For the seventh #radlibchat at 20.00 (GMT) on Tuesday 8th March, we will be discussing critical information literacy praxis, using Eamon Tewell’s open access article ‘ ‘Decolonizing social justice work‘ blog post to shape questions about decolonizing critical information literacy.
The discussion will be hosted by @RadicalLibs on Twitter using the #radlibchat hashtag.
You can suggest questions or points for discussion, or comment on the questions ahead of time using the #radlibchat etherpad – or comment on this blog post.
Citing the work of educator Paulo Freire, Tewell (p. 26) argues that:
Critical pedagogy is in essence a project that positions education as a catalyst for social justice…
Q1. How far do you consider critical pedagogy in #infolit to be a form of social justice work?
Definitions of ‘information literacy’ are contested and standards, codes and and frameworks abound in our professional organisations. Can we “hate the framework, love the frame” as Kevin Seeber suggests?
Q2. How do you reconcile critical #infolit approaches with standards such as the ACRL ‘Framework…’ or the SCONUL ‘Seven Pillars’?
We talk about praxis as a reciprocal combination of theory and practice, but it is not necessarily obvious how to put theory into practice in #infolit work. Jessimaka recently asked about practical examples of critical pedagogy, which resonated with me:
Q3. What does critical-informed #infolit look like to you, in practice? Practical examples from your work very welcome.
Previous #critlib chats on critical pedagogy and information literacy included discussion of practical problems using a critical approach in the neoliberal academy, especially when information literacy is set up as a “one shot” session.
Q4. Can we reconcile a critical #infolit approach with a ‘student satisfaction’ agenda, and marketized higher education?
Q5. What suggestions can you offer to include critical approaches in “one shot” #infolit, if this is all that is available?
April Hathcock (2016) problematizes the false dichotomy of theory vs. practice in a recent blog post, and calls instead for decolonizing of theory:
We’ve been framing the debate as theory vs practice or lived experience vs theory, but for those of us who critique critical theoretical work from within, we’re talking about something much more nuanced. We’re not saying theory has no place or lived experience can’t be theoretical. What we are saying is that much of the theory we see and hear from our colleagues remains largely colonized, that is, it is largely white, male, Western, cis-het, Judeo-Christian.
Q6. How can we move to decolonize our own critical #infolit practices?
Tewell’s closing paragraph (p. 37) emphasizes the importance of developing critical praxis in librarianship:
It is the writings, words, and work of others that helps us as a profession to achieve praxis via the reciprocity of theory, practice and action, and to thereby provide educational opportunities with emancipatory possibilities for both our students and ourselves.
Q7. How could we frame this approach with respect to the centrality of lived experience emphasized by Hathcock and others?
Q8. Finally, Tewell’s paper is a review. What recommended reading or further suggestions would you add to it about critical #infolit?
Hathcock, A. (2016) ‘Decolonizing social justice work’, At the Intersection, 2 March. Available at: https://aprilhathcock.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/decolonizing-social-justice-work/
Tewell, E. (2015). ‘A decade of critical information literacy: a review of the literature’, Communications in Information Literacy, 9(1) [Online]. Available at: http://www.comminfolit.org/index.php?journal=cil&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=v9i1p24