Threading Community Resources into an Encyclopedic View on Our 125-Year Collective Milestone

Using the reflections of both the instructor and students on lesson plans from three course sessions, this paper argues that a social justice framework can be practically implemented in an introductory archives classroom such that students are imparted with both the rationale for classical Western archival concepts and functions and the modes to critique such functions from a social justice perspective. After a brief introduction summarizing course logistics and the action research methodology employed, this paper proposes a working definition of social justice and discuss in detail what constitutes a social justice pedagogical framework in archival education. Next, this paper describes and analyzes a small group exercise on the concepts of record, provenance, and creatorship, detailing ways in which students can be both taught prevailing archival concepts and encouraged to critique these concepts from a social justice perspective. This paper then addresses a group discussion concerning power, marginalization, and listening for whispers in the archives, revealing how records can be used in the classroom to illustrate complex theoretical concepts. This paper then discusses the effectiveness of an exercise using three real-life human rights case studies to impart the importance of ethical action in archival practice. In conclusion, the challenges of implementing this framework will be discussed as well as suggestions for future research.

The Archival / Preservation Education SIG session offers pedagogical insights on master’s-level information science and archival education. Five ten-minute individual presentations and audience discussion elucidate educators’ roles in developing competent new professionals; presenters bring perspectives from multiple states. “Curricular Integration of Audiovisual Archiving and Preservation” by Sarah Buchanan explores connections between coursework and professional experiences completed by MLIS graduate students. Students actively contribute to curriculum maintenance through their digitization and documentation activities, metadata creation, and perhaps most significantly community-based dialogues around project progressions and expert input – collectively ensuring the preparedness of today’s archivists to address technical challenges. “Operationalizing the Value of Legacy Research Data” by Gretchen Stahlman and Inna Kouper explores the need for a more systematic understanding of legacy research data efforts and the value of legacy data as perceived by various research, library, and data communities. To illuminate relevant considerations, two legacy data preservation case study sites are analyzed, further situating the socio-technical processes and impact of working with and curating legacy data, as well as the role of equity, fairness, and justice. “The Need for Archival Triage” by Jeff Hirschy and Jessica Herr demonstrates how new archivists and educators could benefit from expanded mental models of archival workplace realities. The presentation emphasizes the values of flexibility and adaptability on the part of new archivists and educators, as they strengthen tenuous connections between “perfect” archival theory (in settings with full funding and full staff), professional problem-solving, continuing education, and the definitions of preservation and oral history. “Bridging Gaps between Archival Studies and Social Justice Scholarship: Training of Community-Embedded Paraprofessional Archivists Who Are Black, Indigenous, and People of Color” by Bharat Mehra, Robert Riter, and Ron Harris highlights ongoing experiences in bridging gaps between archival studies and social justice scholarship via curricular development/implementation, strategic collaborations, and project design in the IMLS-funded “Archival Studies Social Justice Master’s Scholarship Program (SJ4A).” SJ4A addresses current gaps in diversifying the workforce and operationalizing the how-to’s of social justice in archival practice while proposing systematic, intentional, action-oriented, community-engaged, and impact-driven education. “AI and the Future of Archival/Preservation Education” by Suliman Hawamdeh and Manar Alsaid discusses the types of training, competencies and practices which need to be integrated into archival and preservation education to harness the power of artificial intelligence (AI) and yet protect the authenticity and originality of archival material. Generative AI natural language tools and chatbots such as ChatGPT have the potential to enhance archival education and research by identifying sources, gathering and processing large amount of historical material / data in a timely manner, and assisting with methodological problems and computational tasks. The recent issues concerning document classification of presidential records and gaps in the National Archives’ tracking of information highlight the magnitude of spaces where AI could be the sword with two sharp edges. The moderator will facilitate Q&A within and across the presentations.

This paper was produced as a collaborative project by a Progressive Librarianship class at an ALA-accredited Masters of Library and Information Science (MLIS) program located in Canada. Recent research in LIS has identified a need for issues of social justice to be discussed more prominently in LIS education. From a uniquely student perspective, the authors suggest how MLIS programs can incorporate social justice as a key component in LIS education. Specifically, they encourage pedagogy that supports critical thinking on issues of social justice and provides scaffolding for progressive change for the common good within a library context. This includes where social justice should appear in the LIS curriculum, who should teach about social justice, what topics are currently of relevance, and suggestions on key strategies for progressive change that can be taught in LIS education.

