Introduction
This portfolio is a curated selection, not a comprehensive record of my work or experiences. Each piece of evidence was chosen with intention, reflecting both its relevance and its ability to demonstrate competency mastery. The e-Portfolio was initially created in Squarespace, with evidence hyperlinked to Google Drive and accompanied by descriptive labels for each artifact.
Competency A
Ethics are not abstract ideals separate from professional practice; they are the frameworks that guide how information professionals make decisions, manage risk, and uphold trust. This competency narrative explores how foundational values such as intellectual freedom, confidentiality, accuracy, and responsible stewardship operate across libraries, archives, and corporate information environments. Drawing on academic coursework and applied professional experience, it demonstrates how ethical awareness is embedded in daily information work—from evaluating sources and managing access to navigating intellectual property and rights restrictions in creative asset management.
Competency B
This competency explores how organizational context shapes information practice across corporate, academic, cultural, and governmental settings. Through comparative analysis, I demonstrate how differences in mission, governance, and legal constraints influence access, preservation, and information use. This work highlights the need for adaptability, particularly in environments where intellectual property, risk management, and user needs must be carefully balanced.
Competency C
This competency explores the role of inclusive, user-centered program and service design in library and information science. Through applied research, evaluation projects, and information system redesign, this section demonstrates how thoughtful design decisions can reduce barriers to access and better serve diverse communities.
Competency E
Information retrieval systems determine how information is organized, searched, and accessed within digital environments. Designing and evaluating these systems requires understanding how metadata, indexing, and search interfaces work together to support efficient discovery. In libraries, archives, and digital asset management systems, well-designed retrieval systems ensure that collections remain usable and accessible over time.
Competency F
This reflective e-portfolio entry examines my development of Competency F during my MLIS program at San José State University. Competency F focuses on the selection, evaluation, organization, and preservation of both physical and digital information objects. Through three artifacts—a preservation analysis of silk textiles, a digital photograph preservation project, and a finding aid for a digital animation collection—I demonstrate how these principles guide responsible collection stewardship. Together, these projects illustrate how archival theory and collection management practices support the long-term preservation and accessibility of cultural heritage materials.
Competency M
Every setting I have worked in has come with the same problem. The information function is almost never the organization’s core business, which means its value has to be argued rather than assumed.
I spent the last few weeks writing about professional leadership and communication for my MLIS portfolio, and I kept arriving at the same pair of moves. Something gets raised that was not already on the agenda. Then it gets explained in terms the audience already values. Neither move is sufficient alone. A preservation argument made to people responsible for a budget will fail. So will a good idea nobody ever hears.
The three pieces of work I chose look unrelated. An evaluation of a grant-funded literacy program, a proposal to two executives, and a metadata project. They turned out to be the same problem in different clothing.
Competency N
Competency N contains two requirements that are easy to collapse into one. The first is evaluation. The second is that the evaluation rests on measurable criteria. Counting how many people attended a program is measurement, while deciding whether that attendance was good is evaluation. What separates them is a criterion. This essay examines where criteria come from, whether built locally or adopted from a professional body, and demonstrates three artifacts that apply criteria to a digital collection, to a program that did not yet exist, and to a disaster plan tested by simulation.