Kate, thank you so much for writing this. I think this information will be so helpful to a lot of us. As a web services person who gets tasked with building a lot of forms, I really appreciate you taking the time to write and to share.
-Val > On Dec 7, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Kate Deibel <[email protected]> wrote: > > I admit I was about got a bit of irritated subtweeting on this, but I'll move > it into the mailing list. > > It is good and all that you responded to feedback, but I'd like to talk more > about how to ask a survey question on gender. > > First, I'd like to point everyone to the great resource that the Human Right > Campaign has put together on this topic: > https://www.hrc.org/resources/collecting-transgender-inclusive-gender-data-in-workplace-and-other-surveys > > It's not perfect. For example, I disagree with their use of female/male > instead of woman/man because that opens up a giant can of worms as to whether > some terms are strictly biological versus social. It's a critical studies > minefield pit at times. However, their approach and options are worth > pointing out. > > Note that their recommended language is to use two questions. The first is > similar to the one used in Rowan survey. It has five options: > Woman > Man > Non-binary/third gender > Prefer to self-describe ____________ > Prefer not to say > > (I changed the language for the first two) > > Note several important differences. First, the third option is not "Other" > but specifically states "Non-binary/third gender." Other is not a great term > to use when asking about someone's identity. It's problematic. It focuses on > a person being so different you can't find the words. It's... um... > OTHERING... literally. To help you understand why this is hurtful, take any > diversity question (race, religion, gender, etc.) and take the entry you > would select and change the text to Other. It casts you as so unimportant to > not specify it. Your identity belongs in a junk drawer. > > Also note that the question includes an option self-describe. Language is > fluid, and identity language doubly-so. No fixed answer survey question for > identity will ever be perfect. Let there be a self-description field. All > good survey software allows such an option. And yes, this does make data > analysis more complex, but that's the price in wanting to do research in > human diversity. > > The HRC's second question asks if a person identifies as transgender? This is > important as it complements the previous question. I'll use myself as an > example. I am a trans woman. I identify as a woman and would answer such on > the first question since it makes no distinction as to trans or cis status. I > also identify as transgender as I see it as a different perspective on a > being a woman than if I were cisgender. I would answer yes to the second > question as I see it providing more info to the survey that may be relevant. > But my answers alone would not be the only groupings you may see. This added > question allows for more coverage of respondent answers. > > > > > Katherine Deibel | PhD > Inclusion & Accessibility Librarian > Syracuse University Libraries > T 315.443.7178 > [email protected] > 222 Waverly Ave., Syracuse, NY 13244 > Syracuse University > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Code for Libraries <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Sharon > Whitfield > Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 10:23 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Gender and Organizational Citizenship Behavior Survey > in LIbrary Technology Departments > > Good morning, > Based on survey feedback about gender being non-binary, I have added "Other" > as an option to the question about gender identification. This feedback was > greatly appreciated it. My apologies that the research survey was not as > inconclusive as it should have been. > > If you wish to participate in the survey, please click the following link: > https://rowan.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_4GcTfQY07e6Wisl > > Thanks, > Sharon Whitfield > > Ed. D. Candidate > > Rowan University > College of Education > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 9:11 AM Sharon Whitfield <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Good Morning, >> >> >> >> You are invited to participate in an online research survey titled >> Gender and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors in Library Technology >> Departments. >> You have received this email to participate because you are a member >> of the Code4lib distribution list. >> >> >> >> The survey may take approximately 10-20 minutes to complete. Your >> participation is voluntary. >> >> >> >> The purpose of this study is to address issues of organizational >> justice for women technology librarians who experience the >> gendered-nature of organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB). Organ >> (1988) identified five specific OCB categories: >> >> -Altruism: Helps enhance an individual's performance >> >> -Conscientiousness: Consideration of others >> >> -Sportsmanship: Consideration of the organization as a team >> >> -Courtesy: prevents problems and maximizes time >> >> -Civic virtue: Serve the interests of the organization >> >> >> >> The goal of this study is to bring to light issues of organizational >> justice for women technology librarians because of the gendered nature >> of organizational citizenship behaviors and explore how change agents >> may use this study to promote organizational justice for women >> technology librarians. This research study focuses particularly on academic >> libraries. >> >> >> >> If you have any questions about the survey, you can contact Dr. Ane >> Turner Johnson at 856-256-4500 x3818 or [email protected] >> >> >> >> If you wish to participate, please click the following link: >> https://rowan.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_4GcTfQY07e6Wisl >> >> >> >> >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Sharon Whitfield >> >> Ed. D. Candidate >> >> Rowan University >> >> College of Education >> >> >> >> Study has been approved by Rowan IRB. IRB# Pro2018000032 >> >> >> >> >> >> Reference: >> >> Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good >> soldier >> syndrome: Lexington Books/DC Heath and Com. >>
