5.1: Creating a Social Justice Mindset: Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice in the Collections Directorate of the MIT Libraries

Creating a Social Justice Mindset: Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice in the Collections Directorate of the MIT Libraries

February 9, 2017 Report of the Collections Directorate Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice Task Force:

• Michelle Baildon, Collections Strategist for Arts & Humanities (Scholarly Communications & Collections Strategy); Science, Technology, & Society (STS) Librarian (Liaison, Instruction, & Reference Services)
• Dana Hamlin, Project Archivist (Institute Archives & Special Collections)
• Czeslaw Jankowski, Tangible Serials Acquisitions Assistant (Acquisitions & Discovery Enhancement)
• Rhonda Kauffman, Bibliographic Metadata Associate (Acquisitions & Discovery Enhancement)
• Julia Lanigan, Collections and Administrative Assistant (Scholarly Communications & Collections Strategy)
• Michelle Miller, Administrative Assistant (Acquisitions & Discovery Enhancement)
• Jessica Venlet, Library Fellow for Digital Archives (Institute Archives & Special Collections), now at UNC Chapel Hill
• Ann Marie Willer (convener), Preservation Librarian (Acquisitions & Discovery Enhancement)

Contents

The Big Picture: Some Contexts of Our Work

Economics: Neoliberalism, the Corporatization of Academic Libraries, and the Commercialization of Scholarly Publishing

Systems of Oppression and Privilege

Values and Ethics of Libraries and Archives

Neutrality

Outside of our Scope 

Definitions

Process

Strategies and Ideas

1. The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Library Marketplace Suggested Strategies
2. Representation of Marginalized Perspectives Suggested Strategies
3. Community Inclusion & Outreach Suggested Strategies
4. Building Organizational Infrastructure for Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice Suggested Strategies

Conclusion

Bibliography

Appendix

The Collections Directorate of the MIT Libraries sponsored a task force to identify opportunities for archives, technical services, preservation, scholarly communication, and collections strategy staff to manifest the values of diversity, inclusion, and social justice in their daily work. Convening March-October 2016, the task force used the following as the guiding principle in our work:

[The] future of academic libraries [is] where librarians confront and creatively address the lack of racial and ethnic diversity within our profession and actively pursue a social justice agenda within our libraries and in the communities we serve. This future requires that we acknowledge that many of our current practices reinforce existing structures of inequity and privilege, and that we leverage our services and resources to support, document, and encourage diversity and social justice efforts within librarianship and society.1

Below, the Collections Directorate Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice (DISJ) task force describes some of the overarching social and economic contexts for academic libraries, as well as the core professional values that guide us, and offers recommendations to the Directorate for operationalizing the values of diversity, inclusion, and social justice. The task force aims to demonstrate, through our recommendations, how DISJ values might guide every aspect of our work. We look forward to working together to foster a social justice mindset throughout the MIT Libraries’ Collections Directorate.

The Big Picture: Some Contexts of Our Work

Our work at the MIT Libraries is not separate from the large-scale economic, socio-political, and cultural structures and forces that shape contemporary life. These structures and forces are grounded in ideologies that are pervasive to the point of near-invisibility. At the same time, librarians and archivists operate under a set of professional values that provide us with guidance as we respond to these forces, as well as some assumptions that hinder our ability to engage effectively with them.

Economics: Neoliberalism, the Corporatization of Academic Libraries, and the Commercialization of Scholarly Publishing

Neoliberalism is an economic and political ideology that frames all aspects of our society in terms of market exchange, foregrounding the role of the individual as a market actor. Over the past several decades, neoliberalism has become a dominant perspective that is transforming higher education, as well as other social, political, and cultural institutions.

There is a growing professional conversation about the challenges and threats that neoliberalism poses to core values of higher education, libraries, and archives. In a 2014 blog post, Chris Bourg quotes Daniel Saunders’ definition of neoliberalism as:

a varied collection of ideas, practices, policies and discursive representations … united by three broad beliefs: the benevolence of the free market, minimal state intervention and regulation of the economy, and the individual as a rational economic actor.2

As Bourg describes it, neoliberalism “includes the extension of market language, metaphors, and logic into non-economic realms,” including into higher education. This is exemplified by a shift in higher education away from the goal “to promote a healthy democracy and an informed citizenry,” and toward the commodification of education as a private good, providing “marketable skills” and supporting corporate interests through the creation of new workers.3 With respect to academic libraries, the neoliberal influence is evident in such developments as corporate monetization of resource access and sharing, patron-driven acquisitions, and the 4 emphasis on monetary return on investment (ROI).5

A related development is the increasing reliance by academic libraries on corporate solutions for many of our basic functions. Over the past two decades, the balance of library collecting has shifted significantly towards electronic information, and the accompanying issues of digital infrastructure and copyright have disrupted many well-established library activities. For instance, in the digital age libraries have moved from sale and ownership to licensing and access of information, threatening the doctrine of first sale, the basis for library lending. In addition, in a 6 departure from the print-based model of library-created catalogs and library-maintained stacks, we lack the resources to develop analogous homegrown online systems. From the integrated library system (ILS) to discovery layers to e-journal packages, libraries require the ongoing mediation of corporations to provide standard collections and services.

The dysfunctions of the scholarly communication marketplace have their basis in the commercialization of scholarly publishing. The commercialization of both for- and non-profit publishing, as described on the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) website, “has led to egregious price increases and unacceptable terms and conditions of use for some key research resources needed by the scholarly community.” In addition to prices inflated far above cost, 7 bundled site licenses (i.e., the “Big Deal”) and the reduction of competition through mergers and 8 consolidations are cited by economist Ted Bergstrom as ways commercial publishers have “capitalized on... inelastic demand.” Expensive subscription packages from publishing 9 conglomerates dominate library budgets, leaving little flexibility to add new subscriptions from, for example, independent publishers. The great cost of these packages results in access to journals exclusively for those fortunate enough to be affiliates of well-funded universities. These publishers, moreover, claim property rights on the articles that are written, edited, refereed, and read by academic authors who expect no profit from their work. Barbara Fister warns that we are headed towards “a world in which knowledge is turned into intellectual property, monetized, and made artificially scarce.” This scarcity turns knowledge into “an expensive commodity” that forms the basis of publishers’ immense profit margins while libraries struggle to cover the costs. 10

Systems of Oppression and Privilege

American society is structured around systems of oppression and privilege that disempower or elevate people according to social and cultural categories such as race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, gender expression, class, and ability. We are likewise situated within global structures of power that have their origins in histories of racialized imperialism, war, and economic exploitation.

