Reading Reflection Lesson 7 - MARC, CIP, and Copy Cataloguing

Okay… so a couple weeks ago I posted that I was looking forward to “our further exploration of cataloguing!” Well…the exploration has been extensive with MARC records, and I think my brain is hurting! I am starting to dream about MARC records! So many numbers, so many tags, so many indicators, and now the CIP (cataloging-in-publication). I had never heard of this before – I always looked at this page when doing my bibliographies, but I did not realize the formalities of it. I have to admit, I enjoyed looking at the CIP’s and understanding them a little better. Then to find out that sometimes they are incorrect was actually fascinating. It was interesting to learn that older books’ CIP’s could be different than the MARC records – I would not have noticed that.

After reading about copy cataloguing, I was certainly wishing we could have used this for our MARC records in Assignment #2! Oh how much easier that would have been! It was comforting to know that there are “cooperative entities” (Lesson 7) which collaborate to put together these catalogue records. I found the MARC records to be informative, yet very labor intensive to make from scratch. One question that I did keep asking myself throughout this lesson, however, was: if there are so many places to access MARC records for free, then why would a library pay to get them? Or is it that the ones you pay for are more standardized and complete? Or is it because of a compatible format that you are paying to download? Interesting…

Reading Reflection Lesson 6 - MARC Records

Wow! A MARC record looks complicated! Lots of numbers, lines, letters. It appears to be another language used as a complicated way to catalogue books!

When I read: “Today's computers use hard disks and floppy disks for storage of information rather than the tape drives used by mainframe computers. For computers, data is commonly sent and received on floppy disks. From the floppy disks, bibliographic records are uploaded to the stationary hard disk” (Library of Congress reading) I began to wonder about the usefulness of MARC records in today’s technological age. Are MARC records getting old and dated? Are there new cataloguing systems out there now?

After the task of familiarizing ourselves with MARC records through this week’s readings, putting together my own MARC record was not as simple as it appeared it would be. I was able to get most of the frequently used tags, only forgetting a few indicators here and there with the corresponding tags. I did notice a discrepancy between the 650/651 tags, as I used the 650, but the Library of Congress used a 651 tag. When it came to some of the other tags that are not used as frequently, I certainly missed most of those!

Some of the MARC records listed in online catalogues provided a variety of different results for the same book, which left me to wonder about the standards that are set in place for entering the information into a MARC record. I was curious, as well, in regards to the use of different symbols in the indicators (#, _, nothing) the symbols in the field information ($, l,) and even the use of the symbols AFTER the information in the field ($ used again). It seems to me that if the desire is to have some uniformity in the MARC records, I am wondering why they are using different symbols? Also, when looking at the same book with different catalogues, the MARC record can look different, with one using more tags than the other. So my best guess is that it would depend on the person who is entering the information? I have to give credit to those people who have to enter MARC records - it is challenging to learn all the different tags and indicators, but I would guess that with time, they would become more familiar and easier to identify.

After talking to a Teacher Librarian in our school district, she said the Teacher Librarians do not have to enter the information for MARC records, as there is a district person who takes care of cataloguing new books into the system (a little sigh of relief on my part!) I wonder if that is similar in other districts? Provinces? Having a knowledge of MARC records is useful, however, to understand how all those books and resources get catalogued!

Reading Reflection Lesson 5 - Cataloguing Process and Standards

With this lesson, I have NO background knowledge of how resources are catalogued in a school library, so I am looking forward to finding out how items get ORGANIZED!

Personally, when I am doing a search for a resource, some main points that I look at are: the title, the author, the brief description, the summary, quite often I look to see how many pages are in the book, and I will check to see what the format is – whether it is a book, video, audio, etc. Something else I realize that I look to first, is the photo of the book. I know that if there isn’t one, I am disappointed.

I was interested to learn about the ISBD (International Standard Bibliographic Description), and how they divide the resource description into eight units, called areas, and that they are listed in a particular order:

Title and statement(s) of responsibility

Edition

Material (or type of publication) specific details

Publication, distribution, etc.