PurposeThis paper aims to explore the relationship between historiography and archival practices. It takes the new social history approach to history as a case study for examining how historians' changing theories and methods may affect solicitation, acquisition, appraisal, arrangement, description, reference, outreach, and other aspects of archival administration.Design/methodology/approachThe paper presents a review of the archival and historical literature since the late 1970s.FindingsThe paper finds that many aspects of archival administration have been and continue to be affected by the new social history trend in historical scholarship. The paper suggests that archivists and archival educators be trained in historiography as a way to understand historians' craft and develop strong documentation strategies to anticipate future archival needs.Research limitations/implicationsBecause the paper is primarily a literature review, it does not test real‐life examples or case studies that would be useful in understanding the relationship between historians and archivists.Practical implicationsThe paper includes implications for the development of archival administration and education strategies.Originality/valueThe paper draws from a range of literature to consider the impact of scholarly practices on professional archival work.

Previous articleNext article No AccessFrom the New Editorial TeamLibrary Research and What Libraries Actually Do Now: Education, Inclusion, Social Services, Public Spaces, Digital Literacy, Social Justice, Human Rights, and Other Community NeedsPaul T. Jaeger, Ursula Gorham, Natalie Greene Taylor, Karen Kettnich, Lindsay C. Sarin, and Kaitlin J. PetersonPaul T. Jaeger Search for more articles by this author , Ursula Gorham Search for more articles by this author , Natalie Greene Taylor Search for more articles by this author , Karen Kettnich Search for more articles by this author , Lindsay C. Sarin Search for more articles by this author , and Kaitlin J. Peterson Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Library Quarterly Volume 84, Number 4October 2014Special Issue in Honor of John Carlo Bertot Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/677785 Views: 1171Total views on this site Citations: 18Citations are reported from Crossref © 2014 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Ulrikke Wethal, Katherine Ellsworth-Krebs, Arve Hansen, Sejal Changede, Gert Spaargaren Reworking boundaries in the home-as-office: boundary traffic during COVID-19 lockdown and the future of working from home, Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 18, no.11 (May 2022): 325–343.https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2022.2063097Bharat Mehra Toward an impact‐driven framework to operationalize social justice and implement ICT4D in the field of information, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 18 (Jun 2022).https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24693Teresa Helena Moreno Beyond the police: libraries as locations of carceral care, Reference Services Review 50, no.11 (Dec 2021): 102–112.https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-07-2021-0039Alison Frayne Transcribing public libraries as revitalized ethical spaces, IFLA Journal 4 (Feb 2022): 034003522210747.https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352221074716Amatul Momin Social Justice as It Evolves in the LAM Sector, (Jan 2022): 56–81.https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8363-0.ch003Joseph Winberry, LaVerne Gray, Jean Hardy, Baheya Jaber, Bharat Mehra Conceptualizing Relevance of Information as a Social Justice Issue: An Interactive Panel Discussion, Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology 58, no.11 (Oct 2021): 667–672.https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.524Bharat Mehra Social Justice Design and Implementation: Innovative Pedagogies to Transform LIS Education, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 62, no.44 (Sep 2021): 460–476.https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis-62-4-2020-0094Ralph Cuseglio MSW interns in the public library: a case study in community partnership, Social Work Education 40, no.55 (Jul 2020): 671–683.https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2020.1791066Elizabeth A. Wahler, Mary A. Provence, John Helling, Michael A. Williams The Changing Role of Libraries: How Social Workers Can Help, Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services 101, no.11 (Jun 2019): 34–43.https://doi.org/10.1177/1044389419850707Marc Kosciejew Information’s Importance for Refugees: Information Technologies, Public Libraries, and the Current Refugee Crisis, The Library Quarterly 89, no.22 (Mar 2019): 79–98.https://doi.org/10.1086/702193Keren Dali Chapter 6: Integrating Social Work Perspectives into LIS Education: Blended Professionals as Change Agents, (Mar 2018): 83–121.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-28302018000044B007Keren DaliPaul T. Jaeger Beyond Scholarly Publishing: The Human Dimension of Peer Review in LIS, The Library Quarterly 88, no.22 (Mar 2018): 99–124.https://doi.org/10.1086/696578Paul T. JaegerErin ZerhusenUrsula GorhamRenee F. HillNatalie Greene Taylor Waking Up to Advocacy in a New Political Reality for Libraries, The Library Quarterly 87, no.44 (Oct 2017): 350–368.https://doi.org/10.1086/693492Nadia CaidiJ. J. GhaddarDanielle Allard Negotiating Borders: Librarianship and Twenty-First-Century Politics, The Library Quarterly 87, no.44 (Oct 2017): 391–409.https://doi.org/10.1086/693493Christine Stilwell Public Libraries and Social Inclusion: An Update from South Africa, (Feb 2016): 119–146.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-283020160000041006Toni Samek Critical Reflection on Librarianship and Human Rights: A Book and Continuing Endeavor, (Feb 2016): 245–263.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-283020160000041010Paul T. Jaeger, Katie Shilton, and Jes Koepfler The Rise of Social Justice as a Guiding Principle in Library and Information Science Research, The Library Quarterly 86, no.11 (Dec 2015): 1–9.https://doi.org/10.1086/684142Judi Moreillon Digital Storytelling Based on the Association for Library Service to Children Competencies: A Learning Activity to Promote Values Associated with Social Justice, Public Library Quarterly 34, no.33 (Sep 2015): 212–229.https://doi.org/10.1080/01616846.2015.1069676

