- Email: [email protected]
Maintaining the cohesive collection: The case for the local cataloger
v’
PERSPECTIVES
ON . . .
Maintaining the Cohesive Collection: The Case for the Local Cataloger by Ruth Sheeran
T
he recent trend to economize in cataloging departments by reducing the numbers of professional catalogers and highly trained paraprofessionals is a he recent trend to economize in cataloging departments by reducing the numbers of professional catalogers and highly trained paraprofessionals is a worrying development which could have far-reaching effects. In some instances, where entire operations are outsourced to large bibliographic utilities, cataloging departments are virtually eliminated, and local control of the database is effectively lost. Michael Gorman, writing in Librav Journal, addresses this trend and opens his article with a warning: “terrible things are happening to catalogs and cataloging; terrible things with implications for service to library users and the future of libraries.“t The bibliographic database is at the center of the library, and, in order to provide effective access to the library materials, it must necessarily be of a high quality. As Gorman explains, “to the informed librarian, cataloging is seen to be at the heart of librarianship; the central core of everything librarians do.“’ Gorman’s allusion to “the informed librarian” suggests that a full appreciation of the nature and the importance of the catalog is not a simple matter. All too frequently, neither librarians nor users realize the depth of their dependence on a cohesive catalog. (This is perhaps because of the “invisibility” of cataloging-at its most successful, it is least apparent.) Thus, the effects of a poor catalog on users may never be appreciated by the users themselves. Moreover, when decisions are made regarding the role of the cataloging department, these decisions may not be made from a fully enlightened perspective. Many fail to realize that cataloging is not only at the “heart of librarianship,” but also at the center of all academic activity; consequently, they simply do not foresee the problems that may arise from an erosion of the quality of the catalog. As Clare Dunkle points out in her article on outsourcing, “If cataloging staff fail to couch cataloging issues in terms that make sense to management, they may see their manager reaching for outsourcing as a way to understand what is going on.“3 The Need to Categorize For a full understanding of the centrality of cataloging, one must appreciate certain aspects of human cognition, and how
Ruth Sheeran is a reference Bishop’s
University
librarian,
Lennoxville,
John Bassett Memorial Library,
Quebec,
.
462
The Journal
of Academic
Librarianship
Canada /lM
127
these aspects influence even the most sophisticated type of research. One primary act of human cognition seems to be categorizing, a function which seeks to impose order on the chaos of experience. In The Fine Line, Eviatar Zerubavel, a sociologist at Rutgers University, explores this human need to impose order on phenomena: “We transform the natural world into a social one by carving out of it mental chunks we treat as if they were discrete, totally detached from their surroundings.“4 This necessary dividing of the world into categories is done for library users by the catalogers who apply order to the chaos of accumulated knowledge and categorize it so that users can retrieve the mental chunks that they require. The need to divide the world, however, is balanced by a need to distinguish entities one from another. Zerubavel writes: “The process of placing the various things we perceive in categories, however, is usually accompanied by a complementary process of separating them from other things.. . Separating things from the context in which they are embedded (decontextualization) is the basic model for mental differentiation in general.“” Within the complex organization of various scholarly discourse communities, cataloging has this twofold function: to place materials that are the same together; and, to distinguish each item from all the others and identify what makes it unique. Everything that a cataloger does when creating a bibliographic record involves either defining the similarities or the differences of a given item. Ultimately, the researcher’s ability to retrieve materials depends on how well this “sameness” and “differentness” is specified, and how accurately the catalog reflects distinctions present in the researcher’s academic field. Researchers approach the library catalog with many different needs, but essentially these needs can all be reduced to one of two basic questions. Does the library have something specific and individual? Or, does it have something similar to other things in a group? If the researcher wants a specific item, it must be possible to distinguish that individual item from all the like items surrounding it. Eroding the uniqueness of the description means that the user is never sure of what exactly has been located until it is retrieved physically from the shelf. If the researcher wishes to retrieve related materials, it is necessary to find those grouped materials together, either in the catalog or on the shelf. Eroding the sameness of the description means that the user must spend much more time trying to gather together the materials. In order for the researcher to make sense of the chaos of knowledge, the cataloger must provide the necessary categorization and differentiation of the materials which contain that knowledge. According to Karl Weintraub, “The producers and the users of knowledge have helped to create the
