Since I am on a role, here are my reactions to module 10. I was overwhelmed with the amount of cataloguing optinos which exist for TL's. While I like the variety of options, it would be so much easier if every TL, library, publisher followed the same format and system. That being said, this weeks readings definitely made me realize the complexity of the cataloguing process.
Below are my reactions shared on the Disucssion Board.
The Seven Cataloguing Options:
In this week’s readings I was surprised to find that there are seven different options for cataloguing items in a school library. Based on the previous readings I was aware that the CIP information could be used to create records for a catalogue system. However, I did not realize how many options there were and the benefits that they offered.
District based central cataloguing and processing seems to be the best and most efficient way to catalogue items in a school library. By having a system run by the district, all schools within that district would operate under the same system. This would allow for students and staff to use the library with ease regardless of whether they move schools. Furthermore, this form of system would mean that entering cataloguing information and preparing books for the shelves would be done by the district. This would make a teacher-librarian’s job easier as they would no longer have to deal with cataloguing and processing records. While there are many advantages to having the district control cataloguing and processing, it may limit the freedom of the librarian in selecting new items as well as how the library must be organized and run on a daily basis.
Purchasing cataloguing from book suppliers does not seem all that beneficial to me as they will only be able to provide information on the items which their company represents. I would imagine that a library contains items by tens or hundreds of different publishers and suppliers. If this is the case, then purchasing cataloguing information from each supplier may be very time consuming and provide the teacher-librarian with records which are not uniform or consistent.
Making use of cataloguing agencies may alleviate the concerns of the previous option, however the information would likely still have to be processed by the teacher-librarian. Even if it is done for them, it would create a library with a cataloguing system which is different than users may be accustomed to. As a result, teaching users how to use the system would be an added task for the teacher-librarian.
As stated in the readings, it is unlikely that schools would use bibliographic utilities. This is likely due to the time consuming nature of having to enter information into a database.
Copied cataloguing may be an effective option however, similar to bibliographic utilities, the information would once again have to be entered into the cataloguing system.
Exchanging records could work especially if schools within a district were willing to work together. With the amount of work teacher-librarians have to do I am not sure if having the added task of exchanging records would be realistic or fair.
The final option is using the CIP information. This makes a great deal of sense as all of the pertinent cataloguing information is listed on the verso of the title page. However, entering all of this information into records in a database would be very time consuming for the teacher-librarian.
Does or would my school library use them?
Since I am not a teacher-librarian I can not speak to the details of how our school catalogues items. However, I do know that we use a cataloguing system called Destiny. It is district wide throughout Surrey elementary and secondary schools. Since this program is a district initiative it would appear that we have a district-based central cataloguing and processing system.
However, since I am not an expert I would assume that certain items need to be entered by our teacher-librarian. Based on my understanding of the seven different options, it would make the most sense for the librarian to use the CIP information or get these records from another school or online.
Follett and ULS:
In browsing Follett and ULS I was amazed at how many resources they offer for TL.
With Follett’s Titlewave I liked the lists of new books and items that were available for purchase. There were a lot of items listed including title’s which I do not think the average person would find.
With ULS I thought that the information they provided regarding cataloguing and processing was extremely relevant to this week’s discussion. In particular I was interested by the quotes/prices for cataloguing and processing services. I had no idea that a basic MARC record costs $.56. I do not know how many items an average school library has, however at $.56 per item that is an astronomical expense which I had never even considered. However, I would imagine that this is a one time expense for each item.
ODLIS and Z39.50:
When I searched Z39.50 in ODLIS I was given the following definition:
A client-server protocol established as a NISO standard that allows the computer user to query a remote information retrieval system using the software of the local system and receive results in the format of the local system, often used in portal and gateway products to search several sources simultaneously and integrate the results
I understood this to mean that Z39.50 is a program that allows a user to search for something with one system, find results on other systems and have these results converted into the format of the user’s original system.
Am I completely wrong on this one? Any clarification would be much appreciated.
If my interpretation is correct, then teacher-librarians can search for records on items from other systems and the results will be converted into their own system’s format. This would allow teacher-librarians to get uniform records from a variety of sources and save them time when cataloguing and processing items.
No comments:
Post a Comment