This paper discusses the use of Computational Thinking (CT) in Archival Educators’ instruction towards enhancing the training and professional development of the library and archival workforce to meet the needs of their communities, and enhancing digital collection management and access to information and resources through retrospective and born-digital content. Four educators share their teaching strategies aimed at modernizing the way digital LIS and computational education are conducted. Their goal is to create an active and engaged community of future archival practitioners, ready to tackle the digital records and archives future.

This panel will explore the intersection of Critical Race Theory and Library and Information Science unveiling the challenges, opportunities, and actionable steps for integrating CRT into library practices, education, and services. Emerging from legal studies in the 1970s, CRT has is considered the key framework for addressing systemic racism and understanding the role of power and race in shaping societal structures. In this session, panelists will discuss how CRT can be used to transform library practices and offer solutions for the evolving challenges faced by libraries and LIS educators. Panelists will explain how CRT’s core ideas can offer new perspectives on issues of access, representation, and equity within libraries helping attendees understand why CRT is crucial in reshaping how libraries address race and how library systems can either perpetuate or challenge racial inequalities. In addition, panelists will examine the tension between the field’s traditional commitment to neutrality and CRT’s call for activism and social justice unveiling how these competing values can sometimes create friction, especially when it comes to rethinking established practices like collection development, access to resources, and library services. Panelists will engage in a candid conversation centered on the difficulties of shifting these practices in ways that more actively promote racial justice and inclusivity. Another topic will be the gap in LIS education regarding CRT. Drawing from studies that reveal LIS students often receive little to no exposure to CRT during their graduate programs, the panel will highlight the urgent need for educational reform. Panelists will advocate for curricula that more comprehensively integrate CRT, preparing future librarians to understand and confront issues of racial power dynamics and inequities in their professional work. They will discuss the ways in which a CRT-infused education can equip future library leaders with the tools they need to challenge and dismantle systemic racism in their practices. Panelists will offer practical ways that CRT can be applied in libraries and real-world examples of how library services and collections can be reimagined through the lens of CRT. Noting the importance of diversifying collections, ensuring that libraries offer equitable access to resources, and creating inclusive spaces where all community members feel represented and heard. By focusing on action-oriented solutions to illustrate how libraries can move beyond theory and engage in concrete efforts to address racial inequities. A key theme of the panel will be the role of librarians as agents of social change. Finally, the panel will look ahead to the future of CRT in LIS with strategies for ensuring that CRT principles continue to be integrated into LIS practices and education in the long term. This will include ideas for advocating for policy changes within libraries, promoting diversity and inclusion within LIS education, and fostering an ongoing commitment to racial justice in library services and operations. Panelists will leave attendees with actionable steps they can take to incorporate CRT into their own professional practices and educational settings.