Our profession and our specific workplace exist within these contexts of structural inequities and cultural representations, and in fact may serve to reproduce them. In higher education, we see 11 disparities in access at every level by members of marginalized groups (e.g., admission, readiness, hiring, promotion, and inclusion on campus). In publishing and other modes of cultural expression, we see disparities in access by authors and creators to scholarly, popular, and literary publication and media production, as well as disparities in representation.12

These systems of oppression introduce (often unconscious) biases into our individual work and behavior. As Chris Bourg has noted, “Librarians [need] to understand the ways in which structural discrimination and inequality (systemic racism, white privilege, heteronormative patriarchy, etc.) operate and how they affect not only our patrons but also the ways in which information is created, distributed, organized, and accessed.” For example, cataloging and 13 archival description are key to the discoverability of information resources, but biases in Library of Congress Subject Headings and other controlled vocabularies have been noted since Sanford Berman’s pioneering work in the 1970s. The way we categorize materials communicates our 14 biases and judgments to our users and limits the accessibility of information. We would expect similar unconscious biases to affect, for example, how a vendor profiles a book, how a selector evaluates a possible new resource, or how we decide to acquire, retain, or preserve specific collections.15

Values and Ethics of Libraries and Archives

Librarians and archivists are driven not only by practical and local concerns, but also by ideals embodied in professional statements of values and ethics. As stated in the American Library Association’s Core Values of Librarianship and in the Society of American Archivists’ Core 16 Values Statement and Code of Ethics, these values include access, accountability, advocacy, 17 confidentiality/privacy, democracy, diversity, history and memory, intellectual freedom, the public good, preservation, responsible custody, service, and social responsibility.

Our professional values place us in opposition to the systems of oppression and privilege described above. For example, a commitment to diversity and social responsibility demands that we attempt to counteract and ameliorate inequities of access to education and publication based on factors such as race, gender, religion, language, and global wealth disparities. Commitment to democracy and preservation demands that we reckon with the implications of the corporate provision of digital information for libraries’ commitment to access and stewardship. Commitment to the public good demands that we resist the over-commodification of information and the exploitation of intellectual property by corporations.18

Neutrality

As we confront the ways the library and archives professions have been shaped by—and have reinforced and reproduced—neoliberal values and structures of oppression, we must resist long-standing self-perceptions of librarians and archivists as “neutral.” Neither our repositories, 19 nor our professional practices, nor ourselves as individual practitioners are able to achieve neutrality.20

Journalism professor Robert Jensen’s 2004 piece “The Myth of the Neutral Professional” argues that all situations entail a distribution of power, and the choice to overtly endorse or contest that distribution is clearly not neutral. We must, however, also understand that “to take no explicit position by claiming to be neutral is also a political choice.” In other words, all settings are 21 structured by power imbalances, and a position of “neutrality” will inevitably serve to maintain existing power structures.22

Chris Bourg notes,

Our traditional practices and technologies are not neutral, and without active intervention we end up with collections that lack diversity and we end up classifying and arranging our content in ways that further marginalizes works by and about people of color, queer people, indigenous peoples, and others who don’t fit neatly into a classification system that sets the default as western, white, straight, and male.23

Indeed, embracing the ideology of “neutrality” ensures a passive approach to inequities that will perpetuate the status quo.24

Outside of our Scope

In addition to the issues of economic and socio-political justice discussed above, the DISJ task force considered issues of environmental justice, privacy, and intellectual freedom. These are important issues that informed our thinking, but we did not systematically explore them as part of our charge.

Definitions

The ways that people understand the terms “diversity,” “inclusion,” and “social justice” are themselves diverse, but the work of our task force required the foundation of shared definitions. After brainstorming and discussion informed by others’ definitions of the terms, we agreed on the draft definitions below. The definitions should be considered together, with each subsequent definition building on and sharpening the previous one.

• Diversity simply means difference. It is the heterogeneity found in the composition of the workforce, our collections, and community.
• Inclusion means creating and actively sustaining an organization and community in which all can participate fully, be respected, and be treated in an equitable manner.
• Social justice is a commitment to recognizing, addressing, and correcting systemic power imbalances that privilege one group at the expense of another. It is based on the premise that all people are of equal and incalculable value. The work of social justice 25 includes individual and collective action to disrupt the patterns and structures of power in our community, organization, culture, and society.

We propose that the Collections Directorate—or the MIT Libraries and MIT Press, perhaps via the Libraries’ Committee for the Promotion of Diversity and Inclusion—refine these definitions so that the entire organization has a shared understanding of these terms.

Process

The DISJ task force met from March through October 2016. Task force members met regularly, conducted a literature search, and attended conferences and webinars related to their charge. In 26 addition, DISJ met with stakeholders Associate Director Greg Eow (task force sponsor), Director of Libraries Chris Bourg, and the Libraries’ Committee for the Promotion of Diversity and Inclusion.

DISJ gathered feedback from members of the Directorate in several ways. First, we held two feedback forums (open to anyone in the Directorate; 38 attendees in total), in which we provided a summary of our work thus far, shared our draft definitions, outlined our remaining work, answered questions, listed related readings, and asked for input on ways our Directorate could manifest the values of diversity, inclusion, and social justice in our daily work.

Second, we followed up on the feedback forums with facilitated discussions with each department (Acquisitions and Discovery Enhancement, Institute Archives & Special Collections, and Scholarly Communications & Collections Strategy) at a department meeting. During these meetings, one DISJ member took notes while another facilitated a 20-50 minute discussion of specific ideas and strategies for integrating DISJ into that department’s work. To encourage a more intimate conversation among members of the largest department (Acquisitions and Discovery Enhancement [ADE], 28 people), DISJ members led facilitated discussions with each ADE unit at a team meeting (three groups in total: Tangible Formats, Digital Collections & Reformatting, and E-Resources). Lastly, DISJ created, publicized, and monitored an anonymous online feedback form using Google Forms.

The task force felt it was important to share our work within our professional networks. Our poster sessions were accepted by the National Diversity in Libraries conference, “Collaborating for MIT’s Future,” and the New England Library Association, and we are organizing a program for the 2017 American Library Association annual conference.

We anticipate that following receipt of our report, the Collections Directorate Leadership group (CDL) will work as a team to identify inclusive processes by which their respective departments and programs will choose strategies to be piloted and/or implemented during FY17 and beyond. Cross-departmental collaboration will be necessary to achieve our goals. There are several ideas that are in process or that we are close to doing, or that can be implemented thoroughly with minimal resources; these are the ones that CDL could choose to act upon immediately. We recommend that a plan for periodic reporting and year-end assessment of these efforts be outlined. MIT is known for problem-solving and ingenuity, and the Libraries are no stranger to creative and community-driven solutions. We believe strongly in the ability of the Libraries staff and administration to continue and expand initiatives that encourage diversity, inclusion, and social justice.

Strategies and Ideas

The task force identified broad areas in which the MIT Libraries could advance the values of diversity, inclusion, and social justice: (1) our impact on MIT students, how they interact with the world, and how they learn what they need to know in this world; (2) our impact on the scholarly publishing and academic library marketplace; and (3) our impact on posterity and the scholarly, cultural, and historical record. As we began drafting our report, we added the realm of influence on the communities to which the MIT Libraries belong, including our local, global, and professional communities.

The strategies and ideas below are the task force’s suggested responses to the challenges and problems articulated in the earlier “Context” section.

