Competency C
Articulate the importance of designing programs and services supportive of diversity, inclusion, and equity for clientele and employees.
Understanding the Competency
To me, this competency means recognizing that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are not optional or secondary considerations in library and information science. They are essential principles that should shape every program, policy, and service we design. It requires an active commitment to understanding the varied needs, identities, and lived experiences of both patrons and employees. Then building structures and practices that ensure everyone feels welcome, represented, and empowered to access information.
This goes beyond simply offering a “diverse” collection or posting a nondiscrimination statement. It involves embedding DEI into the very framework of our work: from the way we conduct outreach, to the language we use in policies, to how we hire and train staff. It also requires recognizing systemic barriers–historical, cultural, linguistic, and economic–that have excluded or marginalized communities, while working intentionally to remove those barriers.
Why It Matters to the Profession
Libraries and archives are not neutral spaces. Every decision we make about collections, programming, staffing, and access has an impact on who feels seen and who does not. As Honma (2005) argues, the profession has historically failed to interrogate its own structures of privilege and power, leading to inequities in both representation and access. Honma says that “in order for libraries to fulfill these goals, the struggles against racism and other forms of discrimination need to involve not just those who benefit from white privilege or those who suffer the effects of racism; rather, we must all become involved in the collective effort towards self and social emancipation,” (p.21). DEI-focused work challenges us to see where those inequities exist and take meaningful steps to address them.
For patrons, a library or archive that actively supports DEI can be a transformative resource. Inclusive programs allow people to see themselves reflected in the narratives and histories we preserve, while equitable policies ensure that access is not dependent on privilege. For employees, an equitable workplace fosters a sense of belonging, encourages collaboration across differences, and supports retention of talented staff from historically underrepresented groups (Espinal et al., 2018).
For me personally, this competency resonates because of my work as Vice President: Foundation for Delta Gamma, where I coordinated volunteer events and awareness activities focused on visual impairments. Through these efforts, I saw firsthand how meaningful it is when a community’s needs and experiences are recognized, supported, and made visible to others. Similarly, archival work that centers marginalized voices has the power to affirm identity and challenge dominant narratives–something I believe is a professional and moral responsibility.
Awareness of Diversity in an Information Environment
Diversity in an information environment manifests in many ways: cultural, linguistic, generational, socio-economic, and in terms of ability and accessibility needs. Understanding diversity means not only recognizing demographic differences but also understanding the intersectionality of these identities. As Crenshaw (1989) describes, “This focus on the most privileged group members marginalizes those who are multiply-burdened and obscures claims that cannot be understood as resulting from discrete sources of discrimination,” (p.315).
In practical terms, this awareness can influence program design. For example, an archive serving a multilingual community might consider translating finding aids, offering bilingual programming, or partnering with local organizations that work with immigrant populations. Similarly, a library designing services for patrons with visual impairments might integrate screen readers–compatible catalog systems, tactile maps, and staff trained in accessibility tools.
Impact of Diversity on the Organization
A diverse community challenges an information organization to think more broadly about collections, staffing, and outreach. It also impacts funding priorities, partnerships, and training needs. As Jaeger et al. (2011) point out, public libraries that fail to adapt to the diversity of their communities risk becoming irrelevant to those they intend to serve.
Internally, diversity among employees enriches the organization’s cultural competence. Staff from different backgrounds bring varied perspectives that can help identify biases in services or collections, leading to more inclusive outcomes. However, without policies that support equity–such as equitable pay scales, flexible work arrangements, and anti-bias training–diversity alone is not enough to create a healthy organizational culture.
Evidence 1
One of the most impactful projects I completed in the MLIS program that directly aligns with this competency was Assignment #5a: Grant Report – Braille Literacy for INFO 285: Applied Research Methods. This project required me to evaluate and report on a program designed to increase braille literacy among visually impaired adults through the use of adaptive technology.
Link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FTrxfxUVudN1pkxB5YzSOs2iqj4K_FMxM1miQtihMmQ/edit?usp=sharing
Description of the Artifact
The program I evaluated provided free, in-person training on braille devices, led by technology trainers–many of whom were visually impaired themselves. The goal was to create an empathetic, supportive learning environment where participants could improve their braille reading skills using refreshable braille devices.
My role in the project was to analyze the program’s evaluation data, interpret its findings, and make recommendations for improvement. The primary evaluation method relied on participant self-reporting, in which individuals described whether they had met their learning goals and identified any barriers they faced. This qualitative data provided rich insights into participant experiences, but also introduced limitations due to its subjectivity and lack of standardization.
The results were complex. While nearly half of the participants (47.62%) reported fully meeting their goals and 19.05% reported partially meeting them, the program also saw a slight decrease in self-reported ability to use the braille device from pre-program to post-program assessments. I explored possible reasons for this outcome, such as participants gaining a more realistic understanding of the device’s complexity after training or structural issues in program delivery.
