Around 1992 I can remember working at Columbia U libraries and
revision had ended with workflows going to a supervisor to red ink our
records. What is most important from my own experience is to teach
cataloging staff to recognize what is good and what is just bad in a
record and why. this also changes as technology changes and certain
fields become less important to display etc Less and less editing was
then being done to records in the mid 1990s in terms of copy
cataloging staff. Depending on the types of materials students wil end
up actually working on - special collections? special
subjects/language materials? music? e-resources? digital collections?
this all makes a difference too.
In teaching introductory cataloging for 3 yrs at Drexel, I have
tried to emphasize the basics of what should be in the core of a
record and why. what areas would be open to further discussion or
explanation, and why, and mostly get them to think like a cataloger
and know the core of a record and how to look at the item in front of
them especially. Very often today's students also will tend to scan
online resources, LibraryThing, Amazon and WorldCat already before
doing assignments thinking these will help guide them somehow. So
also I would not spend hours and hours on such revisions in class
work, but get them to really start understanding the core elements and
thinking about each item, and the reasons a field matters more than
others, what things can make a difference and create problems etc and
how users will be looking for different parts of the record and how.
The documentation alone can terrify most people in any beginning
cataloging course, and that just is not how catalogers are working day
to day either. Catalogers have always been some of the most
collaborative people I have had the opportunity to work with over the
years, yet many don't believe this always about them. :-) Our
students used to have to create records on their own for 5 books as a
final project, week to week they had exercises to submit along with
the help of a text book, and kept a cataloging journal on using
cataloging tools and for which they explored and learned more about,
not necessarily were expected to "master" in an introductory level
graduate course. It's important that students don't get too bogged
down in the details of cataloging work, but learn what to eyeball for
good records or as we say today 'good metadata" or bad metadata. it's
all cataloging work that has evolved along the way too. Just some
thoughts on this, good luck ! Karen Weaver
Karen Weaver, MLS
Electronic Resources Statistician
Duquesne University, Gumberg Library
Pittsburgh PA email: [log in to unmask] / Gmail: [log in to unmask]
On 3/26/11, Diane I. Hillmann <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> It's been a while since I taught real cataloging courses, but it struck
> me when reading your message that in the real world of large-ish catalog
> departments, revision is not usually done by one supervisory person
> (it's a bottleneck, as you know), but by other catalogers. I realize
> that the other students are unlikely to be as detailed and correct as
> you would be, it's at least as much of a learning opportunity for them
> to see the work of their cohorts as it is to see your comments, don't
> you think? Thinking a bit further down the line, if you were to see the
> comments of other students, it might help you focus on concepts they
> don't understand for discussion in class, and allow the teaching of
> problem solving methods using the rules, rather than the rules
> themselves, which may be far more useful to them in the long run.
> On 3/25/11 6:47 AM, Mary L Miller wrote:
>> Hi, Cataloging educators.
>> I am in my first semester of teaching Advanced Cataloging online.
>> I've taught metadata and intro cataloging courses before, and we did some
>> creation, but not as much as I have my students doing this semester.
>> There are 20 people in the class. I am giving them 3 records a week,
>> which doesn't
>> seem like much, but it's all I can do to get them graded and give feedback
>> in time
>> to help them with their next batch.
>> [In addition to record creation, we're doing some readings and discussion
>> posts as well, and everyone is researching a metadata standard of his/her
>> choosing and will write a paper and give a presentation on same. The other
>> component is live guest speakers on topics like serials, music, and media
>> Once they have submitted their assignments, I am posting correct versions
>> of the records.
>> When there is an issue that trips up multiple people, instead of noting it
>> on every single record,
>> I add it to a discussion document that I also post. But I am highlighting
>> every error in every record
>> and giving notes on errors that are unique to that paper.
>> Is there a better/easier/faster/ way to grade and give feedback?
>> How many records per week do y'all assign?
>> Any words of wisdom that can be tossed my way would be very much
>> Mary L. Miller, M.Ed., MLIS, C.A.
>> Peabody Awards Collection Archivist
>> [log in to unmask] (706) 542-4789