Writing is important for many careers. While writing tools continue to be studied in HCI, little attention has been paid to the accessibility of typesetting with LaTeX, a widespread markup language for preparing publications. In contrast to WYSIWYG (“What You See is What You Get”), co-authoring papers in LaTeX presents additional considerations with code, visual, and PDF content co-existing in an interface. Our collaborative autoethnography centers two neurodiverse teams preparing ACM SIGCHI publications using LaTeX interfaces. We illustrate how text customization constraints and collaborative clutter produce inaccessible visuals to dyslexic writers. In turn, we shift our conceptualization of design for dyslexia from intervening solely on fonts to understanding visual processing in the greater whole of technology-mediated communication. With this updated conceptualization, we discuss changes to improve writers’ agency through: (1) customization by text function, (2) presentation of collaboration cues, and (3) social support for a wider range of access labor.

Disability Studies and Accessibility HCI document what design elements are (in)accessible to disabled communities and illuminate technological ableism. However, Disability Studies’ systemic critique rarely includes roadmaps for design. We articulate a roadmap by marrying HCI’s infrastructuring theory with Disability Studies into an approach called Infrastructuring for Access. Focusing on dyslexic writers’ experiences with spell checkers, we demonstrate Infrastructuring for Access in a collaborative design process. We co-designed software to address limitations of spell checkers and conducted an eight-month field deployment. Our technological contribution is Jargon Manager, a toolkit with a browser extension for writers to opportunistically save terms in a custom dictionary and then use later via a word processor extension. Our theory contribution moves from a space of critique into a space of repair: Infrastructuring for Access expands the design space from only removing barriers to also institutionalizing disabled practitioners’ existing workarounds, therefore alleviating access labor and broadening participation.

Within computing curricula, Game Design elective courses can be avenues for students to simultaneously practice human-centered design and software development. Meanwhile, museums are experimenting with the potential of games to actively and subversively engage new audiences. Therefore, we see opportunities for computing educators and museum academic curators to collaboratively teach community-engaged Game Design. We present the model of a Museum Game Jam (MGJ), where students can design multimedia interactions with museum objects for museum clienteles. In this experience report, we provide the roadmap for cross-stakeholder collaboration, assignment design, and student engagement to make MGJs successful. Reflections from stakeholders are offered to inform MGJs for other institutional and disciplinary contexts. Complementing the problem-solving and programming skills that computing students already acquire in major requirements, the key student experiences of our model include involving external stakeholders early and often in the design process, playtesting with a variety of audiences, and navigating peer collaboration as indie game studios. We then reflect on students' professional development, museum curators' approaches to engaging computing students, and instructors' pedagogical choices for introducing MGJs into their curricula.

Writing is the currency of academia. Although technology-mediated writing has been studied extensively in CSCW, we know little about how writing practices unfold with disabled people, such as dyslexic writers whose neurodivergence shapes how they process language. Our qualitative analysis reveals how dyslexic professionals simultaneously identify how editing tools break down on academic language; develop workarounds that re-appropriate other tools as language sources; cultivate ad-hoc collaborations to compensate for technology's limitations; and navigate culturally ingrained ableist expectations for writing. We discuss how dyslexic writers' experiences with shouldering invisible work to participate in academic writing processes indicates that current tools and services do not support their needs. We then draw on our findings to inform design opportunities to make writing processes more accessible through changes to writing tools, institutional services, and peer review practices.

Although accessibility in academic and professional workplaces is a well-known issue, understanding how teams with different abilities communicate and coordinate in technology-rich workspaces is less well understood. When hearing people collaborate around computers, they rely on the ability to simultaneously see and hear as they start a shared document, talk to each other while editing, and gesture towards the screen. This interaction norm breaks down for teams of people with different sensory abilities, such as Deaf and hearing collaborators, who rely on visual communication. Through interviews and observations, we analyze how Deaf-hearing teams collaborate on a variety of naturalistic tasks. Our findings reveal that Deaf-hearing teams create accessibility through their moment-to-moment co-located interaction and emerging team practices over time. We conclude with a discussion of how studying co-located Deaf-hearing interaction extends our understanding of accessibility in mixed-ability teams and provides new insights for groupware systems.