I am glad to hear about all the different ways RDA is being incorporated in
some of the curriculum at different institutions. Perhaps my post was
jumping the gun a bit : ). Also, I apologize to Diane for not being specific
enough about what her course was about. The reason I felt her course was so
important was because we weren't focused on the rules but on the potential
for RDA as data as she highlighted. Allyson also made a great point about
teaching students how to think about cataloging. When I heard about RDA not
being taught, I wasn't thinking "oh no, the students wont learn the rules
for creating a 337 MARC field" or anything like that. However, on the
practical side of learning the RDA as rules, I didn't apply for a single
cataloging job after graduation that didn't want me to know at least the
basics of RDA as rules. Admittedly, I only applied for jobs at academic
libraries. Most of the jobs I applied for didn't require that I know
anything about RDF or XML or other metadata schemas outside of MARC, but I
think it is going to be important for future catalogers to walk in both
worlds. I am seeing fewer positions posted for 'catalog librarians' and more
for 'metadata librarians'. They are often being used interchangeably. At the
end of the day, I think teaching students how to think about cataloging and
how to think about data and how it can be structured it for better re-use
outside the library is going to go a lot further than teaching two sets of
rules. It sounds like everyone who has posted on this topic are taking many
great strides in accomplishing this : ).
-Nerissa
|