D. Flynn, Teresa Crewe, R. Hare, Krishna Maroo, A. Preater
{"title":"‘They burn so bright whilst you can only wonder why’","authors":"D. Flynn, Teresa Crewe, R. Hare, Krishna Maroo, A. Preater","doi":"10.11645/17.1.3361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article we connect critical librarianship and its practices of information literacy (IL) with working-class experiences of higher education (HE). Although the research literature and professional body of knowledge of critical information literacy (CIL), is one of the most theoretically-developed areas of wider critical librarianship (Critlib) movement, working-class knowledge and experiences remain underrepresented.\nOne reason for this is that the values, behaviour and assumptions of library and HE workers are shaped by a HE system which inculcates middle-class values and cultural capitals within students, and stigmatises working-class students as lacking or in deficit. Hegemonic, or non-critical, IL proselytises middle-class values and assumptions about academic practices and skills development including the notion of an ideal student with behaviour and markers of identity which reflect those most privileged by wider society. In contrast CIL, framed as the socially-just practice of IL is theoretically well-placed to support working-class library workers in destabilising this alongside middle-class accomplices.\nEmploying Yosso’s (2005) concept of community and cultural wealth (CCW), we analyse how library workers can recognise working-class cultural wealth within the context of CIL and wider working practices. As such narrative accounts are lacking in the literature, we utilise collaborative autoethnography (CAE) (Chang et al., 2013) to consider and interpret our own experiences of libraries when we were university students ourselves, and more recently as HE workers of working-class heritage.","PeriodicalId":38111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Literacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Information Literacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11645/17.1.3361","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In this article we connect critical librarianship and its practices of information literacy (IL) with working-class experiences of higher education (HE). Although the research literature and professional body of knowledge of critical information literacy (CIL), is one of the most theoretically-developed areas of wider critical librarianship (Critlib) movement, working-class knowledge and experiences remain underrepresented.
One reason for this is that the values, behaviour and assumptions of library and HE workers are shaped by a HE system which inculcates middle-class values and cultural capitals within students, and stigmatises working-class students as lacking or in deficit. Hegemonic, or non-critical, IL proselytises middle-class values and assumptions about academic practices and skills development including the notion of an ideal student with behaviour and markers of identity which reflect those most privileged by wider society. In contrast CIL, framed as the socially-just practice of IL is theoretically well-placed to support working-class library workers in destabilising this alongside middle-class accomplices.
Employing Yosso’s (2005) concept of community and cultural wealth (CCW), we analyse how library workers can recognise working-class cultural wealth within the context of CIL and wider working practices. As such narrative accounts are lacking in the literature, we utilise collaborative autoethnography (CAE) (Chang et al., 2013) to consider and interpret our own experiences of libraries when we were university students ourselves, and more recently as HE workers of working-class heritage.
在这篇文章中,我们将批判性图书馆及其信息素养实践与工人阶级的高等教育经验联系起来。尽管批判性信息素养(CIL)的研究文献和专业知识体系是更广泛的批判性图书馆学(Critlib)运动中理论最发达的领域之一,但工人阶级的知识和经验仍然代表性不足。其中一个原因是,图书馆和高等教育工作者的价值观、行为和假设是由高等教育系统塑造的,该系统在学生中灌输中产阶级价值观和文化资本,并将工人阶级学生污名化为缺乏或赤字。IL宣扬中产阶级的价值观和对学术实践和技能发展的假设,包括理想学生的概念,其行为和身份标志反映了那些在更广泛的社会中享有特权的人。相比之下,CIL被认为是IL的社会公正实践,理论上完全可以支持工人阶级图书馆工作者与中产阶级同谋一起破坏这一局面。利用Yosso(2005)关于社区和文化财富(CCW)的概念,我们分析了图书馆工作者如何在CIL和更广泛的工作实践的背景下识别工人阶级的文化财富。由于文献中缺乏这样的叙述性叙述,我们利用合作民族志(CAE)(Chang et al.,2013)来思考和解释我们自己在大学生时代以及最近作为工人阶级传统的高等教育工作者时对图书馆的体验。
期刊介绍:
JIL is an international, peer-reviewed journal that aims to investigate information literacy in all its forms to address the interests of diverse IL communities of practice. To this end it publishes articles from both established and new authors in this field. JIL welcomes contributions that push the boundaries of IL beyond the educational setting and examine this phenomenon as a continuum between those involved in its development and delivery and those benefiting from its provision. This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. The journal is published under the Gold Open Access model, because the CILIP Information Literacy Group believes that knowledge should be shared. It is therefore free and requires no subscription. In addition authors are not required to pay a fee to be published in JIL. The Journal of Information Literacy is published twice a year. Additional, special themed issues are also possible and the editor welcomes suggestions. JIL has an acceptance rate of 44% for articles submitted to the journal.