(Article forthcoming)
 This paper will discuss the theoretical framework and approach to educating archivists in the Clayton State Master of Archival Studies (MAS) program. The MAS program is an entirely online program based in the state of Georgia in the U.S. Across the curriculum of the MAS, we approached developing our curriculum to ensure that students engage with social justice issues through wrestling with archival silences. Through creating a theoretical framework, class discussion activities, and assignments, our hope is for our students to be prepared to engage with issues of representation in archival collections once they are in the field. This paper explains the basis for our approach and provides example assignments which other institutions can use as inspiration for their archival education curriculum.
 For many, archival education emphasizes fundamentals. Archival educators and professionals seem most concerned with educating new archivists on topics such as how to preserve materials, how to provide access, and how to acquire materials. These activities are the work of archivists, but emphasis on the technical disguises the complexities of cultural, economic, and social issues that surround archival work. Technical archival work often silences the voices of many groups found within our collections through emphasizing standardization and mechanics of archival work. Student archivists need exposure to discussions that go beyond the technical. The MAS program does this by encouraging students to engage with the silences that occur during our work.

Our long-term program of research has considered the relationships between teachers’ work and identities, literacy pedagogies and schooling, particularly in high-poverty communities. Over the past decade, we have worked with teachers to consciously explore with them the possible productive synergies between critical literacy and place-based pedagogies, and the affordances of multimodal and digital literacies for students’ engagement with the places where they live and learn. These studies have been undertaken with teachers working and living in various locales—from the urban fringe to inner suburban areas undergoing urban renewal, to rural and regional communities where poverty and the politics of place bring certain distinctive opportunities and constraints to bear on pedagogy for social justice. There is now wider recognition that “social justice” may need rethinking to foreground the nonhuman world and the relation between people and politics of places, people, and environments in terms of “eco-social justice” (Green 2010 ; Gruenewald 2003b) or spatial justice (Soja 2011).KeywordsSocial JusticeAustralian JournalCritical LiteracyCritical PedagogyLiteracy PracticeThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Privacy considerations are woven throughout archival practice, from the acquisition and stewardship of archival collections to the generation and retention of patron request records. Drawing on scholarship from archival theorists and practitioners, as well as recent case studies and their own professional experience, the authors present a broad overview of the ethics and practice of privacy throughout the archival life cycle. At each stage, archivists seek a balance between sensitivity to the rights and well-being of creators and subjects and responsibility to researchers and the access mission. For archivists, privacy protections are not about secrecy or exclusivity, but about an ethics of care. Decisions made by archivists related to privacy have broad societal implications related to the understanding of history, the accountability of those in power, the availability of information, and the agency of creators and communities. We approach privacy from two complementary perspectives in archival practice—that of a collections manager and processing archivist working with creators, donors, and their archival collections to determine what privacy considerations may need to be addressed, and that of a reference and instruction archivist, working with students and researchers whose use of archival collections generates data that has its own privacy concerns.

