Unit 1 – Intro. to Info Analysis & Organization – Readings

Lecture Notes

Cataloging work generally takes place behind the scenes. Cataloging is a technology because it is comprised of procedures, machines, conventions, and knowledge. It is a complex procedure.

Information analysis and organization makes up the foundation of information dissemination and use. There are four main activities: acquistion, organization, storage and dissemination of information. The principal responsibilities of the professional librarian are 1)to establish, develop, and maintain information centers to preserve human knowledge, 2)to classify and organize human knowledge, and 3)to make human knowledge accessible.

Cataloging is part of field of bibliographic control which aids in location and retrieval of information – all types of information, not just print resources. Catalogs usually represent one institution’s collection.

In 1961, IFLA defined the author/title catalog as one that allows user to figure out if a library has a book based on 1)its author and title 2)its title alone if there is no author or c)a suitable substitute for the title. The 1961 Paris Principles required that an author/title catalog allow users to determine which works by an author and which editions of a work were in the library.

Holistic vs. prescriptive technologies:
Holistic technologies – those that allow one to control the procedures and the processes. Prescriptive technologies – transfer control from the individual to the external agent. Cataloging is a prescriptive technology.

Cataloging – 3 activities:
1. description of physical object – based on physical examination – determined by Chaption 1 of AACR2 – need knowledge of AACR2
2. development of access points – main vs. added entries – primary and secondary authorship of work – use of cross referenences (see references and see also references) – use of rules in Part 2 of AACR2 – assignment of topica/subject headings using controlled vocabulary – not covered by AACR2 – use of LC Subject Headings
3. classification – pointer to physical location – allows for browsing – assignment of classification number based on subject and other identifying information to create call number – in class will concentrate on LC call numbers

Importance of LC in support documentation for cataloging.

MARC – Machine Readable Cataloging – LC is responsible for maintaining MARC standards

Chapter 1 from Lois Mai Chan’s Cataloging and Classification: An Introduction

Bibliographic control – consists of indexing, classification & descriptive & subject cataloging.
Authority control – use of uniform terms for names and topics (as access points).

Bibliographic records – 2 parts
1) identifying data
2) atleast 1 access point

Main Entry Vs. Added Entries
Main entry – has full description – chief access point – usually the author/corporate body – useful to have standard convention for citation

Forms of Catalog:
card catalog
book catalog
microform catalog
online catalog

Arrangement of Records in Catalog
alphabetical vs. systematic (or classified) – shelflist is a variant of a classified catalog

Cataloging Files
1) bibliographic file – represents library holdings – bib record for every item with multiple access points – 2 types of cross references (see and see also)
2) shelflist – subset of bib file arranged in shelf order – usually call number – for inventory control and to facilitate call number assignment – contains additional information like library holdings, notes
3) authority file(s) – standardized forms of names and topical terms that are used as headings (access points and their associated cross-references

Cataloging Procedures

1) descriptive cataloging – preparationof bib descriptions & determination of bib access points – drafting bib info (title, author, edition, place, date of publication, publisher, physical description, series info & notes – deciding on main & added entries as access points – deciding upon proper form for names and titles – done according to accepted standards (AACR2R)
2) subject analysis -
subject cataloging – heading assignment & classification from authorized lists (LCSH or Sears)
classification – fiting primary topic of work into classification scheme in use (LC or Dewey) – choose appropriate class number & add book number to form call number
3) authority work – determination of standardized forms of subject terms and names – entails both descriptive & subject cataloging – access points are normalized and standardized – uniforms headings – headings are established when used for first time – cross-references are provided to allow access to variant names and for linked references (related headings) – authority work is considered to be most time-consuming & costly aspect of cataloging

MARC tagging

3 digit numerical code or field tag – subfields are id’d by alphabetic or numeric subfield code

The User Certainly Isn’t Broken – But Neither is the Library

Last week, K.G. Schneider wrote a very thought provoking post entitled THE USER IS NOT BROKEN: A MEME MASQUERADING AS A MANIFESTO on her blog, Free Range Librarian. I have to say that I spent all weekend pondering this article, thinking about it, and regurgitating it. She has some awesome points: “The user is not broken, ” “The user is the sun,” and my personal favorite, “The most significant help you can provide your users is to add value and meaning to the information experience, wherever it happens; defend their right to read; and then get out of the way.” All of her points are worth a read – and worth further discussion. (Jane, over at A Wandering Eyre, added some of her own suggestions in a post entitled “We Are Broken, Not “Them.”)

I do have a serious problem with the comment that “Your system is broken until proven otherwise.” I am by no means trying to say that library systems are user friendly, intuitive or even ok the way they are. However, nothing is broken – not the user, not the library, not the people who work in the library nor the library systems in use in the library. Without a doubt, we need to be looking at how our users find information and how we can overhaul our search mechanisms to make our collections accessible. But we do have something in place – and I would go so far as to argue that our systems do actually work. People do find materials that they need – on a regular basis even. I honestly think that our OPACs do exactly what they should do – reflect the data that we have entered about the material that we own in print. Period! Given that users are often frustrated in their searches, OPACs do not work at making our information accessible to the user. So maybe OPACs aren’t the answer at all.

Before these problems can be fully solved, we have to have a clear understanding of users and what they are looking for in the library. I would venture to guess that this will vary greatly from one type of library to another and even from one institution to another. Certainly users expect very different things from a public library than they do from an academic one. One of the biggest problems that we have in my library is that students rely primarily on full text articles – and do the majority of their searching to find such articles. Our OPAC is not an appropriate place to search for articles, and they do not understand why that is. Here is a major point of disconnect – we provide tools that don’t do what users expect them to do.

So what is it exactly that we are hoping to provide to our users? Do we want one search interface for everything that we posess? How do we adequately distinguish between virtual items and tangible ones? Is it realistic to expect one system for books, articles, online material, archives, multimedia and more? Do we plan to provide everything online? Have we clearly defined what we can offer our patrons? Do we even know the full extent of our resources? Where does interaction fit in with all of this? Will the ability to post comments and reviews in our systems help the user find what they are looking for? If we remove library jargon from our web site, what do we replace it with? If a user doesn’t understand the term “interlibrary loan,” what would a good alternative be? I struggle with these questions daily. I haven’t found too many good solutions yet – but I keep trying.

In the meantime, we work hard to help users make sense of it all. We work to be friendly and helpful in the ways that our systems aren’t. Our patrons do come back and they think very highly of us. We are not broken at all.

More Grades are In . . .

My grades were posted a bit earlier than expected. The school lists June 5th as the day grades become available online. However, I was psyched to see them listed earlier. Fortunately, I passed both classes. It is kind of nice to see 9 credits towards my degree. That makes me 1/4 of the way done. YEAH!!!!! While I can’t quite see the light at the end of the tunnel, I feel as if I am more entrenched in the program.

And on another happy note, my book for my summer class finally came in on Saturday. Now, I feel like things are complete for the summer.