own grits bowl

Since December, I’ve been systematically watching the recordings of the live sessions as well as born-virtual sessions, so I’m still absorbing the conference content.

Molly

Most interesting presentation/meeting: Several of the “chefs” of the Scholarly Kitchen blog gave a panel talk titled “If the Sky’s the Limit, Are You Ready on the Ground?”. Their conversation touched on the role of policy in open research, the future of the Nelson Memo and expanding public access to Federal research, and accessibility considerations. Some of the key takeaways:

  • Open research compliance should be easy and the benefits clear (not always so)
  • Challenges to open research are 20% technological and 80% buy-in & policy
  • Accessibility sometimes falls by the wayside as publishing gets leaner and faster

What I’ve been thinking about most: There’s so much we don’t yet know about how the new administration will change Federal support for research and education. Hopefully support for open research and open science will continue. Also, there will be a lot of work required to meet accessibility standards under the recently revised Title II. This likely will disproportionately fall on libraries and we need to start working soon to ensure materials for which we’re responsible – including repository deposits – are compliant.

Best thing I ate: Carrot cake at Lenoir. Delicious!

Summer

Most interesting presentation/meeting One standout session for me was, “Leveraging Library Collections to Cultivate Social responsibility and Local impact” by Robin Vickery (U. of Arizona), Valerie Linsinbigler (James Madison U), Rebekah Shaw (Sage), and Steve Cramer (UNC Greensboro). They explored how libraries can encourage local social responsibility and hands-on learning via their collections. The panelists discussed real-world projects attempting to do just that, focusing on locally prevalent issues for each campus like redlining, food deserts, and health disparities. They highlighted three escalating levels of student engagement:

  • Assessing social impact for assignments.
  • Partnering with community organizations for experiential learning.
  • Creating sustainable solutions post-graduation.

My poster, “Skyrocketing to Global Social Impact: Leveraging Library Collections and Resources for Enhanced Education,” aligned well with this presentation. I co-presented this virtual poster alongside Rebekah Shaw (Sage) and Janet Hauck (Seattle Pacific University) on leveraging library resources for global social impact. On our poster, I showcased my LIB 290 study-abroad courses that have provided students an opportunity to connect library resources to global context around business, entrepreneurship and social change.

What I’ve been thinking about most: How to explore collaboration with faculty to curate targeted collections that address local issues (or in our case, specific consulting project topics for local businesses), as well as to create workshops tailored to these community-driven assignments to inspire socially responsible learning – and how all this might be especially relevant to Wake’s newest QEP, experiential learning.

Best thing I ate BBQ from Rodney Scotts!

Denice

Most interesting presentation/meeting: This was my second time attending the Charleston Conference and my first time presenting at the conference. Similar to last year, I roamed the halls of the Charleston Conference attending different workshops focused on AI. One of the few workshops that I attended that didn’t mention AI was “Challenges and Opportunities around Research Inquiry: A Conversation.” Meg White from Delta Think, Elisa Bik a science integrity consultant, and Ivan Oransky from Retraction Watch illuminated the fact that as the number of articles published have increased dramatically so have the number of retractions. From 2003 to 2023, the percentage of retractions out of the total number of publications increased from 0.02% to 0.2%.

I presented with Katherine Howell (Health Sciences Librarian, UNC-Chapel Hill), Ellen Cline (Engineering and Physical Sciences Librarian, Elon University), and Rachel Goode (Global Marketing Director, Academic Division, Oxford University Press) on “AI’s Role in Research: Perspectives from Researchers and Librarians.” Looking to the back of the room to see who raised their hand to ask a question reminded me that I need to start wearing my glasses.

What I’ve been thinking about most: Listening to different people talk about AI, there’s still a prevalent fear of AI replacing jobs as well as a hesitancy to use AI tools. I’m challenged to find ways to demystify AI for librarians in the field as well as students, faculty, and staff.

Best thing I ate: It’s a tie between the crispy calamari steak slices and the crab cake sandwich at Amen Street Fish and Raw Bar

Kathy

Most interesting presentation/meeting: Like last year, much of my time at the in-person conference was spent connecting with our vendor representatives to learn about new products and initiatives. For example, I was pleased to learn from Paratext that access to Nest is included in our subscription to Bird, which may help us compare our collections to those of other universities in our various consortia or region.

This year, I was also invited to serve on a panel with two other librarians to discuss the library’s role in teaching and learning, which is not a common topic at Charleston. Our panel, “Keeping Libraries as Central Players in an Evolving Teaching and Learning Space,” was well attended. I enjoyed hearing from my fellow panelists, Michelle Guittar from Northwestern University and Karen Stoll Ferrell from Indiana University, who shared current initiatives at each of their libraries to support new areas of teaching and learning, including digital and data literacy, open access, AI, and open pedagogy. We also shared how we are approaching common challenges, including capacity and sustainability, developing librarian expertise, accessibility, supporting neurodiverse learners, and the impact of AI. Despite our much smaller size relative to these other institutions, folks in ZSR are doing a great job of positioning ourselves in these conversations around campus and highlighting and contributing our expertise.

Outside of my own panel, I wasn’t able to attend as many sessions in person, so I’m grateful that many of the sessions were recorded and I was able to watch them later!

What I’ve been thinking about most: How we can work with early career faculty to develop collections that support their research and teaching, and how we can better incorporate quality resources that are available open access to enhance discoverability by researchers. (FYI: Our Resources Services team just added records for books indexed in DOAB to Primo, and I’ve already encountered a few while working with students that they otherwise would not have found!)

Best thing I ate: The porkchop at SNOB! (I’ve been thinking about it since last year…)

Kate S.

Most interesting presentation/meeting: In a conference with no shortage of sessions about AI, this one stood out to me: “Evaluating generative AI-powered resources for higher education: separating the toys from the tools.” By now, we have established that generative AI in some form is here to stay and is going to impact our work in a variety of ways. There are lots of shiny new tools out there, and even more opinions about what we should be doing with them. These panelists offered some practical insight into how to approach AI in library work. Bill Mickey from CHOICE presented a rubric for evaluating generative AI tools, which provides a great framework for determining what questions we need to ask when presented with a new product. I think that this rubric will come in handy as vendors increasingly add generative AI tools to their platforms.

What I’ve been thinking about most: Often I go to conferences and learn practical solutions to specific problems. This time, I came away with more questions than answers. We seem to be in a time of great change in terms of how we discover resources, how publishers and content providers make them available to us, and how we do our work.

Best thing I ate: Goat cheese biscuit sandwich at Callie’s Hot Little Biscuit