Physical description

Series

Note(s)

Standard number

In examining these areas, for a teacher or student who is trying to find the particular Mother Goose book as pictured in this week’s lesson, I would think that they would tend to look up the book based on the subject – in this case Nursery Rhymes. I am guessing the subject of the book would be included under the "area" of Material.  If a teacher/student knew that they were looking for "Mother Goose" in particular, then I think they would most likely use the title search of Mother Goose.

Hmmm…I almost feel like I need to design AREAS for the rest of today’s blog!

INSIGHTS FROM THIS WEEK’S READINGS:

In the Manitoba Education and Training handbook (1997, p.1.4) , this section stood out for me as the main reason cataloguing of resources needs to take place:

The catalogue enable users to

• retrieve information efficiently

• increase understanding by students and staff of information retrieval systems

• plan, order, and check resources efficiently

• develop information retrieval skills that are transferable from one school library to other school, public, college,  university, and special libraries

As I read through Chapter 3 in the Manitoba Education and Training handbook regarding organization of the school library, they are very specific in how the resources in the library should be arranged. I am hearing more about some school libraries developing their own way of sorting resources in the library, and how some are going away from the Dewey Decimal system. Is this something that is going to become more prevalent?

Chapter 4 of Standard cataloguing for school and public libraries by Intner, & Weihs, (2001). This chapter was rather confusing to me, and most of the time I kept thinking how glad I was that our district has people who catalogue the books into the system!

KEITH’S QUOTES: (the instructor for this course!)

“Housekeeping details supplied by cataloguing agencies are of little interest to the teacher-librarian. However, any information added as housekeeping at the school level is often vitally important to collection management.”

“Consistency is important in bibliographic control and is a factor in effective information retrieval.”

QUESTIONS I PONDER:

T-slips…are these still used??!! This is the first that I have heard of them. This manual work sounds like something that would not be done anymore with latest technology.

Although the Manitoba Education and Training handbook is from 1997, I do see the benefits for each of these topics. I wonder though, with the wider scope of written and online resources that are available, if this is going to become increasingly difficult?

NEW TERMS!

Some terms I learned this week (ones that I had heard of, but didn’t know what they stood for):

I learned the words for ISBN! I always knew what it referred to, but did not know it is called the “International Standard Book Number.”

Also, I didn’t realize that a MARC record is a "Machine Readable Cataloguing record"

FINAL THOUGHTS:

I didn’t fully understand the article by Conners (2008) on Main Entry. I think this is partly because I have not worked in a library yet, so I don’t understand the different distinctions for entries. I do agree though, that if something such as Main Entries is now redundant, then it is time to move on to something more current, and reflects the needs of today’s library.

Reading Reflection Lesson 4 - Cataloguing

This weeks’ lesson was another eye-opener for me (oh so much to learn!) I had never really given too much thought about how a book is described so that it can be found. Usually Title and Author are all I use to find a book, but the suggestion that a book could be catalogued with a description of its colour surprised me. Although it makes sense, as Keith commented, that sometimes students may inquire about a book and may only remember its colour! Throughout this lesson, I was introduced to the many ways that books could be catalogued, and how they are catalogued for the most efficient ACCESS.  I learn well by analogies, so I liked the analogy that Keith mentioned of organizing a kitchen, and how if someone else did it for me, I wouldn’t be able to easily find things. So it is with the library. There needs to be some standards in place to provide quick, easy, accurate access to the information.

I was interested to read that there are now some new standards for bibliographic description: “Resource Description and Access (RDA) is a new standard for bibliographic description for libraries, archives, museums and other information organizations. In 2011, RDA is being tested by libraries.” (McPherson, Lesson 4) I wonder how this works? I imagine this will be covered in later lessons. 

There were many new terms introduced this week, and some terms expanded on my previous knowledge. A new term for me was: 'collocating' which is “often attributed to catalogue functions. To ‘collocate’ provides for linkages between items. Subjects relating to other subjects, books by the same author, etc. (McPerson, Lesson 4). I appreciated the analogy from Keith where he describes Amazon.com’s: "customers who bought this, also bought..." as a good example of the technique of collocating.

