G. Demonstrate understanding of basic principles and standards involved in organizing information such as classification and controlled vocabulary systems, cataloging systems, metadata schemas or other systems for making information accessible to a particular clientele
INTRODUCTION
If the information a school library provides is going to be stored, it needs to be organized and represented in some way so that it can be found and retrieved. There are many different ways to organize information, and many different types of information that need to be organized. In a school library, students and faculty rely on the library teacher to provide a variety of relevant information in multiple formats in a timely manner. Since no single library can have every possible information resource a student or staff member may need, school libraries need to be able to collaborate, communicate, and share resources with other libraries in their district, as well as the public library. Public libraries, like the one in my town, are usually part of a consortium in order to share resources with all of the libraries in a particular region.
In order for all of these libraries to communicate and share resources, they need to use a standardized system when cataloguing their information. According to Bolin (2018), The role of shared standards in these systems is “crucial in the world of cataloging, metadata, bibliographic control, and discovery. If data is created using a shared standard, it is more likely to be interoperable by many different systems” (p. 145). School librarians must understand these systems and how they work in order to effectively provide information to the school community. Specifically, they need to understand how the library collection is organized, and how the materials are classified and catalogued. In this document, I will discuss the following aspects of information organization a school library uses: metadata and descriptive cataloging, access points and authority control, subject headings and controlled vocabularies, and classification.
METADATA AND DESCRIPTIVE CATALOGING
Each information resource, or material in a school library’s collection must have a bibliographic record attached to it. The bibliographic record, used to represent each piece of data, needs to have data, or information, that details, defines, locates, or otherwise makes it easier to retrieve, use, or manage the item it is representing. Using descriptive cataloging, school librarians index the various components of the bibliographic record. Descriptive cataloging consists of the items’ bibliographic information, such as its title, author or statement of responsibility, publisher, and publication data “descriptive cataloging deals with what a resource is and who is responsible for it” (Bolin, 2018, p. 149). The data on these records is considered metadata which, according to Bolin (2018) “is the structured data that enables people to find and access information” (p. 143). Resource Description and Access (RDA), and its predecessors Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR) established in 1967, and the second edition (AACR2), updated in 1978 are descriptive standard formats libraries use to catalog their information resources. RDA standardizes how the attributes of an item should be recorded, and how the relationship between each item should be expressed. RDA provides libraries with “guidelines and instructions for description and access for all digital and analog resources” (Tucker, 2018, p. 75).
Each bibliographic record is stored in a library’s database. Most school libraries, including the one I work in, currently use an electronic formatting system called Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC), which replaced the card catalog system. MARC is a digital encoding program that allows libraries “to store, communicate, and reformat bibliographic information in machine-readable form” (Tucker, 2018, p. 74). Because every library that uses MARC, uses the same standards, they are able to share information easily “shared standards are crucial in the world of cataloging, metadata, bibliographic control, and discovery” (Bolin, 2018, p. 145).
With MARC, catalogers match the bibliographic aspects of a resource to a set of predetermined field and subfield locations. Each field in a bibliographic record is assigned a code, which the library teacher must fill in with the item’s attributes. For instance, the fields for the statement of responsibility, title, publication, and physical description for the book The Diary of a Young Girl, would look something like this:
>100 1 $a Frank, Anne |d 1929-1945. |t Achterhuis.
>245 10 $a THE DIARY OF A YOUNG GIRL : / $c editors, Otto H. Frank & Mirjam Pressler.
>264 1 $a New York : $b ANCHOR BOOKS DOUBLE DAY $c 1995
>300 $a viii, 340 pages : $b Illustrations ; $c 22 cm
Converting to a digitized system “allowed libraries to replace card catalogs with online public access catalogs (OPACs)” (Bolin, 2018, p. 144). OPACs make it possible for libraries all over the world to communicate electronically and share resources with each other. The changeover to a digital format also allowed for more information, or metadata about each document to be attached to its record. The core information about the document, however, did not alter. In a card catalog file, a book would have the following classifications: title, author, publication information, physical description, call number and up to three subjects. The MARC record would have all of that same information, but it also has the ability to add additional “iterating fields” (Brown & Bell, 2018, p. 25), such as additional subjects the book may overlap into. The digital record may also include links to reviews, the author’s website, and suggestions for further reading. For instance, if a library user were searching for Anne Frank's The Diary of a Young Girl, and they typed in Anne Frank, The Diary of a Young Girl, or diary (although that would probably bring back way too many records), they should be able to retrieve all of the bibliographic records related to their search query. They should then be able to determine which record, if any, fits their needs. The information should detail whether the library owns a copy, what format it is available in (paperback, hardcover, large print, audiobook, ebook, graphic novel, movie…), if the desired item is available there or in another library, where it is located on the shelf or how to request it from another library, or instructions to download it if it is an eresource.