• Section 1: The scholarly publishing and academic library marketplace includes responses to the problems outlined in “Economics.”
• Sections 2 and 3: Representation of marginalized perspectives and Community inclusion and outreach include responses to the problems outlined in “Structures of Oppression and Privilege.” The former emphasizes the ways structures of power shape publishing and cultural production as well as many of our professional practices. The latter emphasizes the ways structures of power are manifested in the status and condition of people who are members of the communities to which MIT Libraries belong.
• Section 4: Building organizational infrastructure for diversity, inclusion, and social justice addresses the kind of organization we must build in order to carry out the actions described in the three preceding sections.

The strategies and suggestions that follow vary in size and scope. Combined with the Appendix, they represent all of the ideas gathered from the task force, the feedback forums, the online form, the department meetings, and the unit meetings.

We acknowledge that MIT Libraries staff have limited time to complete their current workloads. Some of the strategies and ideas below require additional resources (time, money, and/or staff) that are also limited. The culture of efficiency that permeates many of the Collections Directorate workflows, in addition to periodic budget cuts, has led us to adopt time- and money-saving processes that reduce our ability to make socially responsible decisions about our work. In light of these constraints, CDL will need to work collaboratively to determine which initiatives should be prioritized across the Directorate.

1. The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Library Marketplace

In this section, the task force enumerates strategies for addressing problems in academic libraries’ marketplace(s), as well as the intrusion of market logic and corporate interests into higher education and academic libraries.

Earlier in this report, we sketched out some broad challenges for academic libraries posed by neoliberalism and the related developments of the corporatization of academic libraries and the commercialization of scholarly publishing. As we have argued, these changes in the marketplace, which are intertwined with developments in digital technology, destabilize many of the functions central to libraries’ purpose and mission. These challenges are difficult to meet by institutions 27 acting alone, and we look forward to collaborations by MIT Libraries within Ivies Plus, ARL, and other consortia and associations.

The task force recognizes that one of the main ways the Directorate will address these issues is through the newly established Scholarly Communications and Collections Strategy (SCCS) department, which is dedicated to transforming scholarly communication toward openness and increased access and is guided by the values of open access, diversity, and social justice. Open access (OA) provides a much needed alternative to the dysfunctions of the economics of the current publishing system, and as a movement has intrinsically liberatory aspects, both in intent and effect. But we must also take into account critiques of OA as a neo-colonial practice, acknowledging the danger of focusing on access but not participation. Our goal should be equitable global scholarly exchange rather than one-way bestowal of knowledge from the Global North to the Global South.28

We encourage the Collections Directorate to embrace the identity of the library as a cultural institution with a larger purpose than serving as a “purchasing agent” for our campus. Although 29 many libraries are understandably focused on issues of efficiency and cost-effectiveness, a values-driven organization cannot rely exclusively on a transactional approach. A more expansive approach recognizes that price is not the same as cost, and a reduction in price can come at the cost of diversity, inclusion, and social justice.30

Suggested Strategies

1.1. Review collection philosophy and collection development policies to ensure sufficient coverage of materials intended not only to prepare our students for professional life (private good) but also to help them become responsible global citizens (public good). This would include works that focus on ethics, values, and social and political concerns through a critical lens.

1.2. Evaluate the implications and impacts of MIT Libraries’ business decisions under the framework of our values, including diversity, inclusion, and social justice. MIT’s global renown gives the Libraries leverage when negotiating with vendors or approaching them about their practices’ alignment (or misalignment) with these values (e.g., a vendor’s sustainability or labor practices). Consider how MIT Libraries’ business decisions might impact other institutions, the marketplace, and the environment.

1.3. Support diversity in the marketplace by identifying alternative vendors (e.g., womenor minority-owned businesses) for materials and services of all kinds, from collections to catering to office supplies.

1.4. Combat the commercialization and homogenization of tools created for library and archives access and management by promoting and adopting open-source tools.

1.5. Continue to consider the Big Deal, publisher e-book packages, and patron- or demand-driven acquisitions critically and with circumspection, taking into account the risks in ceding collection-building to commercial entities, as well as the role of library selection in building diverse and inclusive collections.

1.6. Understand both the utility and the limitations of quantitative measures of collections assessment, such as circulation and usage stats and cost per use, and leave room for values-based evaluation and the role of professional and subject expertise in collections decisions.

1.7. Explore ways to use licensing to advance diversity, inclusion, and social justice objectives beyond/in addition to those related to openness of scholarly publishing (e.g., negotiate for universal design/accessibility and patron privacy in addition to author rights and fair business terms).

1.8. Maintain an expansive view of copyright issues relevant to the MIT Libraries, focusing on not only author rights and fair use, but also on fundamental questions of digital copyright, such as DRM, the doctrine of first sale, and licensing vs. ownership.

1.9. Promote and provide access to open access materials through Barton, Vera, and BartonPlus, for example by cataloging OA material and by listing OA access first when multiple access routes are available.

2. Representation of Marginalized Perspectives

As described above, the work of academic libraries has been shaped by homogenous, heteronormative standards of practice created by majority voices. Even with mandates from professional organizations to provide diverse materials that “actively document those whose voices have been overlooked or marginalized” regardless of “origin, background, or views of 31 those contributing” the information, many voices continue to be marginalized. 32 33

Furthermore, the current publishing stream favors the majority voice of white men and is 34 characterized by an “unequal distribution of power in knowledge production and dissemination” between the Global North and the Global South. In order to disrupt this stream and incorporate 35 non-majority voices, we must deliberately acquire materials through non-traditional publication channels.

Here at MIT, members of the campus community come from all over the world, representing nearly 130 countries. With 47 percent of undergraduates and 18 percent of graduate students at MIT identifying as members of U.S. minority groups, and international students consisting of 10 and 42 percent of the undergraduate and graduate populations respectively, it is imperative that MIT’s library collections represent these populations.36

By acknowledging and disrupting the lack of recognition and representation of non-majority points of view, we can begin to manifest our professional values in the services we provide.

Suggested Strategies

2.1. Update our collection philosophy and collection development policies to reflect a concerted effort to collect works by and records of diverse groups and voices, including material in languages other than English.

2.2. Consider taking the American Library Association’s “Our Voices” pledge and use that initiative’s templates to build “distinguished collections of diverse, quality, locally produced literature” at the MIT Libraries.37

2.3. Review current monograph approval plans from the point of view of unconsciously biased profiling as well as exclusion of small presses. Engage vendor in a discussion of findings.

2.4. Because marginalized groups have not had equal access to traditional publishing streams, ensure that the format of materials does not create unnecessary barriers to their acquisition and preservation. Accept unusual formats, including ephemera such as posters, zines, and postcards, as well as student-created objects and hacks.

2.5. Identify alternative publication outlets for materials by self- and independently published authors.

2.6. Actively acquire MIT publications and archival materials that capture the student experience and student and social movements at MIT (e.g., student organizational records, protests, and fliers).

2.7. Counteract the systemic lack of access to publishing by marginalized groups by providing targeted workshops to MIT students who are members of those groups (e.g., women students and students of color), offering foundational knowledge about the scholarly publishing landscape, its processes, and assumptions.

