Suzanne and all:

ps  personally , I have never used the word "code" for cataloging-metadata
work .  I'll have students with a programming background or hobby who like
to compare it to other "coding" work and that is all fine if it works for
them.   Since library catalogs esp contain a large amount of what is now
called "legacy" data , I'm a strong supporter of historical understanding
and perspective--even of the catalog.  ;-)        more on what a challenge
for some today to understand the need for "structure" without seeming too
"legacy-like"   (?)     In academic libraries today, its great having the
"emergent" everything however, a challenge remains working with "legacy" in
terms of technology, and yes the human factors also--here is where that
leadership is needed.
New grads cannot venture out just wanting to Google their day away in a
cataloging unit, they can --however, it won't help them* keep* a
professional position, yes I agree with you, they will need much more.

Best, Karen

Karen Weaver, MLS
Adjunct Instructor, Cataloging & Classification
The iSchool at Drexel University
College of Information Science & Technology
Philadelphia PA
email: [log in to unmask]

Electronic Resources Statistician
Duquesne University, Gumberg Library
Pittsburgh PA
email: [log in to unmask]




On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Suzanne Stauffer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I think it is important to distinguish among "codes," "coding" and
> "standards." MARC is the method we in the U.S. use for "coding" the
> cataloging record created according to a cataloging standard or code for use
> by (some) electronic databases (also called "catalogs"). Cataloging
> principles and standards existed before electronic databases were a gleam in
> their creators' eyes, and catalogs were created for literally millenia
> before electricity was harnessed for human use. While it is important today
> to understand "how "code" (not sure whether you mean MARC or standards such
> as AACR2 and RDA or computer software) fits into the framework of automated
> library software," that does not equate with understanding the general
> principles of definition, description, and organization on which cataloging
> is based.
>
> As we work through AACR2, DDC, LCC, and LCSH, I attempt to give my students
> some understanding of the theoretical principles on which these various
> standards and systems are based so that they are are in a position to apply
> whatever specific standard they are called on to use. I try to teach them
> the process (the "why") as well as the procedure (the "what") of cataloging
> so that they have the foundation for using different procedures in the
> future. We also look at the socio-cultural, disciplinary, and cognitive
> bases for structuring knowledge and organizing information in particular
> ways, so that they understand that there is no single, right standard or
> code for organizing all information for everyone in every situation.
>
> I don't understand how teaching RDA before AACR2 in any way addresses the
> difficulty of teaching two different cataloging codes or standards in one
> class. It also does not address the issues of teaching a standard before it
> has been released and accepted into widespread use.
>
> Suzanne M. Stauffer, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> School of Library and Information Science
> Louisiana State University
> 275 Coates Hall
> Baton Rouge, LA 70803
> (225)578-1461
> Fax: (225)578-4581
> [log in to unmask]
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Discussion List for issues related to cataloging & metadata education
> & training on behalf of Jennifer Parsons
> Sent: Sun 1/11/2009 8:28 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [eduCAT] incorporating RDA into a Cataloging and
> Classification class
>
>
>
>  Thanks, Richard.  While it can be effective to teach code in detail, I'll
> hazard a guess that it really only works with an approach where students
> can
> see the effects of their code directly-- sort of the way I see things done
> in programming classes.  The trouble is, that rarely happens in library
> catalog land; a working OPAC simply can't be built in a timely fashion by a
> single person.  The result of this is that you need catalogers and
> technical
> services staff with a good abstract knowledge of how code fits into the
> frame work of automated library software.
> I really like Shawne and UNT's method of having students build the
> structure
> in which the code is placed, in addition to detailed code.  Not only will
> this give students a better idea of how a catalog works, it will help them
> in working with vendors, since they're already aware of how database
> applications interact with software and can be used to collate many tables
> of records.
>
> -Jennifer Parsons
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Richard Stewart <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Doesn't sound so crazy to me. It's been a few years since I taught as an
> > adjunct at Dominican--I introduced a survey of the then-new FRBR in my
> last
> > few terms--but even then I was coming to the conclusion that teaching the
> > code in detail, or trying to, was impractical in Organization of
> Knowledge
> > (the introductory core course). Comparing the two codes (with reference
> to
> > FRBR) could be a good way of illuminating the underlying principles.
> >
> > Richard A. Stewart
> > Senior Cataloger
> > Indian Trails Public Library District
> > 355 South Schoenbeck Road
> > Wheeling, Illinois 60090-4499
> > USA
> >
> > Tel: 847-279-2214
> > Fax: 847-4760
> > [log in to unmask]
> > htpp://www.itpld.lib.il.us
> > >>> Jennifer Parsons <[log in to unmask]> 01/10/09 9:31 AM >>>
> > Well...I have a crazy idea, everyone.  Disclaimer: I'm a
> > wet-behind-the-ears
> > LIS school graduate; I have very little cataloging experience compared to
> > everyone else on this board.
> > Why not reverse the order when teaching coding to a Cataloging class--
> that
> > is, why not teach RDA, and then AACR2?  Or, better yet, why not start
> from
> > a
> > very general, basic concept of what coding is for, and then lead on into
> a
> > comparison of the two?  If students can grasp why these two standards
> exist
> > to begin with (i.e., to minimize differences between records and make
> them
> > easier to find across platforms), it will be easier for them to grasp
> > why changes
> > had to be made from one standard to the other.  By pointing out the
> > concepts
> > behind the change and the function of both sets, the large, contrasting
> > differences between RDA and AACR2 will help students learn how to display
> > their cataloging information, rather than providing confusion.
> >
> > -Jennifer Parsons
> >
>