MARC was created in the late 1960’s, and while it is still widely used, it is not perfect, especially when it comes to cataloguing digital resources “MARC’s rigidly defined standards can make it unsuitable for the description of digital, visual, or multimedia resources” (Gonzales, 2018, p. 206). MARC is due to be supplanted by BIBFRAME, a system that was created with the 21st century library user in mind. “BIBFRAME is more flexible and is suited to the current computing environment and the expectation of users” (Bolin, 2018, p. 144). Aside from MARC, there are a number of different standardized systems that various industries use to share information. These include Dublin Core (DC), Text Encoding Initiative (TEI), and Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS).
ACCESS POINTS AND AUTHORITY CONTROL
In order to effectively locate information in a library catalog, school libraries must use authority control in relation to the access points when indexing bibliographic records. Access points are the fields and subfields each record contains to make it findable. Authority control is crucial in cataloging, as it helps differentiate between authors and titles with the same name “all access points for names and work titles need to be under authority control so that persons or entities with the same name can be distinguished from each other” (Taylor & Joudrey, 2018, p. 162). Access points need to be consistent in order for IR systems to aggregate, disambiguate, and discriminate information “current practice dictates either the establishment of an authorized access point for each name or work title or the provision of pointers to draw different representations of names or titles together” (Taylor & Joudrey, 2018, p. 162). RDA is the standard used for generating access points in most school library bibliographic records. Other standards include Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO) and the International Standards Archival Authority Record for Corporate Bodies, Persons and Families (ISAAR[CPF]).
Dog, canine, puppy, pooch, and hound can all be used to describe one type of animal “a user searching with only one or two of those words will be unlikely to aggregate all the documents related to this concept” (Tucker, 2018, p. 141). In order for a library user to successfully retrieve information by subject, the subject search needs to correlate with the subject field in a bibliographic record. This can be done using a controlled vocabulary system which is “a specialized indexing language created for the purpose of representing the subject documents in an IRS” (Tucker, 2018, p. 141). Before a record can be classified or assigned controlled vocabulary terms, “it is necessary first to complete a conceptual analysis of the resource” (Taylor & Joudrey, 2018, p. 163). Completing a conceptual analysis allows the cataloguer to establish what the material consists of, or its aboutness. In order to “provide for collocation of resources that are of a like nature and contain similar and/or related information” (Taylor & Joudrey, 2018, p. 163). The results of the analysis are then used to designate classification and/or controlled vocabularies which are then transformed into metadata. According to Bolin (2018), when a library determines the identification, or aboutness of a resource “all names and forms of the name are compiled, [and] one name is chosen as the authorized form” (p. 149). In other words, “libraries search for authority records that match access points in bibliographic records and export and load these records into their catalogs” (Bolin, 2018, p. 150). Therefore, if a student seeking information on the Japanese internment camp Topaz, during WWII, entered “topaz” the searcher should be able to distinguish between information on Executive Order 9066 and the mineral topaz. The Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), one of the most common controlled vocabulary systems for bibliographic records, is the system used in my school district. Other examples of controlled vocabulary systems consist of the Sears List of Subject Headings and Faceted Application of Subject Headings (FAST).
CLASSIFICATION
Libraries create bibliographic records by way of a classification, or ranking system, which in turn uses an index with a controlled vocabulary for ease of access. The two different types of classification used in school and other types of libraries are subject and descriptive. The subject side of cataloging, like subject headings “deals with what the resource is about” (Bolin, 2018, p. 149). Any given item may have more than one subject assigned to it, however “classification puts a resource in just one place” (Bolin, 2018, p. 151). This includes an attempt to arrange and coordinate all possible subjects of “like things together” (Bolin, 2018, p. 151).
There are a number of classification systems available for libraries to utilize, such as the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Library of Congress Classification (LCC), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), S.R. Ranganathan’s Colon Classification (CC), Charles Cutter’s Expansive Classification (EC), and Henry Bliss’s Bibliographic Classification (BC). The systems most commonly used in libraries are LCC and DDC, which is the system my school library uses. The DDC divides subjects into ten overall broad categories, “which together cover the entire world of knowledge” (OCLC, 2003, p. 2). These broader subjects, or “call numbers,” are:
