Evidence Summary
Improving Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in LIS
Education: Insights for Curriculum Development and Professional Preparation
A Review of:
Drewry,
C., Matsuno, S., Hicks, A., & Inskip, C. (2024). How could the Library and
Information Studies curriculum better prepare graduates to address equity,
diversity and inclusion issues in their workplace? Journal of Information Science. Advance online publication https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515241245960
Reviewed by:
Lili
Luo
Professor
School
of Information
San
Jose State University
San
Jose, California, United States of America
Email:
lili.luo@sjsu.edu
Received: 19 Sept. 2024 Accepted: 13 Jan. 2025
2025 Luo.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0 International
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
DOI: 10.18438/eblip30632
Objective – To
explore how the graduate-level Library and Information Studies (LIS) curriculum
can be redesigned to be more socially justice focused and thus better prepare
graduates to address equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) issues in their
workplace.
Design – A
cross-sectional, descriptive online survey study.
Setting –
MA/PG Diploma program in LIS at University College, London (UCL).
Subjects – 59
recent graduates from the MA/PG Diploma program in LIS at University College,
London (UCL).
Methods – Using
the descriptive survey methodology, a 13-item online questionnaire was sent to
a purposive sample of 733 alumni from the MA/PG Diploma program in LIS at
University College, London (UCL). The online survey included 7 closed question
and 6 open-ended questions, and was open for 6 weeks. Survey responses were
analyzed using thematic coding in NVIVO software to identify key trends and
insights.
Main Results –
Regarding effective pedagogical strategies for EDI-focused work, a notable
theme was the importance of personal identity in understanding and engaging
with EDI issues. Respondents mentioned that their own experiences of
marginalization, promotion to management roles, and personal study, helped them
recognize the significance of EDI in their professional lives and understand
the broad array of protected characteristics in their EDI work. Group work and
community building were also identified as crucial for effective EDI education.
Respondents noted that working collaboratively, both in professional associations
and with colleagues, helped them maintain motivation and deepen their
understanding of EDI issues. Workshops, discussion groups, and online forums
were highlighted as valuable tools for fostering these connections and
promoting shared understandings. Another key theme was the need to embed an EDI
ethos throughout the entire curriculum rather than isolating it in specific
modules. Respondents advocated for integrating EDI principles into all aspects
of LIS education, including lectures, reading lists, and course content to
ensure a holistic approach. Gaps in the curriculum were also noted. First,
there was a lack of training in management and leadership, particularly in
areas like inclusive hiring practices and managing diverse teams. Respondents
felt unprepared to address these practical challenges, which are critical for
nurturing a diverse and equitable workplace. Second, fostering learner
positionality needs to be strengthened in the curriculum. Positionality refers
to how differences in social position, identity, and power dynamics shape
individuals' experiences and access to opportunities. Without developing an
understanding of these dynamics, students may struggle to fully grasp the
complexities of marginalization or may inadvertently impose their perspectives
on others. Lastly, respondents highlighted the need to broaden the scope of EDI
education to address all protected characteristics under UK law, not just race
and ethnicity.
Conclusion –
Three effective pedagogical strategies and three curricular gaps were
identified to help LIS graduate programs to improve their EDI-focused
curriculum. Specific approaches such as embedding EDI throughout the
curriculum, encouraging students to reflect on their own identities and
experiences with marginalization, and promoting collaborative activities were
recommended. In the process of curricular form, educators need to be mindful
about the tensions related to the pressure placed on those from marginalized
communities to share their experiences and lead EDI work, challenging existing
structures, and performative diversity. Lessons from archival practices can be
considered, such as adopting trauma-informed practices when engaging with
communities that have experienced historical or ongoing harm, and shifting towards
more relational and person-centered approaches to build relationships with
diverse user groups.
This
study offers valuable insights into how the LIS curriculum can better equip
graduates to address equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) issues in their
professional lives. Examined under the CRiSTAL Checklist for Appraising a User
Study (n.d.), this study is strong in the following areas: 1) the authors
clearly stated their research question; 2) the data collection instrument (an
online survey) had face validity and content validity; and 3) suggestions for
EDI-focused curricular reform were properly informed by the survey results and
the literature.
The
authors acknowledged several limitations that affect the generalizability of
the study findings. One major limitation is the small sample size, with only 59
valid responses from 733 survey invitations, yielding a response rate of just
8%. This low response rate limits the study’s representativeness and makes it
difficult to draw broader conclusions applicable to a wider range of LIS
programs or graduates. Additionally, the study focused on graduates from a
single UK-based LIS program, which restricts the geographical and institutional
diversity of perspectives. As a result, the findings may not be fully
generalizable to other LIS schools or international contexts. Additionally, the
authors pointed out underrepresentation of certain demographics within its
sample, further limiting the study’s generalizability. This underrepresentation
could skew the findings and leave out crucial perspectives, particularly from
marginalized or underrepresented groups, which are vital to understanding the
full scope of EDI challenges in the profession.
Another
limitation is the reliance on self-reported data from an online questionnaire.
While this method ensures anonymity and convenience for respondents, it also
introduces potential biases such as social desirability bias, where respondents
may provide answers they believe are expected or desirable rather than fully
reflective of their experiences. Furthermore, the study did not allow for
tracking individual responses across multiple questions, which restricted the
ability to analyze correlations between different variables, such as
demographic factors and specific EDI experiences.
The
authors did provide a copy of the survey questionnaire as an appendix, allowing
readers to more meaningfully assess the data collection instrument. Out of the
13 survey questionnaire times, 6 were open-ended questions. One downside of
having a significant number of open-ended questions is that there are no
opportunities for clarification or probing when respondents misinterpret the
questions, leading to irrelevant or unclear responses. Thus, this qualitative
approach, while valuable, may lack the depth that more extensive qualitative
methods, such as in-depth interviews or focus groups, could provide. These
methods might uncover richer, more nuanced insights into the complexities of
EDI education in LIS.
Overall,
a key strength of the study lies in its focus on practical, actionable
strategies, such as embedding EDI across all coursework and leveraging personal
identity and group work to deepen student engagement. Additionally, the study
identifies specific gaps in leadership and management training, providing a
targeted approach for improving professional preparation. Its relevance extends
beyond the LIS field, offering a framework that can be adapted to other
disciplines aiming to enhance EDI education and practices.
CRiSTAL
checklist for appraising a user study. (n.d.). In nettingtheevidence.pbwiki.com. Retrieved August 10, 2023, from http://nettingtheevidence.pbwiki.com/f/use.doc
Drewry,
C., Matsuno, S., Hicks, A., & Inskip, C. (2024). How could the Library and
Information Studies curriculum better prepare graduates to address equity,
diversity and inclusion issues in their workplace? Journal of Information Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515241245960