Reading 1: Second-Hand Knowledge/ Critical Reading
Wilson (1983) argues that individuals determine who they will regard as a cognitive authority — a person whose opinion the individual values and whose statements of fact he or she would consider to be truth — based on a number of factors, including competency and trustworthiness, and whether the potential authority's views make sense to the individual. While he posits that more than one person can certainly be a cognitive authority for an individual, he also briefly explores the idea of a universal authority: "If our authority is not supposed to know everything already, but simply to be able to find out what others know, then one might indeed have some reason to think him worth taking seriously on all subjects . . . And are not libraries supposed to be storehouses of knowledge, in which one might be able to find answers to any question that can be answered at all?" (20). After raising this potential for libraries as the source of the universal authority, Wilson quickly moves on to another topic, but the question he raises should be considered more fully. Just because a person has access to all of the information available in the library, or even in the world, does that make them a universal authority?
I would argue that there is a great difference between having access to any and all information and being able to competently evaluate that information. The kind of critical evaluation of sources Meltzoff (1998) suggests is key for judging scientific studies is also imperative for the assessment of all other types of information. Just as Meltzoff argues that one's ability to evaluate the scientific method used by a researcher is paramount to critical consideration — "Principles of research design transcend content areas" — I would suggest that the ability to analyze the legitimacy and background of a source is key in the critical consideration of who or what one considers authoritative. It is because of this that teaching individuals the skills they need to make good use of their sources is one of the most important tasks for the reference librarian. Of course, each person is automatically his or her own universal authority — it is the individual who decides which opinions to trust and which facts are "true," and the individual's decision regarding these matters is in his or her mind the final word on the subject. The role information professionals play in the individual's evaluation of sources is to help them become a more competent expert on choosing which expertise to trust. Practically, this has many consequences. It can make the information seeker a better scholar, lead him or her to more accurate medical information when he or she is sick, and even help him or her to better understand news events occurring around the world.
Wilson is right to suggest that the library is a potential source of universal authority, but not because it allows for the possibility of finding out every available piece of information in the world. The library’s role in its patron’s information seeking and evaluating needs is one of instructional center, and though the librarian is not the universal expert because he or she is able to find out what others know, the librarian can assist patrons in becoming their own best universal authority through helping them hone their critical evaluation skills.
Wilson, P. (1983). Second-hand Knowledge: An Inquiry Into Cognitive Authority. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. pp.vii-viii, 13-37.
Meltzoff, J. (1998). Critical thinking about Research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. pp. 3-12.
I would argue that there is a great difference between having access to any and all information and being able to competently evaluate that information. The kind of critical evaluation of sources Meltzoff (1998) suggests is key for judging scientific studies is also imperative for the assessment of all other types of information. Just as Meltzoff argues that one's ability to evaluate the scientific method used by a researcher is paramount to critical consideration — "Principles of research design transcend content areas" — I would suggest that the ability to analyze the legitimacy and background of a source is key in the critical consideration of who or what one considers authoritative. It is because of this that teaching individuals the skills they need to make good use of their sources is one of the most important tasks for the reference librarian. Of course, each person is automatically his or her own universal authority — it is the individual who decides which opinions to trust and which facts are "true," and the individual's decision regarding these matters is in his or her mind the final word on the subject. The role information professionals play in the individual's evaluation of sources is to help them become a more competent expert on choosing which expertise to trust. Practically, this has many consequences. It can make the information seeker a better scholar, lead him or her to more accurate medical information when he or she is sick, and even help him or her to better understand news events occurring around the world.
Wilson is right to suggest that the library is a potential source of universal authority, but not because it allows for the possibility of finding out every available piece of information in the world. The library’s role in its patron’s information seeking and evaluating needs is one of instructional center, and though the librarian is not the universal expert because he or she is able to find out what others know, the librarian can assist patrons in becoming their own best universal authority through helping them hone their critical evaluation skills.
Wilson, P. (1983). Second-hand Knowledge: An Inquiry Into Cognitive Authority. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. pp.vii-viii, 13-37.
Meltzoff, J. (1998). Critical thinking about Research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. pp. 3-12.
posted by Camille at 9:47 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home