complexity of the library world, and then they expect the librarian to reduce this to a set of simplicities.“6 Local Control of the Database Essentially, the intellectual exercise of cataloging is the piece-by-piece creation of a comprehensive map of the world of knowledge. By carefully analyzing each new item and placing it correctly, the cataloger builds and maintains a guide through the accumulated complexity of the library’s materials. Each library, however, has developed slightly different paths based on the needs of the local users. The catalogers have, in effect, created a local knowledge neighborhood which is friendly and comprehensible to the library’s researchers. In many libraries, the catalogers have accumulated collective knowledge and experience which allow for a cohesive collection designed to meet the needs of the local users. This cohesiveness is reflected in the ease with which the local users can retrieve the material. It is probable, therefore, that the necessary high quality of the bibliographic database will diminish if local control of cataloging is compromised or lost. Maintaining Shelf Order Browsing the shelves has always been an effective and much used method of finding materials. Indeed, this is the very reason that materials are classified on the shelves in call number order. In a recent article on subject access, Arlene Taylor notes that “despite rumours to the contrary classification is far from dead. Both research and experiments have shown the usefulness of classification for enhanced subject access.“’ Research has shown that finding similar materials on the shelf beside the original item sought is an important method of retrieval for the researcher. Thomas Mann, in Library Research Methods, persuasively argues the merits of this method and gives examples of when shelf browsing is useful and valuable. He points out that “a researcher can . . browse through full texts-not just brief catalog records representing those texts but the texts themselvesin a systematic fashion. Such an arrangement provides much greater depth of access to the actual contents of the books than does a card or computer catalog consisting merely of brief surrogate records representing the books.“8 Mann also emphasises the importance of serendipity in information retrieval and explains how this is enhanced through good shelf order. To illustrate his point he gives examples of reference questions that could only be answered by shelf browsing.’ However, this method of information retrieval is only possible if the catalogers thoughtfully and accurately situate the items in the collection. By carefully following established policies, catalogers develop and maintain an integrity in the collection. The “mental chunks” evolve and develop as the library grows, and the shelf order corresponds to the categorized whole. The mental mapping out of human knowledge is reflected in the physical placement of items in correct shelf order. This order says to the browser that a given item stands beside other items because it deals with the same ideas. Due to the catalogers’ decisions over the years about the preference of one class number over another, the organization of knowledge develops a cohesiveness appropriate to the local collection. It is this cohesion that must be maintained if the browsing aspect of information retrieval is not to be jeopardized. Knowledge is ever expanding, and new areas are continually developing; classification schemes grow and develop to reflect this expansion. The organization of the local library must change and develop along with this growth. Changes in classi-
fication must be monitored to ensure that the local shelf order does not become fragmented or stagnant. The individual library must respond to the growth of the classification scheme if the knowledge mapping of the shelf order is to remain coherent and if effective browsing is to continue. Classification number expansion results from a closer de& nition of a subject. Materials that previously could only reflect a general, broad topic in their class number can be more precisely delineated and situated. Thus, the cataloger is able not only to expand the knowledge map as ideas develop but also to reflect this development in the shelf order in a more detailed fashion. The shelf order can then say more to the browser about the content of the material and about how it fits into the development of new areas of knowledge. Maintaining Subject Control While classification physically arranges the materials using coded categories, subject classification describes the subject in semantic terms. Placing materials together under defined subject headings describes the knowledge map through text and carves out in words the “mental chunks” for the researcher. Instead of grouping like materials together on the shelves, subject access groups like materials together in an alphabetical list. While alphabetizing is the easiest and most universally understood method of imposing order on chaos, it does not, by itself, create an order which defines relationships and suggests similarities. An alphabetical list files subjects adjacently which bare no relationship to each other. Easy and direct access to an individual subject is supplied, but there is no coherent picture of the universe of knowledge. While man’s knowledge is mapped out for the user on the shelves, knowledge is scattered and split in an alphabetical subject listing. However, a coherence in the subject map can be developed for the user, thus allowing the cataloger to overcome this problem of fragmentation. Through the use of a controlled vocabulary, coupled with a good syndetic structure, the cataloger can impose a system of relationships on the alphabetical order and present to the user a systematically configured picture of the whole. Although alphabetical order destroys the related nature of knowledge, controlling the vocabulary used in subject definition prevents the scattering of materials under a variety of different terms. The syndetic structure preserves the knowledge map which the cataloger has drawn for the user and describes the relationships that exist between the different areas of knowledge. The local cataloger’s acquired knowledge of the users and the collection also aids in subject definition. The local cataloger knows which subject heading will be more appropriate for the users, has a sense of how the subject catalog has developed, and applies this knowledge to the materials. The cataloger knows the needs of the users and can tailor the subject catalog to reflect this. As with classification maintenance, subject catalog maintenance must be an ongoing task if the users are going to retrieve materials easily and accurately. Keyword Access While keyword access is a useful method of retrieval, it cannot compensate for good controlled subject definition. Arlene Taylor, in her discussion of subject access, lists some of the disadvantages of keyword searching and says, “If one just wants to find something regardless of source or quality, keyword will probably do it. However, if one is a researcher looking for the best on a subject or everything on a subject, keyword is quite chancy.“” Keyword searching can enhance