2.8. The MIT Libraries uses the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) and Names Authorities, yet these have a history of biases against underrepresented groups that include using pejorative terms and Anglicizing names. The MIT Libraries 38 should strive to use inclusive terms and methods in its work.

2.8.1. Continue to suggest and create new Library of Congress Subject Headings and Authority records using non-Anglicized forms of names and within-group vocabularies.39 2.8.2. Following the lead of academic research universities such as Harvard and Columbia, accept vocabularies other than the Library of Congress into the library catalog. This includes the familiar Getty Thesauri (Art & 40 Architecture Thesaurus and the Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names), as well as those in the Open Metadata Registry.41

2.8.3. Investigate using tags or terms for archival and special collections in ArchivesSpace (e.g., “women in science” and “technology in Latin America”) to allow users/researchers to more easily discover collections by and about marginalized voices.

2.8.4. Make our metadata more widely available for use and reuse by using linked open data in metadata creation as our catalog and metadata infrastructure evolve.

2.9. Address the long-standing bias against non-English language material—resulting in their deprioritization and inequitable handling—in order to promote the representation of marginalized voices.

2.9.1. Hire administrative and/or support staff who specialize in both CJK (Chinese, Japanese, and Korean) and Middle Eastern languages to address the need for this expertise—and the current skill deficit–in collection development, acquisitions, and cataloging.

2.9.2. Incorporate non-English-language materials into the daily production-oriented workflows of technical services, with priority equivalent to English-language materials.

2.10. Actively showcase and publicize general and special collections that are authored by, or that focus on, marginalized voices, such as LGBTQ persons and African-American women. For example, host physical and digital exhibits featuring these collections and make use of social media to promote them.

2.11. Establish small grants or scholarships that support faculty, students, or outside researchers conducting work with these collections.

2.12. To foster a truly global scholarly communication system founded on equitable knowledge exchange, support publications (OA and pay-for-access) from the Global South and other regions underrepresented in scholarly publishing.

2.12.1. Allocate additional resources for the acquisition of international scholarly publications.

2.12.2. Because of the challenge for many authors worldwide in funding article processing charges (APCs), contribute to efforts that explore other means to fund OA publication.

2.12.3. Explore international resource and gifts exchange programs, especially with countries and organizations that presently lack access and resources.

3. Community Inclusion & Outreach

Despite following well-intentioned professional guidelines, library and archives staffs have historically collected materials from within the dominant culture and have neglected—and at times silenced—alternative narratives and nondominant voices. This, together with the fact that the MIT Libraries does not (yet) reflect the diversity of the community we serve, makes building trust and maintaining transparency critical aspects of our outreach efforts.

The strategies listed below articulate the ways that Collections staff can build that trust and identify and meet the information needs of diverse community members. Our community outreach should be extended to the MIT community, to the cities and towns that surround our campus, to other institutions and professional associations, and to subgroups of marginalized members of any of these communities.

The recently released Future of Libraries Task Force report states that our “overarching vision is that the MIT Libraries embrace and accelerate their transformation from a local portal to a global platform” and that we “conceive of our community as a global one, embracing openness, diversity, global social justice, and critical thinking with those communities.” Our task force 42 shares this vision and encourages staff to take seriously our individual and collective influence on the global scholarly community, while we also continue our “exemplary service to local communities of learners, scholars, and information seekers.”43

Suggested Strategies

3.1. Partner with members and groups within the MIT community to (1) assess and meet their information needs and (2) welcome their input about our collections and services.

3.1.1. Build relationships with student affinity groups and Employee Resource Groups. This could include hosting public forums to foster continued 44 conversation, publicizing the “Suggested Purchase” program, and soliciting input for building collections.

3.1.2. Devise a plan to better understand the community’s needs for non-English language materials, including research resources, educational material such as textbooks, and leisure, personal enrichment, and wellness material (e.g., MIT’s MindHandHeart grant-funded collection ). 45

3.1.3. In order to equalize student access to required course materials, update collection development policies to include increased purchasing of textbooks.

3.1.4. Incorporate universal design/accessibility as a criterion for e-resource selection.

3.1.5. Implement universal design/accessibility for Libraries events, classes, exhibits, etc.

3.2. Investigate ways to connect with groups and institutions outside of the MIT community to (1) support their work and (2) partner to advance the values of DISJ.

3.2.1. Share our Directorate’s DISJ initiatives with our colleagues in other libraries, archives, and cultural heritage organizations (e.g., via a LibGuide).

3.2.2. Investigate partnerships with local community groups and Greater Boston institutions such as community colleges, non-profit organizations (e.g., More than Words ), and prison book programs. 46 47

3.2.3. Host community engagement activities to foster communication (e.g., campus forums to discuss ways to capture local social movements).

3.2.4. Negotiate licensing agreements to allow walk-in access to electronic resources. Also include access for MIT partners such as programs in Singapore and Russia, developing countries, or local public high schools and community colleges.

3.3. Contribute to the development of a diverse workforce in information science by exposing high school and college-age students to academic libraries. For example, MIT Libraries could resume participation in summer employment programs for local high school and college students. MIT is in a prime geographic location for this type of outreach, and we could potentially make connections through Libraries’ staff who currently volunteer in local schools.

4. Building Organizational Infrastructure for Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice

Archivists and librarians are increasingly embracing diversity, inclusion, and social justice as values essential to our professions. However, the specific aim of our task force—that we 48 systematically re-envision the daily work of the Collections Directorate through the lens of diversity, inclusion, and social justice—is unusual and perhaps unique in academic libraries. To accomplish what we propose will require a cultural shift and the creation of an appropriate organizational infrastructure within the Directorate. This would include:

• a culture that celebrates the values of diversity, inclusion, and social justice;
• a deliberate reprioritization of our work to advance these values;
• staff members who are knowledgeable about DISJ values and committed to making them central to our work; and
• a culture of mutual respect that extends across work units, departments, directorates, and organizational roles.

Embarking on this paradigm shift in Collections Directorate work within the framework of diversity, inclusion, and social justice requires adequate and continuing staff development and educational opportunities. Let’s be clear: we are suggesting innovative changes to the fundamental structures of work we do, and we cannot go about this work without appropriate training and conversation.

The success of our DISJ initiatives depends on all Libraries staff feeling valued, heard, and engaged in their work. For the MIT Libraries to focus on making value-driven changes in which only some can participate would be far from inclusive. A culture that enacts diversity, inclusion, and social justice in the ways we treat and value our staff as people is essential. Hiring, retaining, promoting, and supporting the professional development of those who work in the Libraries—especially our staff from marginalized groups—are activities that must be in the foreground of our thinking. In the words of Chris Bourg, “People are our most important 49 resource.”50

The implementation of DISJ throughout the Collections Directorate will require thoughtful prioritization of our resources (time, money, and staff). Especially, this change in organizational structure will require sufficient staffing, and it will be necessary to address existing issues with inadequately staffed teams, including many unfilled open positions. Overall, these changes will require, at a minimum, clear and consistent messaging from leadership to identify priorities.

Suggested Strategies

4.1. We will need a concerted, collaborative effort to create an organizational culture centered on diversity, inclusion, and social justice.

