Here is another very thought provoking article, one which I recommend. I must admit it took a second read for me to get to grips with the writing; nevertheless, Boyce poses some good probing questions as she tries to grapple with the concept of information literacy for herself.
In her second paragraph she opens by stating that she questions the:
‘construction of information literacy; as it has an ‘indeterminate quality’, which seems to encompass everything from computer competence, search savvy…right through to a philosophy of learning how to learn…the strongly print, bibliocentric logic of information literacy seems to me to be inappropriate for the anarchic environment of digital information.’
Her article examines the meaning of the terms along with the context. She calls for another look at the theory, worried by the bibliocentric bias to the concept and how this fits in with the anarchic digital world. One does need to remember that that article was written seven years ago and in that time the theory has move on, yet I believe there is still an element of truth in what she says.
Again I feel myself agreeing with Boyce when she forcefully states:
‘I am troubled by the universality and totalising effects of this movement, by the impetus of the phenomenon so vastly understood, yet subject to such uncritical, fervent allegiance. ‘Against the seemingly universal endorsement of information literacy.’
Drawing to a conclusion, the discussion moves on to ask the question is IL simply a pre-occupation of the teacher/librarian? (Is it a product of a profession too close to its subject?). For Boyce its only play a part in the story it simply reflects a sectoral (i.e. library) viewpoint and that this preoccupation with their particular paradigm has distracted profession to coming to terms within a wider and broader overview of literacy in the new communications environment; ‘it has blinded us to the way in which we have been positioned materially, culturally and socially..’
No comments:
Post a Comment