000 Computer science, information & general works
100 Philosophy & psychology
200 Religion
300 Social sciences
400 Language
500 Science
600 Technology
700 Arts & recreation
800 Literature
900 History & geography (OCLC, 2003, p. 7).
These categories are then divided into ten narrower subcategories, those categories are then further narrowed, and also divided by ten. Each digit in a call number has a specific meaning. The first digit in each three-digit number represents the principle subject. The second digit “indicates the division” (OCLC, n.d., p. 2), and the third “indicates the section” (OCLC, n.d., p. 2). For example, a book on basketball would be catalogued under the call number 796: 700—Arts, 790—Sports, Games, & Entertainment, 796—Athletics and Outdoor Sports & Games. While a cookbook would fall under 641: 600—technology, 640—Home and family management, 641—food and drink. As its name indicates, decimals can also be used to further narrow and distinguish the various categories of library resources “a decimal point follows the third digit in a class number, after which division by ten continues to the specific degree of classification needed (OCLC, n.d., p. 2). While both the DDC and LCC have been in use for years, as I mentioned in competency E, many school libraries are beginning to move away from using the DDC in favor of an updated, user-friendly, subject-based genrification system.
EVIDENCE
Info 248 Beginning Cataloging and Classification - Access Points - Authority Control MARC Record Set
For this assignment, we were required to log on to OCLC Connexion, and search “Amis, Kingsley” in the search box. We then needed to choose “personal names” in the drop down menu in order to search the Library of Congress Name Authority File. We were to choose the first entry from the list of results, and change the view to MARC text area. We then needed to copy and paste the authority record into a word document, and write a brief summary of the fields in the record. I believe this exercise helped me understand how records are created, the meaning behind the fields in a bibliographic record, and how they are created. By completing this assignment, I feel like I will be able to create bibliographic records for new materials in the school library collection, as well as understand the existing ones.
Info 248 Beginning Cataloging and Classification - DDC-LCC MARC Record Set
For this assignment we were required to create 20 MARC records with descriptive fields, access points, and subject headings, the Subject Authority Record number, and a brief annotation of each book. We were also required to apply both Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and Library of Congress (LCC) classifications to the 20 books.
Completing this assignment, showed me the process of creating bibliographic records, assigning call numbers using two different classification systems, and determining the subject or aboutness of books. I believe this foundation in cataloging using various standardized systems will help me tremendously as a school librarian, as it will be my responsibility to index new acquisitions.
Info 202 Information Retrieval System Design - Card Sorting Exercise
This was a group assignment, of which I was the group leader. We were given a set of 43 cards, and were told to have people put them into categories. We then compiled all of the data, and co-wrote a paper on the findings. We used a google doc, each of us writing in a different color. After everyone submitted their information, I combined the data, edited, and turned in the final paper. This project was very enlightening. Seeing all the different ways people sorted the information on the cards, made me realize how important, and how hard it is to classify and index materials using the “best” keywords to make the information findable. When I am the one identifying the subjects for materials in the library I will be mindful, with a goal of choosing field values that are user-friendly.
CONCLUSION
In order to maintain the integrity of the information contained in bibliographic records, school librarians must follow classification rules and a standardized system when indexing and organizing metadata on bibliographic records. I believe that my coursework at SJSU, along with my professional experience, has given me a clear understanding of how to create effective bibliographic records for a school library collection. I am comfortable and confident with my ability to catalog materials in my library’s collection, using resources such as the DCC and LCC, or any new standards that are developed.
References
Bolin, M. K. (2018). Metadata, cataloging, linked data, and the evolving ILS. In S. K. Hirsh (Ed.), Information services today: An introduction (2nd ed., pp. 142-155). Rowman & Littlefield.
Brown, C. C., & Bell, S. S. (2018). Librarian's guide to online searching: Cultivating database skills for research and instruction (5th ed.). Libraries Unlimited.
Gonzales, B. M. (2018). Linking libraries to the web: Linked data and the future of the bibliographic record. In V. M. Tucker (Ed.), Information system retrieval design: Principles & practice (5.1 ed., pp. 205-217).
Online Computer Library Center (OCLC ). (2003). DDC 23 summaries. OCLC.org. https://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/dewey/ddc23-summaries.pdf
Taylor, A. G., & Joudrey, D. N. (2018). Organization and representation of information. In K. Haycock & M.-J. Romaniuk (Eds.), The portable MLIS: Insights from the experts (2nd ed., pp. 153-170). Libraries Unlimited, an imprint of ABC-CLIO.
Tucker, V. M. (2018). Information retrieval system design lecture 2. In V. M. Tucker (Ed.), Information retrieval system design: Principles & practice (5.1 ed., pp. 63-80). Academic Pub.
Tucker, V. M. (2018). Lecture 3 supplement: Subject metadata. In V. M. Tucker (Ed.), Information retrieval system design: Principles & practice (5.1 ed., pp. 140-142).