Schools and libraries are appendages of a knowledge
economy. Instead of teaching students critical thinking, they’ve stoked
decontextualized curiosity
The word rubric,
fittingly, comes from medieval church doctrine
regarding expected rules for group worship. Information-literacy rubrics are
equally indoctrinating. One popular information-literacy rubric is RADCAB
(relevancy, appropriateness, detail, currency, authority, and bias), which was
designed for K-12 students and comes complete with a children’s book: Little RADCABing Hood: A Cautionary Tale for
Young Researchers. Another is CRAAP (currency, relevance,
authority, accuracy, and purpose), designed for higher education students.
Other rubrics exist too, but they all draw on the same criteria of authorial
authority, topicality, and proximity to recent events. By these standards,
primary-source news organizations are considered valid and reliable; government
agencies and holders of public office, more so.
For information literacy to have any
relevance, schools and libraries must assume that primary sources and
government agencies act in good faith. But the social media prowess of a Donald
Trump scuttles CRAAP logic. Not only does Trump disregard information literacy
protocols in his own information diet — he famously declared during the
campaign, “All I know is what’s on the internet” — but he operates with an
entirely different paradigm for making public statements. He speaks as a
celebrity, confident in the value of his brand, rather than as a politician or
technocrat, making recourse to facts, tactical compromises, or polls.
There is no reason to think that the Trump
administration will be a “valid” source in the sense of making truthful,
accurate statements. Instead, Trump has backed into Karl Rove’s famous idea of the
reality-based community: “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we
create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously,
as you will — we’ll act again.”
Trump-based reality is now spreading into
other government agencies. In late 2016, the House Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology used its .gov homepage to question causes of climate change,
while the Wisconsin State Department of Natural Resources recently changed reports to claim
the subject is a matter of scientific debate.
Benjamin ends “The Work of Art in the Age of
Mechanical Reproduction” by arguing that “fascism attempts to organize the
newly created proletarian masses without affecting the property structure which
the masses strive to eliminate. Fascism sees its salvation in giving these
masses not their right, but instead a chance to express themselves.” This
recasts social media in a more sinister light. Fascism is on the rise not
because students can’t tell fake news from the slanted news promulgated by
hegemonic interests. Rather, fascism is resurgent because freedom of expression
has turned out to have little to do with what we can create and much more to do
with how much we can consume.
The promise of social justice and upward mobility
through education has largely gone un kept, and many citizens who believed in
democratic progress have turned to different promises. Information literacy
fails not only because it serves a broken system, but because it is affectively
beside the point. Its cerebral pleasure pales in comparison with fascism’s more
direct, emotive appeals.
Information today is content, a consumable
whose truth value is measured in page views. To combat this, the validation of
knowledge must be localized, shared in communities between engaged citizens.
Information-literacy rubrics implemented by individuals are insufficient. We
must value expertise, but experts must also commit to forging community through
shared development. The one-way diffusion of knowledge must be upended.
Information literacy is less a solution than
an alibi for the problems ailing education. “Solving” fake news will only
compound the real problem. Without substantial work to subvert the traditional
and promote the outside, the feel-good efforts of information literacy will not
serve America’s promised rebound. Instead they will signify democracy’s
dead-cat bounce.
Rolin Moe is Director
of the Institute for Academic Innovation at Seattle Pacific University. Too much
of his writing exists behind academic paywalls, but he can also be found at Hybrid
Pedagogy and Mindshift.
Regards
Pralhad
Jadhav
Senior
Manager @ Library
Khaitan & Co
No comments:
Post a Comment