Literacy, AI, and the Shock

Library Journal turned 150 this year, and it was an honor to write a piece for the anniversary. Mine ran September 1 as part of the “Faith in Our Future” series.

The argument will be familiar to anyone following the Information Shock work. Generative AI authors in two ways. The first produces document-like objects, and for those, AI literacy is the right approach. The second happens inside the exchange itself, where a person and a system build understanding together and no document is doing the mediating. That is where literacy runs out of things to grip.

What the exchange calls for is a role rather than another competency. Someone in the room has to be accountable for what a person leaves believing. A chatbot cannot be. It answers to no community, and it holds to no prior word. Librarians can be. I think the survival of the profession depends on claiming it.

The first issue of Library Journal declared librarianship a profession before there were library schools or credentials to back the claim. Dewey and his colleagues made the profession by naming the role they intended to fill. That is what this moment asks of us again.

Read the piece at Library Journal. Free registration required.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.