Presentation presented in the ALISE 2023 conference in October 2023 in Pittsburgh - Juried Panel presentation. The presentation discusses socially just research impact assessment support from the LIS discipline. Research and research impact assessment have been greatly transformed over the years and thus providing an opportunity for the LIS discipline to explore equitable and context-sensitive approaches that cater for marginalized groups; and how these approaches can be embedded in LIS scholarship and education. Andiswa discuss challenges and propose solutions on how research impact assessment support from the LIS discipline can be more inclusive, flexible, and equitable in practice and in curricula.

1. Research Frameworks for Multiple
Ways of Knowing: Social Justice,
Methodology, and Policy
Lynn Silipigni Connaway, OCLC Research, United States
Clara M. Chu, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, United States
Dick Kawooya, University of South Carolina, United States
Andiswa Mfengu, University of Cape Town, South Africa

2. Research impact assessment
 Research impact - the influence, effect, contribution, change or benefits that result from
the research (academia and beyond)
 Rational for assessment (UN SDG’s, values, etc.)
 Assessment is an integral part of knowledge production in HE spaces, however
“assessment is rarely brought into the decolonization conversation” (Godsell 2021)
 Assessment performs a crucial inclusion or exclusion function
 Call to incentivize and recognize broader research activities and contributions
 Decolonized and democratized research impact assessment practices - contextualized and
co-created
2

3. Knowledge production
 Epistemologies and knowledge-making practices (global north vs south)
 Beliefs, culture, norms, what is valid and acceptable
 Different ways of knowing – indigenous knowledge, indigenous languages, etc.
 Current knowledge practices - epistemic injustices which reinforces these colonial structures
 Prioritization of the English language - citations and international recognition (linguistic apartheid)
 Unjust knowledge hierarchies – power imbalances
 Shifting away from the ‘rat race’ of metrics towards more holistic processes focused on valuing
and nurturing talent
3

4. Challenges and biases
 Inherent biases with language and geographic location
 The differences in citation patterns between disciplines, lack of coverage of certain
disciplines and bias in journal indexing thus under-representing some areas of the
world in their coverage
 Gender and race biases
 Global north databases – source of evidence for impact
 Open science and open access are currently not adequately recognized and
incentivized
4

5. Challenges and biases
 Extracts from interviews with researchers/academics at the University of Cape Town
“The publication process can be crippling for early career academics because it is biased and racist,
gatekeeping takes place as it is an elite environment. Many early career researchers find that they
don’t have the correct surnames, like Smith, to be allowed to publish within those journals”. - UCT
Researcher
“If your surname is Nxumalo and not Jefferson it has a different kind of feel in how it gets cited”. -
UCT Academic
5

6. Curriculum and pedagogy
 Integrate emerging trends such research impact assessment into LIS curricula for
professional education of professionals
 Intentionally design curriculum to include ways in how professionals can be more
socially justice in practice
 Collaboration and co-creation
 Be willing to dismantle what is not serving our needs to allow the new
 Flexibility – pedagogically and content inclusion
6

7. Professionals
 Evolving new roles in scholarly communication in the digital environment
 Can and should take a leading and key role in how these criteria are developed and what tools
institutions should invest in for equitable and responsible research impact assessment practice
 Advocate for equitable and responsible research impact assessment
 Academic libraries have always been involved in raising awareness about new trends such as open
access, research data management, etc. and in training of researchers in these trends - this role
should now expand into the area of research impact assessment
 Communities of practice, resource guides, be flexible and willing to acknowledge different ways of
knowing
7

8. Scholarship
 What research are we doing
 Who is part of the conceptualisation
(monological approaches)
 What questions are we asking
 How are we asking these questions
8
 What theories and worldviews are we
using to understand these problems
 Power imbalances in LIS scholarship
 Social justice imperatives

9. Scholarship
 Research in research impact assessment in the context of EDIA - marginalized voices, engage with
communities we are researching, critical of theories we use, the lens we are viewing the problem
in
 Responsible research assessment - approaches to assessment which incentivize, reflect, and
reward the plural characteristics of high-quality research, in support of diverse and inclusive
research cultures (Curry et al. 2020).
 Equitable and context-sensitive approaches that cater for marginalized groups
 Cultural sensitivity - differences and local realities
 Empower marginalized communities
 Equitable, respectful, ethical research practices
9

10. Policy implications
 Policy development or transformation processes
 Alignment - values, systems, structures and policy
“There is a need to center social and broader impact from research, trying to find those softer
spaces and centering them” – UCT Researcher
 Alignment of open access and open science related policy and research impact
assessment practices
“The institution needs to decide what is valuable and then valuing those things in policies and
tenure processes” – UCT Researcher
 Advocacy - policy developments and transformations
10

11. Conclusion
 Transformative and socially just approaches
 Values - EDIA embody these principles (modelling, create a safe space, etc.)
 Critical diversity literacy
 Engaged scholarship – empower marginalised communities
 Authentic collaborations – communities and scholars/educators
 Intentional link between practice, scholarship and curriculum
 Alignment of policy, practice and scholarship
11