MiALA 2026 Annual Conference

Learn about the statewide work of academic libraries supporting incarcerated students. This panel will share updates from the Michigan Consortium for Higher Education in Prison (MiCHEP) Library Affinity Group on efforts to establish standards for academic library access for students, examples of academic libraries supporting both new and established prison education programs (PEPs), and a discussion of the challenges that libraries face as they work to create the best learning environment for students.

Learning Objective(s): 1) Recognize the forms of collaborative work happening across Michigan to increase academic library access for incarcerated students; 2) Learn where to find support for efforts at your own institution; and 3) Learn about the new standards for information access for incarcerated students in Michigan.

The CAPS Matrix provides a values-driven strategic planning framework for academic libraries navigating rapid change. By mapping strategic priorities (rows) against four operational domains, Collections, Authorship, Programming, and Spaces (columns), libraries can ensure all functional areas align with core values. This flexible, adaptable structure helps libraries maintain their 'True North' while responding to evolving circumstances, fostering organizational coherence and facilitating stakeholder communication about how library work embodies institutional mission and values.

Learning Objectives: 1) Analyze the structure and logic of the CAPS Matrix framework; 2) Identify potential strategic priorities for their own institutional context; 3) Develop sample strategies for at least two matrix cells; and 4) Evaluate the applicability of the CAPS Matrix to their library's planning processes.

Over the past few years, reparative work has become a topic of discussion in library and archival work, largely in the context of metadata and description. This ethnographic study interrogates what reparative work looks like in a broader sense, as it may impact the work of collection development, reference and technical services, preservation and conservation, as well as description and metadata—using a case study of a large midwestern academic research collection.

Learning Objective(s): 1) Understand the concepts and definitions of reparation and reparative work; 2) Learn about the scope of reparative work as it may be seen and implemented in an academic archival & special collections; and 3) Learn about possible applications of reparative archival work beyond description and metadata practices, which may be formative in organizational policy as well as library and archives management.

Our institution’s library developed a training program for peer research consultants: undergraduate students who assist their peers with library research. This presentation shares our process for designing the training curriculum, including how we adapted reference skills for peer-level delivery, challenges encountered, consultant feedback, and lessons learned. Attendees will gain practical frameworks and tools for implementing similar peer consultant training programs that expand library services while providing experiential learning opportunities for students.

Learning Objective(s): ​​​​1) Participants will be able to identify key components of an effective peer research consultant training program for academic libraries; 2) Participants will understand/grasp strategies for adapting professional reference and instruction skills into curriculum appropriate for undergraduate peer consultants; and 3) Participants will gain practical tools and resources that can be adapted to develop peer consultant training programs at their own institutions.