CSB - Minutes - November 30, 2020

S&B 2019 Report debrief_11302020 Monday, November 30, 2020 

11:13 AM 

Meeting Date: 11/30/2020 11:00 AM 

Location: Microsoft Teams Meeting 

Participants 

Rathmel, Angela (Meeting Organizer, 2021 LFSA Committee liaison)

Currie, Lea H. (2021 S&B member, Faculty rep) 

Torres, Matt (2021 S&B member, Staff rep) 

Broadwell, Mike (Ex Officio) 

Royer, Shannon (Ex Officio) 

Hallstrom, Leah Nelson (2021 S&B member, Staff rep) 

Orth-Alfie, Carmen (2019 S&B Chair, Faculty rep) 

Snow, A. (2019 S&B member, Staff rep) 

Wolfe, Erin (2019 S&B member, Faculty rep) 

Simmons, Samantha B (2019 S&B member, Staff rep) 

Ito, Michiko (Guest, Faculty) 

Outhier, Sara (Guest, Faculty) 

Introductions and status of S&B committee 

Before creating a special charge for the current S&B committee, LFSA asked current and former S&B to  review recommendations from 2019 report…  

∙ LFSA Executive Committees narrowly identify and define priorities to study and address concerns  regarding gender equity 

∙ LFSA Executive charge a committee to identify best practices, which the Libraries’ governance and  administration bodies can implement to improve equity within the KU Libraries.  

∙ LFSA Executive charge an ad hoc committee to complete, administer and analyze the opinion  survey. 

… and report back with any suggestions for continued or new special charge 

2019 committee includes: Carmen Orth-Alfie (Chair, Faculty rep), Erin Wolfe (Faculty rep), Samantha  Bishop Simmons (Staff rep), Ann Snow (Staff rep) 

2020 committee not convened. 

2021 S&B committee includes: Angie Rathmel (LFSA liaison), Shannon Royer/Mike Broadwell (ex officio),  Lea Currie (Faculty rep), Matt Torres (Staff rep), Leah Nelson (Staff rep), Michiko Ito (Faculty rep)  nominee, guest), Sara Outier (Faculty rep nominee, guest) 

What data is available 

1. Google document with article links (some saved as PDFs in that Drive) was sent to LFSA, but Carmen  will add all persons on the meeting call to access this.  

2. Mike is running current versions of the data provided to the former committee. The current  committee is using MS Teams.

Important points from former committee 

1. The article having to do with definitions helped understand multiple ways to understand equity, and  to specify with what type of equity is being studied, as each is measured differently. Hindsight, should  have these definitions back to LFSA for narrower selection for special charge. Other facts of interest: ∙ UK requires gender equity study for hiring. 

∙ Glass door transparent about methodology.  

∙ There is potentially relevant ACRL data available that the committee did not look at, do we have  access? 

2. There is a general lack of library gender equity data even externally -- a reluctance to study. For  example, ITHAKA was going to study it and weren't getting responses. Libraries responded that their  legal counsel advised not to. For public institutions, this is surprising given data is publicly available.  However, what is available publically from State of Kansas (and likely other public/government) can be  misleading from year to year, position to position, etc.  

∙ Important to understand what is included in salary figures and what can skew it. (e.g. salary  numbers budgeted vs expended; supplemental overages by position or extra duties). ∙ What cannot be made publically available that may influence salary (e.g. negotiation, other factors  mentioned by Mike) 

3. Former committee felt it was important to identify what is hoping to be learned. Still feels there is  merit in survey approach, but does require education, the complexity of which may be difficult to  address using a survey. Risk of confirmation bias. 

What's changed? What's missing? What's needed?  

∙ Binary vs gender fluidity as a factor. 

∙ Broader intersectional study is needed. 

∙ University (not committee known data) capable of running regression analysis. (see Appendix B  for factors recommended to consider). Requires determining what decision factors get certain  weights. 

∙ Important factor may go beyond salary numbers to decision-making latitude, opportunities for  advancement. 

∙ How does administrative supplement inflate numbers, particularly of certain gender populations. ∙ Feels this should be more University governance study (whether gender equity or other  intersectional concern), and not just limited to Libraries. 

Questions, discussion from current committee 

∙ Concern about survey for reasons expressed by Carmen (education, confirmation bias) and the  potential for identifiable data. 

∙ Scope of the diversity aspect and how to incorporate more current groups/information may  extend beyond this committee. 

∙ Is this the most important topic of salaried/hiring to be focused on now? 

Next Steps  

Angie will take back to LFSA (based on 2019 report and discussion) the following: ∙ Create a new special charge based on what is of most urgent present concern.  ∙ If LFSA doesn't provide a special charge, S&B pursue its standing charge (below):

...in consultation with the library administration and LFSA, prepares such reports and statistical  studies as may be needed to support the libraries budget request for salaries and seeks ways to  education staff concerning benefit options.  

Created with Microsoft OneNote 2016.