Discussion board post on information literacy

by Stacy Torian

This week’s readings encapsulate many of my opinions on what it means to be a

forward-thinking librarian. Jonathan Cope and Angela Pashia argue strongly for why librarians

should question the “structural oppression” (Pashia, 2017, p. 86), “White Institutional Presence,”

(Pashia, 2017, p. 88), and the “social power relationships” (Cope, 2009, p. 13) that underlie

much of the thinking about authority and scholarship. Cope made two remarks that I found

especially pertinent to librarianship practice, namely that “the development of students’ capacity

to pose thoughtful questions (as opposed to clear answers) is as important as their ability to

locate, access, organize, evaluate, and apply information in the research process” (2009, p. 16)

and that “students are asked by educators to use ‘authoritative’ sources without critically

examining the systems in which that ‘authority’ is established and articulated” (p.16). I

remember reading a critique of the peer review process years ago in which peer review was

criticized for being a process that rewards researchers who uphold the status quo thinking within

their professions. One especially vehement critic of the peer review process is Richard Smith

(2006), a medical doctor and former editor of the British Medical Journal (BMJ). He claims that

there is little to show that peer review actually results in better quality papers (2006). While I

think there is some value to the peer review process, the process itself should be viewed with as

much skepticism as the research that is or is not vetted by it.

Cope’s assertion that “most discussions of IL stress the development of applied skills

that assume a rational, unconstrained information-seeking agent operating in an environment

free of social hierarchies” (2009, p.15) somewhat contradicts the experiences I have had in

most of my LIS classes; however, I have met a number of librarians in my life who seem content

to endorse existing class and academic hierarchies. This is concerning, because some of the

people who could benefit most from a library’s resources will be discouraged from using the

library if they sense a condescending vibe at play there.

 Even though many LIS professionals are deeply concerned about social hierarchies,

Cope’s point about the focus on applied skills is definitely justified. There is a lot of pressure on

librarians to be tech experts, teaching experts, research experts, and organizational experts, but

in a society of unequal power relations, who is benefiting the most from our expertise -- “the

agent that is affected by [the] power” or “the agent that wields power”? (Cope, 2009, p. 15).

The article by Angela Pashia was a thought-provoking continuation of the arguments

made by Cope. It introduced me to the term “White Institutional Presence” and made me

question how often I accept the use of the term “diversity” without realizing how it can be used

to avoid “critically engaging in a discussion of structural racism” (Pashia, 2017, p. 89). I do think

that there is a place for discussions about diversity, but I agree with Pashia that those

discussions need to happen alongside a critique of white hegemony.

Both Pashia (2017) and Watkins (2011) wrote about the role of social media in

marginalized communities. As someone who is often leery of social media, I enjoyed reading

Pashia’s assessment of how social media can challenge a dominant media narrative (2017,

p.96) and Watkins’ description of social media being used as a psychological coping tool (2012,

p. 5). Interestingly, Watkins’ remarks about the digital divide and the “quality of online

engagement” reminded me of how important traditional reading, writing, and math literacy skills

are to people seeking to take full advantage of modern technological tools.

References

Cope, J. (2009). Information literacy and social power. In Critical Library Instruction Theories

and Methods (Vol. 13, No. 28, pp. 13-28). Litwin Books in association with GSE

Research.

Craig Watkins, S. (2011). Digital divide: Navigating the digital edge. International Journal of

Learning and Media. 3(2), 1-12. doi: 10.1162/ijlm_a_00072.

Pashia, A. (2017). Examining structural oppression as a component of information literacy: A

call for librarians to support #BlackLivesMatter through our teaching. Journal of

Information Literacy, 11(2), 86-104.

Smith R. (2006). Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals. Journal of

the Royal Society of Medicine, 99(4), 178-82.