Online/Virtual Event

Monday, February 8th 2021 from 10:00am to 12:00pm

See a recording of this webinar here.

METRO's Reference and Instruction Special Interest Group presents round two of a two-part series on Reference and Instruction and Critical Librarianship. Case Studies in Critical Pedagogy includes a primer on critical pedagogy, followed by an overview of a proposed framework for critical pedagogy in action developed by an instructional designer.

Primer on Critical Pedagogies
Maria T. Accardi is the award-winning author of Feminist Pedagogy for Library Instruction (2013). She is also co-editor of Critical Library Instruction: Theories and Methods (2010), and editor of The Feminist Reference Desk: Concepts, Critiques, and Conversations (2017). She is the Coordinator of Instruction and Reference at Indiana University Southeast, a regional campus in the IU system, located in New Albany, Indiana. Accardi holds a BA in English from Northern Kentucky University, an MA in English from the University of Louisville, and an MLIS from the University of Pittsburgh. Her main research and writing interests address the intersections of information literacy, reference work, social justice, and feminist and other pedagogies. She lives in Louisville, Kentucky, where she is also the president of Bringing Justice Home, a food justice nonprofit that she co-founded with her wife, Constance Merritt. You can reach her at maria at mariataccardi.com.

Building a Framework: Critical Pedagogy in Action
Mary Mathis Burnett is Senior Instructional Designer at Arizona State University. Mary shares her work in critical pedagogy and actor-network theory to create and implement a Critical Pedagogy Framework. The primary purpose of the framework is to help make critical pedagogy more broadly accessible to a wider range of faculty in higher education. The study engaged a multidisciplinary committee of faculty, staff, and students to create the framework which can be used to aid in the effective application of critical pedagogy to online and remote courses and concluded with a functional framework from which faculty and instructional designers alike can work. Including participants of diverse backgrounds, varying power levels, and sometimes opposing perspectives in the committee created a diversity of thought and experience which offered the opportunity to refine the purpose, expectations, and specific language of the tool. While the framework is not intended to be a definitive source of critical pedagogy application, this process opened the possibility that more faculty, instructional designers, and other higher education stakeholders may find utility in the framework as a tool for self-advocating and for professional pedagogical growth.