LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for EDUCAT Archives


EDUCAT Archives

EDUCAT Archives


EDUCAT@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

EDUCAT Home

EDUCAT Home

EDUCAT  July 2007

EDUCAT July 2007

Subject:

Re: Martha Yee's comments on LIS education (fwd)

From:

Danielle Plumer <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Discussion List for issues related to cataloging & metadata education & training <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:28:20 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (41 lines)

The text of Martha Yee's paper, for those not on AUTOCAT (like me), has been posted on the cataloging wiki at James Madison University as a word document. You can get it at http://tinyurl.com/2vcqvx

My major concern with Yee's paper, and with others like it, is that she doesn't seem willing to admit that the tools being used for automated indexing and classification of materials are extremely complex and the subject of massive investments in research and development. Google and Amazon's algorithms are much more than "word counting or counting the number of times users gain access to a particular URL," and the presence of these over-simplistic and indeed mistaken attacks makes me uninclined to give any of Yee's other arguments much credence.

Where automated systems really shine is with textually-rich materials, particularly full-text, an area with which library cataloging has not traditionally been concerned. Automated systems can do nothing with a physical object if it has not already been converted to digital form; instead, these systems rely on human-created surrogates (metadata) generated by publishers, authors, readers, and, yes, catalogers. I myself am convinced that more and more materials will be available digitally in the future, including not only new works but also products of retrospective conversion. It therefore seems common sense to me that cataloging needs to learn to use these new tools, and, therefore, that cataloging education needs to change to include more and different methods of information organization. I actually applaud organization of information courses that look at how supermarkets are organized!

Although neither a professor of cataloging nor a cataloger myself (or so I've been told, as I work primarily with non-MARC metadata), I have great respect for cataloging, and, indeed, I know folks at Google and Yahoo! who express continued respect for and appreciation of the work of catalogers. I think we all agree that we need more investments in cataloging and metadata creation, not fewer, although those investments will not and cannot be targeted at traditional cataloging, the way we've "always" done it. Yee and others would be much better equipped to argue against outsourcing and eliminating cataloging practices if they recognized that essential truth.

N.B. I'm a medievalist by training, so I have to point out that our "traditions" of cataloging have mostly been developed in a mere century of practice! I don't think that's quite enough time to show that they have "permanent" utility.

Danielle Cunniff Plumer, Ph.D., M.S.I.S.
Coordinator, Texas Heritage Digitization Initiative
Texas State Library and Archives Commission
512.463.5852 (phone) / 512.936.2306 (fax)
[log in to unmask]

+++Opinions expressed in this email are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Texas State Library and Archives Commission, the Texas Heritage Digitization Initiative, or any other organization+++

-----Original Message-----

Arlene Taylor <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Hi folks,

I sent the message below to AUTOCAT in response to Martha Yee's paper that 
is soon to be published in American Libraries.

Mac Elrod responded: "Martha Yee is very correct that the lack of 
cataloguing education is a major contributing factor to the decline of the 
quality of bibliographic records in bibliographic utilities and in our 
catalogues, and to the general lack of understanding of cataloguing among 
non cataloguer librarians.  Considering the seriousness of the situation, 
a little hyperbole does not seem out of place to me."

I don't think people reading American Libraries will see it as hyperbole. 
Is our education really "a major contributing factor to the decline of the
quality of bibliographic records in bibliographic utilities and in our
catalogues, and to the general lack of understanding of cataloguing among
non cataloguer librarians"?  Am I right, or is he?  I'm trying to defend 
you guys!  Help me out here!

Thanks, Arlene

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
July 2020
June 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
March 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
June 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
December 2007
November 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
April 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager