“Participatory Approaches for Designing and Sustaining Privacy-Oriented Library Services”

by Scott W.H. Young, Paige Walker, Shea Swauger, Michelle J. Gibeault, Sara Mannheimer, and Jason A. Clark

Image by Jason Goodman on Unsplash

This paper was written by members of the National Forum on Web Privacy and Web Analytics and the Digital Library Federation Technologies of Surveillance Working Group (ToS working group) who collaborated to integrate privacy awareness into the design of library technology, services, policy, and outreach. These members emphasize the role of collective action in achieving privacy for the library profession.

The paper provides an overview of recent relevant concerns within the library profession about vendor data collection. For example, for-profit companies that are selling learning analytics products to institutions are also selling an overly simplistic idea that more data enables greater insights. This practice is based on the assumption that students would rather trade privacy for efficiency, and that colleges must purchase data-collection systems to embrace innovation and the future. Surveillance capitalism is thus becoming more enmeshed in education administrative values.

Members from both organizations provide overviews, origins, and operations of participatory-design projects that they have implemented.

National Forum on Web Privacy and Web Analytics:

• Project: In the “Float your Boat” exercise, participants draw a boat that represents public education and engagement related to privacy issues (7).

• In this game-based exercise, participants “enact values of power sharing, mutual learning, and equal expertise with the goal of generating shared ideas for solving a shared problem” (7)

• The participatory design goal is to empower and elevate diverse voices equally through co-creation (7)

• In the drawing, the sails represent strengths and anchors represent challenges while boat floats on the “Lack of Transparency” sea.

  • Strengths identified in this exercise include:

    • awareness

    • Increasing funds for collective action

    • Centering users for seamless experiences as a service philosophy

    • Physical presence

    • Libraries are trusted

    • ALA Code of Ethics

  • User weaknesses include:

    • Learned helplessness/disengagement

    • Prioritizing convenience/time

    • Low literacy/tech knowledge

    • Overreliance on tools/lack of holistic approach

  • Peer weaknesses include:

    • Tunnel vision

    • Fear of change, complexity, technology

    • Inadequate professional development/behavior change

    • Lack of standards and proactive messaging

  • Administrative weaknesses include:

    • Focus on low coast over other benefits/values

    • Lack of stakeholder knowledge

    • Competing priorities

  • External weaknesses include:

    • Late-stage capitalism

    • Lack of accountability

    • Political climate/social service scarcity

    • Commodification of education

    • Corporate control of tools and funds

    • Industry standards and jargon

Digital Library Federation-Technologies of Surveillance Working Group:

• The ToS working group was formed in 2017 at a Digital Library Federation Forum conference as part of a session on Data Ethics in Library Technologies.

• Participants in the session were asked to “identify systems and structures that may be used for surveillance and evaluate existing systems at their home institutions”

• 65 people joining this meeting and participants and divided into five subgroups, in which set their own priorities, deadlines, and deliverables. Each group invested a different theme:

  • Library-Built Systems

  • Vendor-Built Systems

  • Instruction and Outreach

  • Professional Research Ethics

  • Advocacy

The paper includes an Appendix recording the reflective self-assessment and responses provided by the paper’s authors from both groups.

Lesson Plan: Have your students participate in the “Float your Boat” exercise that represents student engagement with privacy-related issues or the public’s engagement with privacy-related issues.

Questions for Librarians:

• Have you participated in any type of privacy-focused organization? How are the meetings structured? Do they incorporate participatory approaches towards the group’s vision, creations of goals, and deliverables?

• Does your institution incorporate a privacy-focused working group? Do you believe there is interest amongst members of your institution to create one?

• If you implemented the “Float your Boat” exercise in your classroom, how did your student’s sails and anchors compare to the sails and anchors identified by library professionals? What new insights do you have about students’ perception of privacy in their schools, communities, and the public at large?

Young, Scott W. H., Paige Walker, Shea Swauger, Michelle J. Gibeault, Sara Mannheimer, and Jason A. Clark. “Participatory Approaches for Designing and Sustaining Privacy-Oriented Library Services.” Journal of Intellectual Freedom & Privacy 4, no.4 (2020): 3–18. doi:10.5860/jifp.v4i4.7134.