Recent Comments on this Page
-
It is unclear how this document relates to the ACRL 2012 Cultural Competencies document. Does the 2012 document still stand? I hope so. ACRL 2012 is a model of clear and effective communication. It demonstrates strong alignment with core library values as articulated in the Library Bill of Rights and Freedom to Read Statement. This Framework is not such a clear communication. It seems to challenge the legitimacy of those values – fundamentally. If the two worldviews are intended to peacefully co-exist within librarianship, it won’t work; they are utterly incompatible.
-
Just combining race with equity isn’t going to get us to a good place. This is several steps backward! Race is a social construction. To paraphrase Lorde who wrote so astutely, you cannot dismantle the master’s house by using his tools! Stop racializing and minoritizing people – this is a “white supremacy” tactic. Find new language. We were doing so well with the language of cultural competencies and diversity. Why have we regressed to prioritizing race again? Ethnicity is more common in most parts of the world and we know that human differences are nuanced even in the racial/cultural sphere because of intermarriage and migration. By continuing to fixate on race without considering these multiple identities and the true nature of disadvantaged populations, we’re just exporting racism! This sort of a framework is American exceptionalism. How does this make sense in a nation of 330 million with about 12% non-monolithic African Americans ,>13% foreign born?
Recent Comments in this Document
-
a lot of middle and upper management job titles in here.
-
Could this be stated in a positive way? Who will be complicit with whom?What does that silencing look like? How do library culture, workplace culture, and systemic racism collude to make it bad for your employed future to speak up or raise awareness? What, in positive terms, can library administrators do to protect library workers who speak up about racism, sexism, homophobia, gender phobia, inequity in general on libraries? For this to happen, library administrators have to nurture a culture where dissent and disagreement are appreciated, not just tolerated or ignored.
-
I think you could make a much longer list of better examples.
-
This test should not be recommended. It has not been shown to predict bias in behavior, which is what we should be concerned about here (that is, library staff are not participants in a psychology research study). Some recent scholarship on the IAT:https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1745691621991860https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1745691619863798https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.04.018
-
[The LIS profession must track the representation of minoritized individuals in leadership and managerial roles whether titular roles in organizations (managers, directors, supervisors, team-leaders, etc.) or comparable roles in civic organizations, associations, professional communities of practice, and other contexts where communities of color have not had, historically, access to power, resources, or opportunities to advocate for themselves or for other marginalized people. ]
Why must “the LIS profession track the representation of minoritized individuals in leadership?” What will this data show and how can it be implemented to bring about change? -
Maybe reference other research about the difference between cultural competency and cultural humility?
-
[As understanding evolves and contexts and vocabulary change, libraries must reassess and revisit their practices to ensure they remain relevant, fulfill their objective, and do not cause harm]
How do you all recommend they do this? -
Perhaps this example could include additional examples of how they would take the next steps to use the information provided by the Implicit Association Test in their work/personal life.
-
What does it mean to “provide the grounding needed?” How are you all defining grounding and why is grounding necessary to bring about systematic change?
Just combining race with equity isn’t going to get us to a good place. This is several steps backward! Race is a social construction. To paraphrase Lorde who wrote so astutely, you cannot dismantle the master’s house by using his tools! Stop racializing and minoritizing people – this is a “white supremacy” tactic. Find new language. We were doing so well with the language of cultural competencies and diversity. Why have we regressed to prioritizing race again? Ethnicity is more common in most parts of the world and we know that human differences are nuanced even in the racial/cultural sphere because of intermarriage and migration. By continuing to fixate on race without considering these multiple identities and the true nature of disadvantaged populations, we’re just exporting racism! This sort of a framework is American exceptionalism. How does this make sense in a nation of 330 million with about 12% non-monolithic African Americans ,>13% foreign born?
It is unclear how this document relates to the ACRL 2012 Cultural Competencies document. Does the 2012 document still stand? I hope so. ACRL 2012 is a model of clear and effective communication. It demonstrates strong alignment with core library values as articulated in the Library Bill of Rights and Freedom to Read Statement. This Framework is not such a clear communication. It seems to challenge the legitimacy of those values – fundamentally. If the two worldviews are intended to peacefully co-exist within librarianship, it won’t work; they are utterly incompatible.