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  March 2011

EDUCAT March 2011

Subject:

Re: like having 20 people in revision at the same time

From:

Cheryl Tarsala <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:18:20 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (98 lines)

Suzanne & Karen--

       I realize that Mary Miller was asking about advanced  
cataloging. That is a different beast from basic cataloging, of  
course, and the students need more practice with record creation, and  
I'm going off on a tangent (apologies to Mary--my answer to her is  
that I would set up some targeted exercises for specific areas so that  
you're not grinding through thousands of whole records throughout the  
entire semester).

       I also realize that students in the course for K-12  
certification especially will be called upon to catalog stuff for  
their collections that isn't bought shelf-ready, usually the weird  
stuff. And any cataloging class worth its salt should be more than  
"cataloging appreciation."

        But I disagree with the often-repeated idea that "theory" is  
somehow nothing but  derivatives of equations on the board. It's a  
false dichotomy.   Suzanne, Elaine Svenonius and the ghost of Seymour  
Lubetzky will be stripping you of your fuzzy UC sleeve bars if they  
hear that! Are you honestly saying that you expect students to go  
forth into practice and then suddenly have a revelation about how  
cataloging practice and theory fits together? How can they have any  
revelation if they don't learn about cataloging theory in graduate  
school and be taught its value?

        If all a student remembers from cataloging class is how to  
properly space a record in OCLC formatting style (or finish the course  
with a horrific memory of how they failed to understand the  
documentation), they have not learned cataloging, just some clerical  
skills for a job that doesn't require a master's degree any more. I'm  
thinking of recent job descriptions from OCLC or USC or LC where a  
bachelor's degree at most is required--original cataloging is not a  
growth area for employment of degreed librarians.

       The goal in cataloging education is to give students problem- 
solving skills and the ability to diagnose whether the records they  
produce or buy correctly apply the standards.  You can't make them  
into full-fledged catalogers in one course, or even two. It takes  
mentoring in record creation (before or after a course) to get enough  
experience under their belts to make them independent record  
producers. Karen, at Illinois, students could choose to do a  
practicum, which is kind of like an internship for credit, but of  
course only a semester in length and with limited work time. Practicum  
or internship, the point is that you get some personal feedback from a  
professional about your records. With 20-30 students, I don't think  
that you can give anyone that level of attention, and I doubt if my  
students--the ones who needed it most--actually went back and reviewed  
my beautifully-constructed keys with detailed notes for everything  
they did.

If I can try to limit the scope of my question and explain what  
troubles me about "how many records do you assign each week?":

Is making students produce x records a week and discussing them in  
class the best way to teach them what they need to take away from a  
course?

Is this a good pedagogical technique? Specifically, does it produce  
the knowledge that all practicing librarians should have about  
cataloging?

An example: out there in the field, many libraries are all hot and  
heavy with converting from DDC to BISAC, or Lexile levels or even LCC,  
and mechanical chopping of Dewey numbers at a certain # of digits past  
the decimal is still done because no one understands base numbers, or  
standard subdivisions, or the function of hierarchies in browsing.   
Analysis of physical classification issues is cataloging knowledge  
that even a K-12 certificate holder must be able to apply to their  
collections. More so than an academic librarian because a teacher- 
librarian has  control over how an entire collection of books is  
shelved.

Does constructing a DDC number for 18th century Swedish devotional  
poets and plugging that into a MARC record with the correct indicators  
produce the outcome of  knowledge about how Dewey can work in a  
library? What about if we construct fifty numbers? Can students deduce  
the melding of theory and practice from that alone? I had two weeks to  
teach DDC--would this be the best use of my students' time?

Obviously I have reservations about it, or I wouldn't ask skeptical  
questions. It seems like we don't give students enough experience in  
the areas where they're going to need the highest-level ability to  
analyze cataloging problems. The problem is urgent, because we have  
only one opportunity in one course to pass along some very complex and  
important knowledge about effective cataloging practice, which we all  
value and desperately want all MLS students to know.

I can't say that in my teaching I have found the answer to this  
question, but that is why I'm trying to provoke discussion.

Cheryl


***************
Cheryl Tarsala
[log in to unmask]

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

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