Challenges of Underrepresentation in LIS The underrepresentation of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPoC) within LIS poses significant challenges to the field’s efforts to advance equity, access, and representation. The statistics from the Department for Professional Employees (AFL-CIO, 2020) clearly illustrate this issue, but the challenges extend beyond numerical gaps. There are deeply embedded biases in LIS pedagogy, faculty hiring, and the overall academic culture that make it difficult for BIPoC scholars to thrive. The lack of racial diversity within LIS faculty—where many programs still have minimal BIPoC representation—creates a situation where Black and Brown students do not see themselves reflected in the curriculum, the faculty, or the research agendas of their programs. Moreover, the existing exclusionary practices within LIS academic institutions contribute to a climate where BIPoC students often feel marginalized. Research by Gibson and Hughes-Hassell (2017) highlights that Black students’ experiences at libraries are often marked by negative encounters, including feelings of unwelcomeness. These experiences not only shape students’ perceptions of LIS as a profession but also affect their investment in LIS education and careers. Furthermore, the burden of representing diversity within the LIS classroom often falls on BIPoC students, creating feelings of exploitation rather than inclusion. The gap between institutional commitment to diversity and the lived experiences of BIPoC scholars is evident in the persistent low enrollment of BIPoC students in LIS programs. The lack of representation in LIS faculty, particularly in historically White institutions, exacerbates the difficulty of recruiting new scholars from these communities. This underrepresentation underscores the importance of creating more intentional pathways for BIPoC students to enter and succeed in LIS fields. Catalysts for Change: The Spectrum Doctoral Fellowship Program Review and Impact This IMLS-grant funded program, Spectrum Doctoral Fellowship, seeks to address these systemic issues. The Spectrum Doctoral Fellowship Program has already demonstrated its effectiveness in advancing racial equity in LIS. By focusing on the recruitment of racially and ethnically diverse doctoral students, the program aims to develop a new generation of LIS faculty committed to racial equity and social justice in both teaching and research. The project builds on the success of earlier initiatives like Project Athena, which focused on cohort-based curricula, peer mentoring, and developing networks of scholars committed to anti-racist education and social justice in LIS. A majority of past Spectrum Doctoral fellows have successfully completed their doctoral degrees, and a third of these fellows have already attained positions as assistant professors or higher. These fellows represent a growing and dynamic community of BIPoC scholars who are reshaping LIS from within. The Spectrum Doctoral Fellowship Program continues to emphasize building supportive, anti-racist community spaces, which have been critical to the success of BIPoC students in LIS. Through networking, mentorship, and collective action, these spaces create an environment where fellows can build solidarity and work together to dismantle institutional barriers to racial equity in LIS education and practice. This panel will provide a platform for critical discussion on the role of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the future of Library and Information Science. It will also shed light on the impact of initiatives like the Spectrum Doctoral Fellowship Program in fostering an inclusive environment that supports BIPoC scholars and advances social justice in LIS curricula. In addition, panel will also discuss research conducted on diversity in higher education, LIS, and the impact and effectiveness of Spectrum and related BIPOC doctoral initiatives. By examining the challenges, successes, and lessons learned from these initiatives, the panel aims to contribute to the ongoing conversation about how LIS can evolve to better serve the diverse communities it aims to support.

Counseling psychologists have been at the forefront of social justice and advocacy efforts in the discipline of psychology. Despite these foci, few graduate training programs in psychology offer formal courses or training in advocacy, social justice, and public policy. To develop and fill a pipeline of professionals involved in social justice and advocacy efforts, graduate training programs in psychology must expose and prepare students to these areas. The purpose of the current paper is to describe how faculty within the professional psychology program at the University of Denver incorporate advocacy, public policy, and social justice education and training into their program. We describe how the program climate and curriculum were created to meet these training needs.

In Scolding Therapists About Social Justice and Advocacy, the authors address the daunting nature of advocacy for oppressed and marginalized populations. On one hand is the sanctimonious and self-righteous behavior of others who claim mental health professionals are not doing enough. On the other hand is the realities that true advocacy work is complicated, challenging, difficult, and often unplanned. Such efforts come about due to the nature of the work to which mental health professionals are engaged. However, there are innumerable benefits to engaging in altruistic, selfless, advocacy efforts, including contributions to client welfare, social justice, meaningfulness, and personal well-being. Advocacy efforts can change the lives of clients and helping professionals.

The one year Digital Media Intern Project was funded by a grant from UBC's Teaching and Learning Enhancement Fund to support four SLAIS Interns (students in the MLIS program). Theywere charged with developing and delivering educational modules related to Web 2.0 for UBC students. A total of 16 workshops were offered, as well as training through a “This is Your Life 2.0” blog on which a series of mini‐modules was posted. The project demonstrates that the dynamic and evolving nature of the Learning Centre is a perfect laboratory for educating information professionals for their changing roles in a new information environment, while the Learning Centre benefits from dynamic programs delivered by students for students.

A-13 Stepping into Action: The Role of Neuropsychologists in Social Justice Advocacy