While the mission of Equity, Diversity,and Inclusion(EDI)work in libraries is often clear and well-defined, the messaging associated with this practice can be blurred by differing expectations, ideas, and perspectives. Armed with this knowledge, and the desire to introduce a more cohesive, cross-sector approach to EDI, the Public Library Association(PLA), American Library Association (ALA), Association of Research Libraries(ARL), and Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) came together in 2019 to form the Cultural Proficiencies for Racial Equity Task Force (CPRE). The CPRE task force has been charged with creation of a highly anticipated racial equity framework that can be used broadly by libraries and library workers, whether academic, public, school or special. The significance of this cross-sector approach to the development of a framework is particularly impactful, as it signals a shift from a more individualized response to equity,diversity, and inclusion to a broader, more collaborative process that encourages a more global approach to change work.
The idea to convene the organizations of ALA, was the brainchild of Mark Puente (he/his). Mark, an EDI practitioner, Associate Dean for Organizational Development, Inclusion and Diversity at Purdue University, and former Director of Diversity and Leadership for ARL is also a member of the CPRE task force. As the task force prepares to publicly share the completed draft of the framework, Mark spoke with me about the origins of the task force, the impact of a cross-sector developed racial equity framework, and his hopes for how this framework will engage libraries and library workers.
CFG: What is the purpose of the framework, and how did it come to be? MP: The purpose of the framework came out of conversations I had with Jody Gray, former director of ALA's ODLOS. We had been talking for years about the challenges to doing EDI work and the relatively little progress that we, as a profession, have made in terms of representation of BIPOC individuals. In my consulting (in many different spaces with many different audiences) some of the same questions and problems kept coming up: the lack of a clear commitment on the part of libraries to label and address racial equity (always being under the larger umbrella of EDI); lack of a common vocabulary; lack of comfort on the part of white people (but not exclusively) in addressing the matters; difficulty in managing difficult conversations. Jody and I took the idea of creating the framework to the executive directors of our respective organizations. The then Executive Directors of PLA, ACRL, ARL, and ODLOS were highly enthusiastic about creating a process for the development of the framework and were willing to put some resources into it.
CFG: In drafting the framework, how did you ensure representation from all voices, particularly the perspectives of Public Library workers? MP: We made certain that our call for expressions of interest was posted in PLA lists. We also posted to the lists of the ALA ethnic caucuses, the Spectrum Scholarship listservs, and other spaces that we know are occupied by public library workers. When we reviewed the "applications'' we tried our best to ensure that people from public libraries were included.
CFG: The Framework examines, interrogates, and addresses how white supremacy, white privilege, and racism show up in Libraries. Why is it important to speak to this in the framework? MP: This was the first thing that surfaced in the development of our logic model when we initiated this work. I know that many people (myself included) are sometimes reticent about or uncomfortable speaking so upfront about the concept of what white supremacy is because most people think of it as a manifestation of extremism and not as something that is embedded in our social fabric. Although we certainly did not anticipate it, there's a growing collective consciousness about what white supremacy is and how it shows up in so many behaviors and policies. Again, the approach is to be as explicit as possible as to what the issues are. If we go directly to the heart of the problem, and call it what it is, perhaps we'll have a better chance at eradicating it.
CFG: Even within the field, Libraries, and librarians are often siloed by specialty (academic, school, public, special). How can this Framework for Racial Equity foster cross-sector, collaborative opportunities?
MP: I think the point of this framework is that racial inequity does not live (and thrive) in any system independently. The framework tries to be sector-agnostic (although we bring up examples from all types of libraries) so that people will understand the commonalities in how racism and racial inequity show up, but also that the best way to counter it is to do so with a collective voice. There are strategies that will be effective and accessible in some contexts, but won't be in others. It's important for us to learn from each others' successes and failures and to approach the dismantling of racist/oppressive structures with a common analysis of how they came to be, how they are sustained, and how they can be dismantled, re-envisioned, and rebuilt.
CFG: The development of a framework for Racial Equity comes with an expectation that Libraries and Library workers will lead and act with accountability. Can you share examples of ways in which EDI-centered organizational/ individual accountability can be demonstrated?
MP:I think my feelings about this are mostly aspirational, because I'm not yet sure how we can build a spirit of mutual-accountability. I do think that many associations and publications are showing more willingness to engage in the tough conversations that are needed to allow people and organizations to learn and grow. What we're not so good at is how we position ourselves to learn and grow without taxing communities of color, or worse, re-traumatizing them in that effort. I do think that modeling the behavior and strategies is one of the best tools in creating change, and we start this at the micro-level. We have to develop the will and the capacity to do this work at meso and macro-levels. I think this starts with pockets of people who are interested in the work and who are committed to it (e.g. a "diversity committee" or a anti-racist reading group). You then build out the interest and engagement throughout the organization, understanding that not everyone is at the same place or will be ready for the same conversation simultaneously. It takes some careful calibration and a degree of emotional intelligence to know when certain people are ready to hear certain messages.
CFG: What is your hope for the Framework? MP: I hope that it will be a launching place for individuals and organizations to develop a level of understanding and a shared vocabulary on these issues. Most importantly, I hope it will lead to action at individual, organizational, and higher (perhaps societal) levels. I hope that libraries and archives can be positioned to model this work and to provide a template for other professional sectors about how to initiate this work. Perhaps, one day, it will evolve into a framework for liberatory practice in our field and society.
CFG: When can we expect to see the Framework? How will it be shared?
MP:We’re on track to share the preliminary draft of the framework by the end of August. It will be shared electronically with opportunities for feedback and iteration. Depending on how that process goes, we could be looking at a final version by early fall. That said, the framework will never be final. I anticipate that it will be a living document that is revisited and revised as language and perspectives change.
Comentarios