With all these new terms, standards, and definitions, I look forward to our further exploration of Cataloguing!

Reading Reflection Lesson 3 - Metadata and Search Engines

Metadata??!!

Okay…now I am venturing into territory outside of my comfort zone! Yes, I use a computer, and familiar with searching (I am a Googler) but when it comes to understanding these search engines, and exploring “metadata,” I can feel my brain start to swirl! Familiar…yes… having “ a mastery of search engine anatomy”(McPherson, K. Module 3 lesson) I do not. Do I see this as a benefit for a “teacher librarian in developing information literacy with colleagues and students?”...absolutely! I admire people who can maneuver their way around the computer, internet, etc…with ease. With technology, and the advancements of information that is available on the internet, to be able to have a critical eye, and the ability to discern between credible sources, current information, I would see this as a huge benefit for a Teacher Librarian. It reminds me of learning the sport of curling. At first, the sport seems very superficial – just sliding around on the ice, throwing rocks down to the other end. But as one learns the sport, he/she rarely falls down on the ice any more, can get the rocks down to the other end of the house with more accuracy, and has an in-depth understanding of the precise strategy that is involved with the competitive game. Understanding Metadata and the inner-workings of the internet – I am at the beginner curler stage. Oh, to be able to be a Teacher Librarian that can move around with speed, accuracy, and have that in-depth understanding of the internet and search engines is a quality I admire and hope to strive for!

Some “ah ha” moments for me this week, as this was a lot of new information to me:

*My understanding was that when I typed in a search in Google, the results that appeared at the top of the page were the ones that were the visited the most amount of times. I did not realize this: “This is yet another flaw which affects the results that appear at the top of the page with all of the search services – the results which appear at the top may not be the most current (perhaps not even most relevant) – the web site owner just paid the most money to appear there. Just about every search service online provides some form of ‘paid for’ listings at the top of the pile” (Grehan, M. 2002)

a “search engine locates the appropriate data in the database and displays it via the browser.

*In understanding search engines, I did not realize that  a “search engine locates the appropriate data in the database and displays it via the browser . This is not to be confused with directories such as Yahoo, that provide subject lists created by humans, that must be browsed.” (Taylor, C .2003)

*Such an appropriate name  -“spider” that crawls around the web and gathers information!

*A key role of the Teacher Librarian in this technological era:  “It is now very easy to publish information, but it is becoming more difficult to find relevant information. For outsiders and casual users, much of the useful material is difficult to locate and therefore is effectively unavailable” (Taylor, C. 2003). Teacher Librarians should not be an “outsider” or “casual user!”

*Dublin Core Metadata schema– apparently a term I should become very familiar with for improving “my resource discovery and delivery”(Taylor, C. 2003).

Works cited:

Grehan, M. Excerpted from the 2002 publication of Search Engine Marketing: The Essential Best Practice Guide. How Search Engines Work. Retrieved from http://cms.searchenginewatch.com/digital_assets/3859/how-search-engines-work-mike-grehan.pdf

Taylor, C. Taylor, C. (2003). An introduction to metadata. Retrieved February 21, 2009 from http://www.library.uq.edu.au/iad/ctmeta4.html

*****************

In our exploration of three Search Engines, I found it difficult to decipher how they determine their relevance rankings, but looking at three in particular, this is what I was able to come up with:

Google: took a bit of looking, but eventually found how they “Make Search More Relevant.” I like how they have worded it in simple terms that I can understand:

“It is by analyzing these search patterns via our logs data that our engineers are able to improve the search algorithms that determine the order in which our search results appear. If our engineers can see that people are consistently clicking on the top result for any given query, they know they are doing something right. If people are hitting “next page” or typing in another query, they know they’re not delivering the results that people are looking for, and can then take action to try and improve the search algorithms.”

This makes sense to me – if they can track that a site is visited often, then they know people are finding some use to it. If a person does not stay at a site, or quickly go to a different search, then it may not be what they were looking for based on the search query that was typed in.

I use Google as my main search engine, and appreciate the programs they have put in to make searches quicker and easier, but I did not realize there were actual names for these programs, such as Autocomplete, (words finish as you type them) and Google Instant, (top searches pop up as you are typing your search).