4.1.1. Adopt definitions of diversity, inclusion, and social justice across the Collections Directorate—or the MIT Libraries and MIT Press—so that the entire organization has a shared understanding of these terms.

4.1.2. Communicate that every member of the Directorate has a role in implementing the MIT Libraries Statement on Diversity. The statement 51 should be actively used to guide the prioritization of the Directorate’s activities in the areas of diversity, inclusion, and social justice and to shape general department goals and individual performance goals.

4.1.3. Acknowledging that there is apprehension among some staff about participating honestly in this type of work, frame it as an opportunity for innovation rather than an opportunity for failure. CDL will guide the Directorate in setting the tone for this work.

4.1.4. Recognize and celebrate our work in the areas of diversity, inclusion, and social justice, however small or incremental.

4.1.5. Create an internal communications method (e.g., Directorate blog) for visibility, accountability, support, and mutual inspiration.

4.2. Recognize that diversity-related activities are an essential part of the work of the MIT Libraries by allowing staff to participate in campus and community events. Encourage conversations between supervisors and supervisees about how participation can be balanced with workflow needs.

4.3. Require that every member of the Directorate participate in sessions led by a trained facilitator on (1) unconscious bias and its impact on interactions with coworkers and 52 individuals’ approaches to their work and (2) active bystander strategies. The department heads may wish to coordinate their approach to this work so that each group has a similar experience.

4.4. Offer opportunities for Libraries staff to learn about issues of diversity, inclusion, and social justice as they relate to the MIT community, higher education, and the field of information science (e.g. neurodiversity; the needs of international students; and racism and sexism in science and engineering, including obstacles to participation by members of marginalized groups and effects on the research process, etc.).

4.5. Systematically and regularly review and update all policies and procedures through the lens of diversity, inclusion, and social justice. This would include hiring, onboarding, workflows, decision trees, training, etc.

4.6. Building a collection that includes material from around the world, from independent publishers, and from otherwise marginalized perspectives requires time and effort. To achieve this, we must create the appropriate infrastructure for this work. For example:

4.6.1. Adjust the approval plan to optimize the receipt of appropriate and relevant approval books and slips.

4.6.2. Consider ways to distribute selection work among staff (e.g., CPDI or another small group assuming signing privileges to purchase newly published books supporting diversity, inclusion, and social justice) and/or provide additional support for selectors.53

4.6.3. Create opportunities for selectors and strategists to discuss how to incorporate a DISJ framework into selection.

4.7. Practice inclusivity by providing opportunities outside of employees’ daily work to participate in Libraries’ DISJ-related activities and initiatives. These opportunities can make jobs more enriching and rewarding, as well as fostering a sense of ownership and pride across Directorate staff in our collections and in our daily work. For example, interested staff from across the Directorate could participate in selecting and organizing materials for themed, pop-up curated collections and/or browseries.

4.8. Examine our progress and goals with respect to recent changes made towards more equitable treatment of administrative and support staff (e.g., committee participation, professional development, and travel), and similarly evaluate our treatment of temporary staff and interns.

4.9. Examine the Directorate’s dependence on MITemps; consider whether this is in keeping with our values of diversity, inclusion, and social justice.

4.10. Implement an intra-Libraries mechanism for addressing experiences of bias or microaggressions among staff members so as to provide an opportunity for resolution and for learning without judgment or blame.

Conclusion

This report describes strategies for integrating diversity, inclusion, and social justice into the work of the Collections Directorate, as well as the context and importance of this work. In addition to the ideas enumerated above, the task force has recorded in the Appendix all of the recommendations gathered from department meetings, literature searches, and brainstorming sessions. We suggest that work begin immediately to implement selected strategies, as reasonable ideas for positive change can be generated relatively quickly and small improvements can begin right away. 

The task force wants to acknowledge the work that is already being done in the Collections Directorate that is related to DISJ. Some of this work can and should be extended or operationalized to become a deliberate part of the Directorate’s culture. A partial list of completed or in-process work includes:

• Cataloging staff contributing a rebuttal in support of changes that would make the Library of Congress Subject Headings less derogatory/biased
• Wunsch Conservation Lab research and implementation of conservation techniques that minimize the alteration of original artifacts (their materials and construction)
• Creation of a one-year “Diversity” monograph fund
• Purchase of subscriptions to tribal newspapers requested by Native American students and implementation of circulation from the students’ meeting location
• The Institute Archive’s “Big Names on Campus” Tumblr, highlighting a diverse cohort 54 of eminent scientists whose names are featured on buildings around MIT’s Killian Court, as well as exploring scientists who might be selected were we to choose the names today, 100 years after the project was first planned
• Creation of a Social Justice LibGuide by Lewis Music Library staff that highlights 55 scores, books, videos, and audio recordings related to protest songs, labor rights, LGBTQ rights, women’s rights, race, and the 1960s
• Adoption of the Humanities Collection Deployment Principles, guidelines for a Spring 2016 monograph storage project that call for using the core values of diversity and social responsibility in selecting materials for storage56
• Following the Association of Research Libraries’ recommendation to refrain from signing nondisclosure and confidentiality agreements57

As the Future of the Libraries task force report outlines, the MIT Libraries are embarking on an ambitious new phase. The Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice Task Force feels confident that the Collections Directorate can effect a Directorate-wide effort to infuse its work with DISJ values and to make significant changes in the culture of our member departments. We eagerly await CDL’s decisions about which strategies will be implemented or piloted during the remainder of FY17, and we are ready to tackle whichever larger initiatives are prioritized for the coming years.

Bibliography

The DISJ task force created an online bibliography with Zotero. (We chose Zotero over its 58 competitors because it is open source.) It contains all of the sources cited in this report as well as many others. We are treating it as a living document, so it will continue to expand.

Appendix

In addition to the strategies outlined above, DISJ submits the following ideas for consideration by CDL. These are all of the ideas gathered from the task force, the feedback forums, the online form, and the department meetings. We identified certain strategies and ideas that apply across the directorate and others that are most logically implemented in a specific department or unit.

• Cross-departmental - general
• Cross-departmental - organizational
• Cross-departmental - pipeline and outreach
• Acquisitions
• Archives and special collections
• Cataloging and metadata
• Collection strategy and development
• Conservation and preservation
• E-resources and licensing
• Open access and scholarly communication

Cross-departmental

• Support the idea of collective access as a shared responsibility. Fund tools and strategies that will enable the entire collection to be easily searchable—leveling access to it for everybody on multiple platforms and formats, including mobile devices, downloadable PDF files, etc.
• Share our strategies and resources to diversify collections and promote inclusion and social justice with other cultural heritage institutions, including those that might not be in our usual channels of communication (e.g., small, non-academic, etc.)
• Fund services, programs, and resources that are inclusive and reflect the diversity of our communities, especially those groups that might be most marginalized
• Identify and fund equipment upgrades and purchases that support the Directorate’s DISJ work
• Advocate against the transfer of corporately-published scholarly journals to behind paywalls
• Fund a permanent bookmobile with computer access and desensitizing brick, etc. Use lessons learned from bookmobiles sponsored by the Libraries’ Committee for the Promotion of Diversity and Inclusion (CPDI).
• Raise awareness of electronic collections in physical spaces
• Embrace library as cultural institution, higher purpose, not just “purchasing agent”

