Page Comparison

Identify needs at each campus with regards to successful implementation of ethical and inclusive metadata practice for description, faceting, subject headings, controlled vocabularies, and authority records in SILS and UC Library Search (Alma and Primo).

Short-term

What does “successful implementation” mean?

Do we need a deliverable for identifying EDIJ resources & projects? A number of these deliverables are dependent on such a list.

SURVEY

Determine what groups/people the survey should be sent to.

• public services

• technical services

• Digital projects metadata

• Special Collections & Archives

• Library Level

Also think about what we will do with survey results? Will that change things we decide to work on?

Create a list of UC reparative and inclusive cataloging local projects and practices that can be shared systemwide. 

Short-term

Will this be a continually updated list, and if so, who will maintain?

SURVEY: Metadata/Cataloging departments, Digital Projects Metadata, Special Collections & Archives, Discovery?, Library Level

Create a means of information sharing and communication around local campus efforts

Midterm

Determine platform

• Google Drive and Google Groups (perhaps a new UC-wide group?) might be a familiar platform that would be easy for users

Who will have view access? All UC staff? Public?

• I would suggest starting UC-wide before deciding if it was appropriate to open to the Public

Create a directory of campus personnel with description and discovery-related DEIJA expertise or responsibility (i.e. NACO, SACO, linked-data, Accessibility)

Midterm

Determine platform

• Question: is this just for the EIMPPT to use, or for other UC staff? If the former, Confluence would be sufficient. If the latter, I would again suggest Google Drive.

Add language as one of the expertise categories?

• I think adding language is an excellent suggestion

Create a space for resources and training materials for UC libraries addressing DEIJA in cataloging, metadata and discovery

Short-term

Determine platform

Who can contribute to this space?

Make concrete recommendations for addressing representation issues with vocabularies, including misrepresentation due to factual error or bias and underrepresentation or erasure due to lack of specific headings.

Long-term

Should we also recommend alternative vocabularies, like Homosaurus?

Develop best practices to create anti-racist and anti-biased description and classification for a more equitable, diverse and inclusive UC Library Search

Long-term

Make concrete recommendations for reparative cataloging for catalogers and systems personnel

Long-term

Maybe more clarity on “concrete recommendations” for the deliverables that have this phrase? From presentations related to ethical cataloging, it seems sometimes the hardest part about this work isn’t identifying that there is a problem, it’s how to make the decision on what to do about it. +1

Make concrete recommendations for improved DEIJA discovery experience 

Long-term

Would we need to bring in others who are more of the experts in front-end discovery systems?

Identify which groups are responsible for changes at local, national and/or international levels (e.g., local-level, SILS Operations Team, Operations Subteams, Leadership Group)

Midterm

This could be interesting given that we largely work in OCLC, so local decisions can potentially have national/international impact

Hold regular updates with the stakeholders

(Q1-4)

Create final report

Long-term

(Q4)