Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Draft Charge:

Goals (incomplete, needs cleaning up):

...

This group will develop guidelines for the critical and ethical examination, review, and remediation of existing description and descriptive workflows. While we will ensure that the guidelines are plausible, this group is not responsible for finding/allocating resources or the overall implementation across CUL.

Goals:

...

Practical outputs:

Members:

  • Jasmine Burns (lead)
  • Tabitha Cary
  • Julia Corrice
  • Laura Daniels
  • Dianne Dietrich
  • Katerina Dimitriadou-Shuster
  • Marcie Farwell
  • Liz Parker
  • Ben Wrubel

NOTES

2 phases 1) past practice and 2) staging the questions for future/best practice

how to get from creating guidelines to implementation? can we make sure to deliver the best practices portion of the charge to ourselves.

central info gathering and dissemination to become aware of all the efforts across many silos, also identifying places where remediation has been happening

we dont know what we dont know? what is underdescribed and how do we figure out the details around past practices?

what could an environmental scan be and what do we mean by an analysis of past practice?

instead of everything we do with description, what if we did a scan of what remediation efforts have happened? what worked or did not work? when our efforts failed what did that look like?

what are our markers of failure?

...