In many work environments, regular staff performance evaluations are the norm, and this practice has real impact on staff promotion opportunities and raises. However, this process is typically top down, i.e., the supervisor evaluates the supervisee. Often employees do not have the opportunity to evaluate their supervisor in turn. This norm of personnel evaluation potentially creates barriers for staff to express their needs as workers, as well as for supervisors to listen, learn, and grow.

This presentation will outline how two newer middle managers at different institutions approached seeking upward feedback from their direct reports. They will discuss what inspired them, how they implemented upward feedback opportunities, what feedback they received from their colleagues, and their reflections since then. For both managers, this process provided crucial feedback and set a precedent to repeat the feedback loop throughout their careers to foster a more open, inclusive, and equitable work environment.

We will draw upon published research on mechanisms of accountability within organizations (particularly within relationships with power differentials) while narrating our own lived experiences. Throughout we will create opportunities for reflection from attendees by posing questions in an Etherpad, such as:

• We must make explicit both to whom and for what we owe accountability. What are managers accountable to their direct reports for?
• What are some necessary conditions for direct reports to feel safe enough to be candid when offering feedback to their managers? How can managers create these conditions?
• How do we operationalize accountability to direct reports? How do we design trustworthy processes, independent of the individuals occupying management roles?

A primary motivation for using Open Educational Resources (OERs) is to increase access by reducing students’ financial burden. While this was a motivating factor in this study, the authors also were interested in understanding OER’s impact on student learning. Therefore, this study describes the adaption process for an OER textbook used in a junior-level undergraduate electricity course and evaluates this OER’s effectiveness to increase student access and improve learning over the baseline textbook. A quasi-experimental, non-equivalent design collected exam scores, and self-reported survey responses from n=144 students in a comparison (non-adapted OER; n=83) and treatment (adapted OER; n=61) group was used. Based on Student’s t, Kolmogorov Smirnov, and Chi-square (χ2) tests, the adapted OER was effective at improving access and learning while also saving enrolled students an average of $8,000 per year, collectively. A brief background of OER databases, materials, and methods used to develop the OER and the intellectual contribution of the newly adapted OER, and lessons learned are included in the study.