The barriers identified included device issues, time constraints, lack of motivation, and insufficient training. Based on these findings, I recommended improvements such as additional instructor training, more frequent or hybrid-format classes, time management support, and a milestone-based reward system to increase motivation. I also proposed forming partnerships with device manufacturers to ensure stable equipment and provide technical support. Finally, I recommended incorporating more objective evaluation methods, such as tracking device usage frequency, braille reading speed, and completion rates, to complement the qualitative data.
Justification and Connection to the Competency
This artifact demonstrates my ability to understand and apply the principles of diversity, inclusion, and equity in program evaluation. The braille literacy program was designed specifically to meet the needs of a community often underrepresented in library and information services: visually impaired adults. My evaluation of the program required me to consider not only the instructional content and technology involved, but also the broader social and accessibility issues that can impact learning outcomes for this population.
By examining the program’s structure, delivery methods, and evaluation strategies, I was able to identify both strengths and areas for improvement that directly related to equitable access. For example, my recommendation to incorporate hybrid learning models recognized that transportation or location might be barriers for some participants, and that flexibility in program delivery could significantly improve accessibility. Similarly, my suggestion to partner with device manufacturers acknowledged that reliable, well-supported technology is essential to removing barriers for visually impaired learners.
This project also built on my leadership experience as Vice President: Foundation for Delta Gamma, where I coordinated volunteer events and awareness activities focused on visual impairments. That role gave me firsthand insight into the importance of designing programs that not only serve a diverse community, but also involve members of that community in leadership and instructional roles. In the braille literacy program, the fact that many of the trainers were visually impaired themselves reflected a commitment to authentic representation and peer-to-peer learning–a key element of inclusive program design.
Completing this project strengthened my understanding of how to assess whether a program is truly meeting the needs of its intended audience, and how to recommend changes that support both equitable access and improved learning outcomes. It reinforced my belief that DEI work in LIS is not just about who we serve, but how we design, implement, and evaluate services to ensure that they are meaningful, respectful, and effective for all participants.
This artifact therefore demonstrates my mastery of the competency by showing that I can:
Recognize the diverse needs of a specific user community.
Analyze how program design and delivery impact equitable access.
Recommend policy and structural changes that promote diversity, inclusion, and equity in both service delivery and program evaluation.
Evidence 2
Another artifact that demonstrates my mastery of this competency is a video presentation created for INFO 285: Applied Research Methods, where I presented the findings and recommendations from the braille literacy program evaluation as if I were reporting to program funders and organizational stakeholders.
Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GeYgKCJMR85mCCi_g_ZrgXPf7TTpdxdU/view?usp=sharing
Description of the Artifact
This artifact is a scripted presentation, supported by slides, that synthesized my evaluation of the “Braille Literacy for the Next Century” program. The presentation was structured to mirror how findings would be communicated to decision-makers in a real-world context. It included an overview of the program’s purpose, evaluation methods, findings and results, recommendations for improvement, and a closing call to action.
The presentation was intentionally designed to be accessible to a non-academic audience, using clear visuals and straightforward language. The narrative emphasized both successes–such as the 47.62% of participants who fully met their goals–and challenges, including the surprising decrease in participants’ self-reported device proficiency. Importantly, the presentation framed these results not as shortcomings, but as opportunities for growth, learning, and refinement in future iterations of the program.
Justification and Connection to the Competency
This artifact demonstrates competency mastery because it required me to translate research and evaluation findings into actionable recommendations, framed within a diversity and equity lens. Presenting to funders and leadership meant highlighting not only the statistical outcomes but also the broader social impact of the program on visually impaired adults. This aligns directly with the competency’s focus on designing programs that recognize and respond to diversity within a user community.
For example, one key recommendation I discussed was incorporating hybrid delivery models (both in-person and virtual), which directly addresses accessibility and inclusion. Not all participants may have the time, transportation, or physical capacity to attend every in-person session. Offering flexible models ensures a wider range of community members can benefit from the program, which is essential for equity. Similarly, recommending partnerships with braille device manufacturers reflects a proactive approach to reducing barriers and providing participants with consistent, reliable access to adaptive technology.
Equally significant is the communication aspect of this artifact. LIS professionals must often advocate for programs and resources in front of governing boards, funding agencies, and administrators who may not have direct experience with the communities being served. This presentation showed my ability to act as a bridge between data and decision-making, emphasizing both the human impact and the operational steps needed to improve outcomes. As Jaeger and Bertot (2011) note, the sustainability of inclusive programs often depends on institutional buy-in and clear communication of their value. By framing the findings in a way that highlighted successes while constructively addressing challenges, I demonstrated the advocacy and communication skills necessary to ensure DEI-centered programs receive continued support.
