Hello! This is your introduction to creating a local LibGuide Open Review Discussion Session (LORDS) working group.
This readme hopes to explain the tools, why they are provided, and ways to use them. They are all suggestions. Any feedback (or ways of utility!) is appreciated.
In this toolkit, there are the following items:
About the Project
The LibGuides Open Review Discussion Sessions (LORDS) Project works towards cultivating a community across California State University Libraries that provides space for critique, conversation, and criticality. In using critical race theory to acknowledge structures of publishing, libraries, and reference, this LibGuide review system works towards holding criticality to fight against the farce of neutrality within knowledge organizations. Started at a predominately white institution, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, we hope to bring anti-racist practices to our LibGuides by understanding and acknowledging the white supremacist structures of publishing, libraries, and reference in our work. Furthermore, in a CSU-wide system, we hope to establish a people-to-people network in working towards anti-racist practices. This project also integrates other dimensions of criticality, including but not limited to web usability best practices and insights from critical information literacy.
The LibGuides Project works on local and intercollegial levels. Local sessions are organized by various members of the libraries participating. It is possible for an individual from a different institution to attend a local session. Additionally, there are CSU-wide sessions quarterly, organized by the CSU Publishing Interest Group.
This google spreadsheet includes sample rubrics from the CSU-wide and local campus sessions to help demonstrate options for the language, the sections, and the set up - the spreadsheet format has presented itself to be the easiest method of having an open documentation of the review session. Each institution has adjusted the language of evaluation according to the institution’s needs. The language and expectations can and should be adjusted for your individual institution.
The original rubric and the language chosen for it was created by a group at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo: jaime ding, Laura Sorvetti, Russ White, and Sarah Lester during the fall of 2019. The ideals were developed through conversation, the levels not necessarily grading for perfection, but different imaginations.
This FAQ is a compilation of questions that have come up repeatedly throughout the discussion sessions. The answers may be helpful language to understand more context for the conversation. After the questions and answers, a list of resources (scholarship, twitter threads, LibGuides, articles) that may help provide more context for the ideas in the rubric and the project are provided.
This document holds suggestions mostly directed towards facilitators of the sessions to set up and run the sessions. However, it can be read by all participants to be more familiar with the flow of conversation. It includes a few phrases, community considerations, and practices that have helped make the sessions at Cal Poly and the CSU wide sessions smoother each time.
This is a sample of the questions to send out after a session to guide conversation and comfortability for the next session. This form was specifically designed to be sent out after the CSU wide LORDS Pilot.
A continuously updated file about the process of CSU’s LORDS project. See examples of integration at various institutions, updates about schedules, and more.
The Publishing Interest Group will also maintain a related Confluence page.
This toolkit was compiled and written by jaime ding (jpding@calpoly.edu) in January 2021. Feedback/comments welcome.