Embracing Diversity, Equity and Inclusion: Social Justice and the Modern University
Academic institutions worldwide are increasingly embracing the principles of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). As centers of knowledge and information, academic libraries are ideally positioned to promote DEI. But what exactly does DEI entail, and why is it so crucial for libraries today?
Roxanne Missingham of the Australian National University (ANU) and Jeffrey Carroll from Rutgers University Libraries gave stellar presentations at the sixth instalment of Taking Libraries into the Future, the De Gruyter webinar series for academic libraries. They discussed the pivotal role libraries play in contributing to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives at their respective institutions and shared their perspectives on their universities’ exciting and sensitively-managed DEI programs. The webinar was facilitated by Linda Bennett and Annika Bennett of Gold Leaf.
Roxanne began by saying that working out what justice requires demands that we think as if we are building society from the ground up, in a way that everyone who is reasonable can accept. We therefore need to imagine ourselves in a situation before any particular society exists. She quoted John Rawls, who said “Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought. A theory, however elegant and economical, must be rejected or revised if it is untrue; likewise, laws and institutions, no matter how efficient and well-arranged, must be reformed or abolished if they are unjust.” She clarified that Rawls does not think we can actually return to this original position, or even that it ever existed. It is a purely hypothetical idea: our job in thinking about justice is to imagine that we are designing a society from scratch.
You are currently viewing a placeholder content from YouTube. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
This profound yet practical observation set the scene for one of the most thought-provoking webinars in the series. The Australian National University and the ANU Press which it owns are particularly sensitive to diversity and equity, because – in common with other universities in Australia and New Zealand – they have in recent years striven to recognize the rights and acknowledge the identities of the Indigenous Nations of their country. The challenges that university libraries must address to combat prejudice in all its forms are considerable and include censorship, misinformation, limited resources and the need to integrate DEI policies into education programs.
The preservation of Indigenous knowledge and the enabling of ‘decolonization’ are, of course, not uniquely Australian issues; they occupy different contexts in different countries and are aided (and sometimes hindered) by an array of national and international legal frameworks. Other recent developments that influence outcomes are open access (OA) and artificial intelligence (AI) – which can also be helpful or not: for example, OA has not created a level playing field for authors, which was one of the main arguments for embracing it.
Click here to catch-up with De Gruyter and Gold Leaf’s quarterly webinar series.
Roxanne therefore asked how actors in the scholarly ecosystem can take on responsibility for DEI. She suggested that the answer is to ‘lift the veil,’ to move the locus of control. Institutional repositories, a key tool in making research available free at the point of use, are already within libraries’ control; preprints are within researchers’ control (but researchers often need to be made more aware of copyright issues); consortia are becoming more powerful and are enabling libraries to achieve more; some publishers are creating more viable access solutions – and librarians can work closely with them and others to build on this; and finally, but crucially, global solutions need to be found to address DEI in a holistic way.
Jeffrey Carroll also began his presentation by quoting philosophical thought. He cited Jospeh Royce, who wrote of a “‘Beloved Community’ – the ideal, beyond what we encounter in life; a community … fully dedicated to the cause of loyalty, truth and reality itself” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Royce’s work was later referenced by Martin Luther King. Jonathan Holloway, who became the 21st President of Rutgers University in 2020, introduced the concept of ‘beloved community’ as the principle on which all Rutgers activities would in future be built. He clarified this further:
A ‘beloved community’ is defined by a commitment to work together to embody, reflect, and respect the complexities of all our parts. Rutgers’ campuses, distinct in location and culture, make up a thriving university composed of students, faculty, and staff from all lived experiences. This tapestry of identities, experiences, and backgrounds informs the work of diversity, equity, and inclusion university-wide. We embrace our differences and are committed to fostering a sense of community and belonging that offers respect in words and actions. Our beloved community must hold space for all of its inhabitants, even when we disagree.
Taking its cue from this, the Rutgers University Library Committee serves as an advisory body supporting many initiatives, including respecting and fostering perspectives that reflect varying backgrounds, identities, roles and their intersections; creating and supporting structures and behaviors that promote equity, fairness and justice; and promoting an environment of belonging, respect, opportunity and empowerment. It considers itself to be a learning committee rather than a committee of experts. Its current work is focused on DEI education, or a learning journey for all library personnel.
Did you know that Taking Libraries into the Future is also an interview series? Click here for more.
A big part of this is ‘reparative description,’ which involves rectifying ableist (i.e., supremacist) language; addressing the erasure and misrepresentation of People of Color; creating equitable metadata; addressing racist language; and correcting biased gendering and misgendering. This is a colossal task, which necessitates the review – and, if required, revision – of all metadata records, including those for the library catalogue, institutional repository and discovery aids for archival material. The university’s open access policy, which was passed by the senate in 2012 and became active in 2015, also plays its part.
These presentations were extremely well-received and generated the most stimulating audience debate of the webinar series thus far. We should like to offer heartfelt thanks to Roxanne and Jeff for their inspired choice of details to highlight in the presentations and for their eloquence; and, in both cases, taking part in what were for them unsocial hours. We have only provided a taster of what they said here. For the complete webinar, including the ensuing debate, please see the De Gruyter YouTube channel.
You might also be interested in this blog series
[Title image by Dedraw Studio/iStock/Getty Images]