This artifact demonstrates how I can analyze data through the lens of diversity, inclusion, and equity, and then translate those insights into a persuasive narrative tailored to stakeholders. It showcases both the evaluative and communicative aspects of the competency: understanding how program design impacts marginalized communities and effectively advocating for improvements that promote equitable access. By creating a presentation that framed findings as both progress and opportunity, I modeled how LIS professionals can champion inclusive programs in a way that inspires confidence and continued investment.
Evidence 3
The third artifact that demonstrates my understanding and mastery of this competency is a group project completed for INFO 202: Information Retrieval System Design, where my team and I analyzed and proposed a redesign of the website for the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA).
Description of the Artifact
The project required us to evaluate the structure, organization, and accessibility of SFMOMA’s website and then create a redesigned site map that would simplify navigation and make resources more intuitive for users. Our analysis involved a close look at the existing site, which contained roughly thirty pages, many of which were repetitive or hidden in confusing ways. We identified the strengths of the site–such as its thorough content and multiple entry points for browsing–but also found significant barriers, including cluttered menus, redundancy, and a lack of visibility for important programs.
Our redesign proposal streamlined the site by consolidating overlapping categories, simplifying the navigation menu, and making essential visitor information more prominent. We placed the “Plan Your Visit” section first to improve accessibility for first-time or out-of-town visitors, made community and educational opportunities easier to locate, and condensed overly fragmented shop and event categories. The end result was a proposed site that emphasized clarity, reduced unnecessary barriers, and better aligned with SFMOMA’s mission of inclusivity.
Justification and Connection to the Competency
This artifact demonstrates my ability to apply diversity, equity, and inclusion principles in a digital environment by showing how website design choices can either support or hinder equitable access. SFMOMA explicitly states its commitment to being an inclusive, accessible museum for people of color, LGBTQ+ individuals, women, and people with disabilities. However, our evaluation revealed that this commitment was not consistently reflected in the digital experience. Key opportunities for engagement, such as community initiatives and partnerships, were buried in donation-focused sections, making them less visible to the public.
Our redesign addressed these shortcomings by re-centering the site around diverse user needs. By simplifying navigation and reducing redundancy, we created a design that would be easier to use for people with different levels of digital literacy. By bringing accessibility and community-oriented content to the forefront, we emphasized inclusion as a structural design choice rather than a hidden feature. Even small changes, such as consolidating categories in the shop or events section, reduced cognitive load for users who might otherwise find the site overwhelming.
This project reinforced for me that accessibility is not limited to physical or technological accommodations; it also encompasses the design of digital environments. A museum website serves as a “front door” to its collections and programs. If that door is confusing or inaccessible, entire communities may be excluded from participating. Through this project, I developed a stronger understanding of how web architecture, information retrieval systems, and user experience intersect with DEI goals.
The SFMOMA website redesign project provided me with practical experience in identifying barriers to access and proposing solutions that align with institutional values of diversity and inclusion. It demonstrated the importance of aligning mission statements with concrete design decisions, ensuring that commitments to equity are reflected in how information is presented and accessed.
For me personally, this artifact connects back to my broader interest in accessibility within archives, museums, and cultural heritage institutions. Just as in libraries, museum websites must be designed with equity in mind if they are to serve diverse communities effectively. This project showed me how theoretical principles of information retrieval can be applied to real-world design challenges, and how intentional, user-centered design can create more inclusive and meaningful information environments.
Conclusion
In my future career, I will apply this competency by focusing on user-centered program and service design that reduces barriers to access and ensures that information systems work effectively for a wide range of communities. My interest in archives and asset management naturally connects to this approach, as organizing and presenting information in clear, inclusive, and accurate ways is essential to professional practice. To remain current, I will continue engaging with professional organizations such as the Society of American Archivists (SAA) and the Association of Moving Image Archivists (AMIA), which provide guidance on accessibility standards, inclusive metadata practices, and emerging technologies. By staying connected to these resources, I can ensure that my work in preservation and information management continues to reflect best practices that support equitable access and meaningful engagement for all users.
References
Crenshaw, K. (1998). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. In A. Phillips (Ed.), Feminism and politics (pp. 139–167). Oxford University Press. (Reprinted from University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989, pp. 139–167)
Espinal, I., Sutherland, T., & Roh, C. (2018). A holistic approach for inclusive librarianship: Decentering whiteness in our profession. Library Trends, 67(1), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2018.0030
Honma, T. (2005). Trippin’ over the color line: The invisibility of race in library and information studies. InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.5070/D412000540
Jaeger, P. T., Bertot, J. C., Kodama, C. M., Katz, S. M., & DeCoster, E. J. (2011). Describing and measuring the value of public libraries: The growth of the Internet and the evolution of library value. First Monday, 16(11). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v16i11.3765
