Print

Print


I'd love the URLs Anita, thanks.
ac  

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion List for issues related to cataloging & metadata
education & training [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anita S.
Coleman
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 8:56 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: EDUCAT discussion list

The question:

> > What should be the core competency of all LIS students in the area 
> > of cataloging and metadata?

The response from Anaclare Evans:

> > > My goal is for my students to be someplace between level II and 
> > > level III after completing the class.  The state of Michigan has a

> > > number of digital projects underway and is going to need a number 
> > > of individuals who can participate in the planning and execution 
> > > of these projects.

I agree - the more competent and higher LIS students can place the
better.
The dilemma for us at Arizona has been one of implementation: 1) how
many courses will or should it take to reach level 3 and 2) since most
of our students will probably not take "information organization" beyond
the minimum required how much can be comfortably fitted into 1 standard
(3 credit unit) graduate course?  What does that competency really look
like?
In the report that Ingrid shared, am I right in assuming that it looks
like 3-4 courses would be sufficient to develop Level 3 expertise?

That's sort of what we've aimed for at University of Arizona.  We have a
required core in Organization of Information.  This is an introductory
course and is thus the first also in an electives track of 15 courses in
"Knowledge Organization" (Cataloging & Metadata Management, Controlled
Vocabularies, Theory of Classification).  DC and other metadata
standards are integrated from the start. There are some things in the
intro course that have helped motivated students (who may never take
another cataloging
course) reach the higher level of competency. On the other hand, it does
appear to be information overload to students who are very new to LIS.

I use the Taylor Organization of Information as course text and
supplement it with exercises that are completed by students at one of
two levels:
required and optional.  Students also use my Knowledge Structures
Toolbox (KS Toolbox which lists a bunch of metadata standards and other
things that are available via the WWW. Understanding and practice with
certain tools and standards is required and thus students must complete
assignments and final projects that are focused on digital resources and
DC or another specialized standard of their choice (EAD has been most
popular next to DC). Basic exercises in reading MARC, simple AACR
cataloging,authority control, creating concept maps, crosswalks, etc.
are all introduced at time of text reading but provided as optional
exercises.
Students complete them at will. This may sound backwards but, with
further streamlining I am optimistic it may indeed continue to work
well.

One problem that I see with this approach is that it seems to be geared
to highly motivated students (who've also had some exposure/work
experience in libraries or other information environments).  It doesn't
appear to do much to entice newcomers into the field and I need to work
on this aspect.

I have had students who have only taken the 1 course above and been
hired as Digital Librarian (for cataloging) or Metadata
Librarian/Coordinator.
In fact one of them commented that if she'd known she'd have paid better
attention to all exercises since everything covered is of value now on
the job.  This sort of anecdotal evidence has been encouragement to
continue the approach.

If anybody is interested I'll be happy to provide urls for syllabi, the
toolbox and class projects students have completed.  Let me know.
Thanks.

Anita Coleman
Asst. Prof. SIRLS
Univesity of Arizona
Tucson