Cross-departmental - organization

• Challenge the culture of productivity and efficiency
• Need to make room in people’s schedules so they can make thoughtful DISJ decisions
• Price is not cost; when is a reduction in price worth a reduction in DISJ?
• Provide financial support and release time for a mentor program within library staff o attend conferences with seasoned librarian or archivist o support employees who are in MLIS programs
• Build or join partnerships/collaborations/consortia that would allow staff more time to take part in DISJ initiatives, particularly across teams and departments (related to Strategy 4.2)
• Develop directorate-wide expectations such as attending relevant MIT HR training (related to Strategy 4.3 and 4.4)
• Develop a sustainable way to fast track people’s DISJ ideas into action. Strategies will continue to evolve and pop up, and we need to be able to implement them.
• Be intentional: weeding, buying, open access IS political
• Incorporate DISJ into all mission statements; all statements should be less than 5 years old. This gives opportunity to include new ideas, developments, thought processes re: DISJ and other ideas.
• Each department could discuss how we prioritize our daily work when we factor in diversity, inclusion, and social justice. (Don’t always do the easy thing or the status quo. Set quantifiable goals, e.g., one finding aid from an underrepresented group/person per year. Prioritize not just at the individual level but at the unit level under leadership of the department head.)
• Apply the Libraries’ search and hiring procedures to conduct searches free of bias and to increase the percentage of underrepresented minority staff. CDL should discuss whether there is anything particular about the way our Directorate thinks about and approaches this (related to Strategy 4.5).
• Specifically initiate education efforts (via speakers, discussion with colleagues, etc.) about how we, with limited budgets, should make decisions about changing selection patterns (e.g., with social sciences, how would the right decisions be made in terms of representation given existing funds?)
• Encourage each department head or team supervisor to guide their staff to find the ways that these goals most meaningfully integrate into their daily work and then to reflect this in their individual performance goals
• Make sure the goals of diversity, accessibility, and social justice are translated into operational objectives, measurable through performance indicators, which are systematically collected and form the basis for organizational improvement for all users, including marginalized persons and minorities
• Provide a sense of welcome and inclusion in our physical and virtual spaces for diverse community members and visitors by ensuring that staff members are trained to be aware of unconscious biases in their interactions with patrons

Cross-departmental - pipeline & outreach

• Support and encourage MLIS students as well as MIT students who are interested in foreign languages and diversity/discoverability issues
• Invite students from local high schools and Simmons College School of Library and Information Science for informational interviews (related to Strategy 3.3)
• Support campus ESL programs, particularly those for employees
• Consider how makerspaces can be used as outreach tools
• Create mechanisms for addressing the psychological and emotional toll that DISJ issues take on people. Provide a place to talk.

Acquisitions

• Acquire materials through self- and independently-published authors, perhaps working with PEN New England (located at MIT) or other writing award-granting groups to determine new/appropriate publication outlets
• Publicize locally unneeded and discarded materials and provide access to them for the local community before sending them as recyclables (related to Strategy 3.2.2)
• Promote journals as part of Suggest a Purchase
• Develop workflow for small and overseas book vendors
• Evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of using large vendors and small vendors. For example, large vendors give us access to larger amounts of resources; how does this value compare to our advancing DISJ values when we use smaller vendors with fewer offerings?
• Choose to use Amazon less often
• Use Open Source ERMs

Archives & Special Collections

• After updating the collection policy to reflect a concerted effort to collect records and papers of diverse groups and voices (e.g. women in science, underrepresented minorities), highlight it on the public website, announce in newsletter, etc. This becomes the foundation for outreach to student groups and donors, and guides selection and acquisition of materials.
• Continue to increase efforts to collect records of diverse student and community groups—including sit-ins, protests, and other campus events—as well as diverse faculty papers. More resources are needed to process these collections and make them available; work with new grant writer to explore funding options.
• Increase trust between Institute Archives and donors; get out message that Archives are safe, secure, will preserve materials into the future and with respect, and that fair and equal access to the materials will be given to everyone
• Increase trust between Institute Archives and researchers – make sure all feel welcome to use materials and space; everyone treated at same high standard; publicize more that the Archives are open to everyone
• Look into ways to provide multilingual assistance to researchers, both in person (making use of Library Staff Association’s “language list”) and on our website (look into translation software for website/finding aids; possibility of partnership with MIT’s Department of Global Languages and Literatures for exhibit work or to translate web pages/finding aids/LibGuides)
• Investigate tags or terms to call out materials in ArchivesSpace–e.g. “women in science” and “technology in Latin America”–to allow people to sort and search more easily for collections by and about marginalized voices
• Host forums on campus to discuss ways to capture social movements; host author/faculty talks to share ideas and start conversations
• Emphasize the social justice inherent in archives and show the importance of administrative records/how records can be used as evidence  
• Consider how we store and manage our collections and what implications this has on the environment
• Review our guidelines for exhibit design and accessibility; see Smithsonian’s Guide to Accessible Exhibit Design
• Explore idea of taking a post-custodial approach to collections when appropriate; i.e., collaborate with record creators as equals and either consult with and offer professional advice to groups who decide to keep their records, or agree to manage accessioned collections in a manner agreed upon with donors/donor groups. See Nancy Godoy’s work at the Arizona State University archives, and the South Asian American Digital Archives, as examples of potential ideas.

Cataloging & Metadata

• Combat bias in LOC headings; modify Barton load profiles so that these additions to the record aren’t stripped  
• Stop Anglicizing names as the “preferred” method of representing an author’s name
• Look into partnering with MIT’s Department of Global Languages and Literatures for cataloging work
• Invest more staff time in OCW (Open Courseware) (currently ⅗ of 1 FTE)
• Consider crowdsourcing (would still involve some staff time)
• Add staff effort as OCW expands and grows
• Use DISJ values to inform choices of metadata schema, vocabularies
• Harvest user-created metadata, including allowing tagging in our catalog. The diversity of our users will express itself through the language they create for an item. Materials will become more discoverable, and reflect our users and their preferred vocabulary. We can then analyze the user tags to learn newer terminology and identify trends.
• As our catalog and metadata infrastructure evolves, we should use Linked Open Data or link existing vocabularies created by subject matter experts and use the power of Linked Data and our metadata creation

Collection Strategy & Development

• Revise approval plans to include small presses and non-commercial publishers; seek those that are award winners
• Develop our capacity for selection beyond YBP
• Include student groups and activities to inform selection
• Facilitate access for students to foreign language materials (books, DVDs, etc.) via display in Libraries, and promote access at other institutions in Greater Boston area (e.g. Boston Public Library)
• Process all theses: bachelor’s and master’s
  • Is the bachelor's thesis fee covering any library fees? If so, can we eliminate them and ask the fee to be reduced? Or eliminate fee altogether?
• Use our purchasing power to influence large vendors to include small presses
• Approval plan:
  • Investigate possible bias in profiling books
  • Recommend that YBP highlight authors of color
• Increase effort to collect international/foreign language science and engineering material. Consider risk of future unavailability of global material if we don’t collect it right away. These will serve as primary sources for the history of sci/tech. Consider role as part of collective collection.
• Explore consortial library-managed platforms/repositories for independent publisher content and self-published content
• OA has a well-known focus on equity of access to published literature, but what about equity of access to publication/the inclusion of multiple voices? Use collection funds to support publishers of underrepresented voices (e.g., developing countries, non-English publications). Perhaps a separate fund.
• Develop tools and better communication and understanding of current research trends among library selectors, acquisition staff, and faculty to enable full use of their knowledge in accessing materials worldwide
• Selectors need time for selection + support for selection + additional participation by other Libraries staff
• Explore open educational resources (OER)
• Offer DDA for foreign-language material
• Seek out information about international students at MIT who return home after graduation. Does this suggest a need for more sci/eng material in foreign languages?