Yahoo: Not sure if I was able to find the exact details on relevancy ranking, but the only thing I could find was a brief paragraph on how it is a “complex text analysis which examines the relationships and context of the words in the document” (How Yahoo! Search results are ranked ).

DMOZ: I found the DMOZ Help very informative. It helped that they explained the difference between their Open Directory Project, and for example, Google: “The ODP is a Web directory, not a search engine. Although we offer a search query, the purpose of the ODP is to list and categorize web sites. We do not rank, promote or optimize sites for search engines. The ODP is simply a data provider.” (DMOZ).  I have not used DMOZ before, but may look to it in the future. I am not sure if it is more time consuming, but wondering if it would yield better results.

I have to admit, this is still all very confusing to me, but I feel I have gained a bit of insight as to how the search engines work. I am not sure, at this point however, how this will help me as a TL in the library? I hope that as this course progresses, I will understand more about this. 

Reading Reflection Lesson 2 - Access

Another point of discussion this week was “library access.” Some of my personal reflections relate to the Intellectual, Physical, and Digital aspects outlined in our lesson:

When it comes to the Intellectual Access, one point that stuck out for me was ”training in skills needed to access all information formats.” For elementary students, I feel proper training is necessary to access the appropriate information that is needed. I feel a majority of students, when researching a topic, just type the topic in the Google bar, and go with whatever pops up.

For Physical Access, I could relate mostly to the point: “providing facilities and equipment for viewing and listening.” I recall teaching a class a topic in science, and we went to the computer lab to browse a website that I had previewed at home. There were many videos and interactive activities to promote individual learning on the topic. Once we got to the computers, I forgot that there was no sound available as there were no earphones. As a result, we couldn’t go to the website. Having access to the proper equipment would have been very beneficial to their learning of that topic!

Lastly, Digital Access, for me, is the one I need to learn the most about. Site licenses, technical support, district databases – these are all newer terms to me. One topic that I could comment on is “developing policies and procedures that ensure students' equitable and responsible access to digital resources.” The “responsible access” is one that struck a chord with me. When I have TOC’d in some classes, I see some students almost too comfortable with their access to computers, and devices, and abuse some privileges. I have seen some students go into the computer lab to do their “research”, but end up changing backgrounds, play games, and act like it is their home computer. I can only imagine what some of the older students are “researching” on the side – there are only so many filters! I may be completely off-base with this understanding of “responsible access,” but it is something I see happening.

Reading Reflection Lesson 2 - Digital Media

When asked to comment on my biases for and against digital media, my following reflection would most likely demonstrate my biases against:

As I read through the article by Loertscher, David. The School Library Learning Commons (2008), the stark realization is hitting me. Our society is moving to LIVE in front of a computer screen! Our existence will be in front of a screen. Students collaborating with other students, communicating with teachers…in front of a screen. Textbooks, learning, assignments…in front of a screen. Want to read a good book? …sit in front of a screen. Watch a movie? …go to the screen. Want to do a research project…go to the screen. Children no longer getting together with friends outside the home, they could just video-conference…in front of a screen..Want to chat or have a visit with relatives? …sit in front of a screen. Need to buy groceries, clothes, appliances…sit in front of a screen. We don’t even have to have a face-to-face verbal conversation with someone anymore, but with text…and screens (anyone watched WALL-E??). More people are working from home…in front of a screen. Sure wish I could make a screen make my dinner, do my laundry, and clean my house!! Oh wait, there are services that I can access (and of course pay for) by getting in front of…yes…a screen!! This is all feeling rather overwhelming to me – I wonder if this is similar to how people felt with the introduction of the telephone??!

Personally, I DO enjoy digital media, I definitely see the usefulness, and I am amazed at the amount of information that is available at my fingertips. I use digital media often, but I have the choice of when I want to use it, and when I don’t. To live in a society where there is no choice, honestly, makes me a little nervous. I just don’t like the idea of “living in front of a screen.” I like face-to-face contact, and getting out into the “real world!”