Conservation & Preservation

• Adopt a policy of minimal intervention so as to preserve aspects of original artifacts that demonstrate characteristic techniques or materials of the creator or creating culture
• Review all procedures to identify junctures where unconscious bias can play a role; even if none, add statements affirming a commitment to diversity, inclusion, and social justice in preservation work (e.g., do not treat non-English materials differently than English materials solely because of their language)

E-Resources & Licensing

• Support transparency in pricing while negotiating contracts with publishers for journals and database bundles, thus leveling the field for all institutions
• Ensure patron privacy is respected (place this in the general context of loss of privacy in the digital age)
• Advocate for transparency and against non-disclosure agreements
• During negotiations with publishers, support efforts to limit transition of scholarly journals to corporate publishers
• Organize collaborative support between academic libraries for demanding a fair price for ebooks or Print + Electronic bundles
• Criteria for selecting databases (or even vendors?):
  • Consider axes of power (global, gender, racial, disability) such as: the content comes from a colonial perspective; accessibility issues
  • Who owns the business?
  • Business practices (e.g., monopoly)
  • Sustainability practices

Open Access & Scholarly Communication

• Advocate for Open Access—by supporting well-funded Open Access repositories, connecting our user community to quality OA resources, and increasing the ability of K-12 educators to discover appropriate OA materials—while also exploring and understanding critiques of Open Access and its neo-colonial implications
• Work with faculty to deepen their understanding of serials pricing issues and alternatives, and encourage their involvement in promoting MIT-funded subsidies for authors who publish with scholarly societies with Open Access publishing initiatives
• Promote and include Open Access materials, e.g., Independent Voices by Reveal Digital, an open access collection of an alternative press
• Open Access collections can be highlighted in the ILS discovery layer
• Make OA resources more discoverable online (online catalog? Other? Note: Bento boxes currently in development). Can customize what is prioritized when clicking on SFX link. Directory of OA Books are being added to our catalog, but could do more to look at what is actually included and what is missing (e.g., HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory). Shift to being selector within OA.
• Make OA materials available on all mobile devices
• Find out about other OA offerings (SCCS should search out everything available)
• Consider avocating for a promotion and tenure policy which incentivizes OA (more here: http://crln.acrl.org/content/77/7/322.full)
• Support well-funded Open Access repositories
• Partner with Liaison, Instruction and Reference Services department to offer instruction about OA, scholarly communication, and information science issues

---

Reference:

1. Morales, Myrna, Em Claire Knowles, and Chris Bourg. “Diversity, Social Justice, and the Future of Libraries.” Portal: Libraries and the Academy 14, no. 3 (2014): 439–51. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/portal_...3.morales.html.
2. Bourg, Chris. “The Neoliberal Library: Resistance Is Not Futile.” Feral Librarian (blog), January 16, 2014. https://chrisbourg.wordpress.com/201...is-not-futile/.
3. Ibid.
4. Bivens-Tatum, Wayne. “Libraries, Neoliberalism, and Oppression.” Academic Librarian (blog), January 15, 2014. http://blogs.princeton.edu/librarian...nd-oppression/.
5. Bourg, “The Neoliberal Library.” 
6.  Gillmor, Dan. “In Our Digital World You Don’t Own Stuff, You Just License It.” The Guardian, April 2013, sec. Opinion. https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...nsed-not-owned.
7. Association of Research Libraries. “Marketplace & Licensing.” ARL Focus Areas: Scholarly Communication, n.d. http://www.arl.org/focus-areas/schol...g#.WHeP2VMrLm4.
8. Frazier, Kenneth. “The Librarian’s Dilemma: Contemplating the Costs of the ‘Big Deal.’” D-Lib Magazine 7, no. 3 (March 2001). doi:10.1045/march2001-frazier. Frazier describes the Big Deal as “an online aggregation of journals that publishers offer as a one-price, one size fits all package. In the Big Deal, libraries agree to buy electronic access to all of a commercial publisher's journals for a price based on current payments to that publisher, plus some increment. Under the terms of the contract, annual price increases are capped for a number of years. The Big Deal usually allows the library to cancel paper subscriptions at some savings or purchase additional paper copies at discounted prices. But the content is, henceforth, ‘bundled’ so that individual journal subscriptions can no longer be cancelled in their electronic format.”
9. Bergstrom, Ted C. “Librarians and the Terrible Fix: Economics of the Big Deal.” Serials 23, no. 2 (2010). https://works.bepress.com/ted_bergstrom/111/. Inelastic demand is “a situation in which the demand for a product does not increase or decrease correspondingly with a fall or rise in its price,” e.g., gasoline (http://www.businessdictionary.com/de...ic-demand.html).
10. Fister, Barbara. “Liberating Knowledge: A Librarian’s Manifesto for Change.” Thought & Action, January 1, 2010, 83–90.
11. Morales, et al. “Diversity, Social Justice, and the Future of Libraries.”
12. Roh, Charlotte. “Library Publishing and Diversity Values Changing Scholarly Publishing through Policy and Scholarly Communication Education.” College & Research Libraries News 77, no. 2 (2–1, 2016): 82–85. http://crln.acrl.org/content/77/2/82.
13. Bourg, Chris. “New Skills, Same as the Old Skills.” Feral Librarian (blog), March 20, 2016. https://chrisbourg.wordpress.com/201...he-old-skills/.
14. Berman, Sanford. Prejudices and Antipathies: A Tract on the LC Subject Heads Concerning People. Jefferson, N.C. : McFarland & Co., 1993.
15. de jesus, nina. “Locating the Library within Institutional Oppression.” In the Library with the Lead Pipe, September 24, 2014. http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpi...al-oppression/.
16. American Library Association. “Core Values of Librarianship.” Advocacy, Legislation & Issues, July 26, 2006. http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreed...ols/corevalues.
17. Society of American Archivists. “SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics.” SAA: Society of American Archivists, 2011. http://www2.archivists.org/statement...cs#core_values.
18. Bourg, Chris. “Beyond Measure: Valuing Libraries.” Feral Librarian (blog), May 19, 2013. https://chrisbourg.wordpress.com/201...ing-libraries/.
19. This question was taken up by the 2008 edited volume Questioning Library Neutrality, which compiled pieces from Progressive Librarian published over the previous two decades. See Lewis, Alison, ed. Questioning Library Neutrality: Essays from Progressive Librarian. Library Juice Press, 2008.
20. In a similar vein, the notion of “objectivity” has been long discredited in the history of science, and was notably critiqued by feminist theorists and historians of science beginning in the 1980s. See “Feminist Perspectives on Science: Feminist Science Studies.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/f...nce/#FemSciStu.
21. Jensen, Robert. “The Myth of the Neutral Professional.” In Questioning Library Neutrality: Essays from Progressive Librarian, 89–96. Library Juice Press, 2008.
22. Bourg, Chris. “Never Neutral: Libraries, Technology, and Inclusion.” Feral Librarian (blog), January 29, 2015. https://chrisbourg.wordpress.com/201...and-inclusion/.
23. Ibid. We would also argue that the default is western, white, Christian, straight, and male points of view.
24. Jimerson, Randall C. “Archives for All: Professional Responsibility and Social Justice.” American Archivist 70, no. 2 (September 2007): 252–81. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17723/aarc.70.2.5n20760751v643m7.
25. Duff, W.M., A. Flinn, K. E. Suurtamm, and D.A. Wallace. “Social Justice Impact of Archives: A Preliminary Investigation.” Archival Science 13, no. 4 (December 2013): 317–48. doi:10.1007/s10502-012-9198-x.
26. For example, the LACUNY Institute conference on Race Matters (Brooklyn College, City University of New York, May 2016) and Safiya Noble’s talk “What Small Data Can Tell Us about Big Data Bias” (Harvard University, March 2016).
27. To reiterate and expand on those issues mentioned in the “Context” section, these functions include: the stewardship and preservation of digital content that is licensed rather than owned; the unfettered lending of digital materials in the absence of the first sale doctrine; selection of material alongside the growth of the Big Deal and patron-driven acquisitions; and the acquisition of necessary research resources in the context of rapidly escalating subscription costs.
28. Bonaccorso, Elisa, et al. “Bottlenecks in the Open-Access System: Voices from Around the Globe.” Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication 2, no. 2 (2014). doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1126. See “Representation of Marginalized Perspectives” for strategies to this end. Crissinger, Sarah. “A Critical Take on OER Practices: Interrogating Commercialization, Colonialism, and Content.” In the Library with the Lead Pipe, October 21, 2015. http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpi...rcialization-c olonialism-and-content/.
29. Fister. “Liberating Knowledge.”
30. Finnie, Ellen. “What Organic Food Shopping Can Tell Us about Transforming the Scholarly Communications System.” In the Open (blog), March 23, 2016. http://intheopen.net/2016/03/what-or...ly-communicati ons-system/.
31. Society of American Archivists. “SAA Core Values Statement.”
32. American Library Association. “Library Bill of Rights.” Advocacy, Legislation & Issues, 1996. http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill.
33.  Morales, et al. “Diversity, Social Justice, and the Future of Libraries.”
34.  Roh.“Library Publishing and Diversity Values.”
35. Moletsane, Relebohile, Louise Haysom, and Vasu Reddy. “Knowledge Production, Critique and Peer Review in Feminist Publishing: Reflections from Agenda.” Critical Arts: A South-North Journal of Cultural & Media Studies 29, no. 6 (December 2, 2015): 766–84. doi:10.1080/02560046.2015.1151112.
36. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Institutional Research: Office of the Provost. Students, 2016. http://web.mit.edu/ir/pop/students/index.html.
37. American Library Association Office for Intellectual Freedom, and American Library Association Office for Diversity Literacy and Outreach Services. “Our Voices,” n.d. http://ourvoiceschicago.ala.org/.
38. Berman. Prejudices and Antipathies. Drabinski, Emily. “Queering the Catalog: Queer Theory and the Politics of Correction.” Library Quarterly 83, no. no. 2 (2013): 94–111. doi:10.1080/00141840802563964. Olson, Hope A. The Power to Name : Locating the Limits of Subject Representation in Libraries. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002. Roberto, K. R. “Inflexible Bodies: Metadata for Transgender Identities.” Journal of Information Ethics 20, no. 2 (2011): 56–64. doi:10.3172/JIE.20.2.56.
39. Szostak, Rick. “Classifying for Diversity.” Knowledge Organization 41, no. 2 (2014): 160–70. doi:10.7152/nasko.v4i1.14659
40.  https://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabularies/
41. http://metadataregistry.org
42. MIT Ad Hoc Task Force on the Future of Libraries. “Institute-Wide Task Force on the Future of Libraries.” Cambridge, MA: MIT Libraries, 2016, p. 22. https://www.pubpub.org/pub/future-of-libraries.
43.  Ibid., p. 7.
44. Student affinity groups: https://alum.mit.edu/networks/Shared...ffinity_Groups, Employee Resource Groups: http://hrweb.mit.edu/diversity/ergs
45.  https://mindhandheart.mit.edu/
46. https://www.mtwyouth.org/
47. In the past the MIT Libraries participated in a vibrant gifts and exchange program with partners worldwide. The program was staffed with 1.0 FTE and a student employee and benefitted organizations in Eastern Europe, the Philippines, and the home countries of MIT students. In 2010, the program was terminated due to changes in Libraries priorities and budget constraints.
48. For example, see the Society of American Archivists and the Association of Research Libraries, http://www2.archivists.org/advocacy/...on-initiatives and http://www.arl.org/storage/documents...2016.08.17.pdf.
49. Several years ago, in a very different climate, the MIT Libraries’ Team Delta came up with a number of proposals, and one in particular is highly relevant and directly applicable today. They advocated for the creation of “satisfying, realistic jobs” for all Libraries staff. http://libstaff.mit.edu/refcomm/RefV...ision_psmg.pdf, p.2.
50.  MIT Libraries All-Staff Meeting, http://webcast.amps.ms.mit.edu/spr2016/Lib/1609/3/, March 2, 2016.
51. https://libraries.mit.edu/about/
52. Berman, Sanford I. “Opening the Closed Mind: Making Assumptions, Jumping to Conclusions.” ETC: A Review of General Semantics 58, no. 4 (2001): 429–39.
53. MIT Libraries’ Committee for the Promotion of Diversity and Inclusion (CPDI) http://libguides.mit.edu/diversity
54. http://mitnames2016.tumblr.com/ and https://libraries.mit.edu/news/books...aunches/22145/
55. http://libguides.mit.edu/music-social-justice
56. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing
57. Association of Research Libraries. “ARL Encourages Members to Refrain from Signing Nondisclosure or Confidentiality Clauses.” ARL News (blog), 2009. http://www.arl.org/news/arl-news/306...e-or-confident iality-clauses#.V_Pumo8rJph.
58.  https://www.zotero.org/groups/disj; a log-in is necessary to view this free bibliography
59.  

Source Information

Creating a Social Justice Mindset: Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice in the Collections Directorate of the MIT Libraries  

1. 777