November
1996
463
subject access but cannot be relied upon to replace the controlled vocabulary. Mann explains that controlled vocabulary, coupled with subdivisions, provides accurate and predictable information access. “With key words one has an avenue of access but not a system, precisely because there is no predictability to it. One cannot tell in advance which key words will work best, and if a searcher’s specification is even slightly off, she will miss whole areas of records-perhaps even the large majority of works on her topic-without realizing that she’s missed anything.“” Maintaining Name Authority Control The control of name and series entries is just as important to the retrieval of information as the control of subjects and classification. Making sure that the same heading is always used for names and series is another way in which accurate retrieval is maintained. Failure to maintain the correct forms of entry will seriously diminish the usefulness of the catalog and jeopardize the researcher’s ability to find like items together or distinguish items one from another. Cataloging the Internet With the advent of the Internet, access to knowledge has taken on a new dimension which is both exciting and disquieting. The organized, categorized system that catalogers are able to create for the library user through the local database is now challenged by a vast and ever-growing arena where order is virtually nonexistent. Very often, what is missing from the Internet is precisely the necessary defined sameness and differentness which makes the knowledge contained in the library easily and coherently accessible. The development of methods to integrate references to useful parts of the Internet into the local catalog means that some order can be applied to the chaos. The knowledge map that the cataloger has developed within the library can be extended to include paths to information available outside the physical building. The cohesive defined order that exists for the user in the local database can, thus, include access to knowledge that does not exist physically on the library shelves. Even so, diminishing the importance of the local catalog, or allowing it to fall into desuetude in favor of the huge world of knowledge accessible through the Internet would render a grave disservice to the local library user. A far more useful endeavor would be to devise ways to extend the already defined methods of organizing knowledge to the vast expanse of networked information outside the library walls. Database Design The cohesive collection, however, must be coupled with the appropriate database system design if the user is to benefit fully from the organization that the catalogers have created. Creating the database is only half the work of making information available; the other half is devising the retrieval methods which lead to the materials. The library’s comprehensive knowledge map must be presented in ways that reflect the integrated geography of the different disciplines, and it is the local catalogers who have the best vision of this integrated whole. In a sense, creation of the bibliographic record is the concrete manifestation of the catalogers’ abstract concept of “connectedness;” the complementary step involves providing means that relate the bibliographic record back to its abstract terms. This blending of practical methods with abstract organizational ideas makes the information comprehensible and retrievable. As Ellen Zyroff points out, “A cataloger’s mind-set is crucial to the establishment and oversight of information organization and is
464
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
key to successful access. The intellectual framework of reference is based on the intellectual framework of cataloging.“‘* Providing this practical comprehensive picture is a function of two processes-creating the indexing structure of the database and designing the OPAC interface. The indexing structure determines what pieces of information will be retrieved when various search keys are utilized. Defining this structure is a complex task which demands a complete understanding of the bibliographic record. The OPAC interface must present the user with a comprehensible method of accessing the information contained in the database. All the screens which the OPAC presents to the user must not only delineate the information clearly and simply but also reflect as closely as possible the connectedness of the ideas. Catalogers have a complete understanding of the way information is put into the database and this leads naturally to an understanding of the best way to get the information out. When this is coupled with the local catalogers’ knowledge of the library’s collection it becomes evident that their contributions are essential for good access. Not utilizing the expertise of the catalogers in the design of the database retrieval process overlooks the library’s most knowledgeable employees in this area. As Zyroff says, “Those who have not spent time applying and creating subject and name headings, authority records, descriptive cataloging and classification codes, and indexing norms don’t have in-depth perspective on the structure of knowledge.“‘3 Bibliographic Instruction Another valuable area where catalogers can utilize their expertise is in bibliographic instruction. Teaching the users the correct methods of accessing the database is an important step in the provision of information. Catalogers, because of their accumulated knowledge of the collection and their knowledge of the database construction, can provide valuable insights into the intricacies of OPAC searching. CONCLUSION Losing the expertise of the local catalogers either through a reduction in staff or through outsourcing can result in a diminishing of the users’ abilities to retrieve the desired library materials easily and accurately. In fact, reducing any of the important functions discussed above can make retrieval more difficult and vitiate the effects of the local tailoring of the database. A disturbing aspect of a deterioration in the quality of the database is that the effects are often invisible. The slowly diminishing quality is not readily perceived by the library user. At the reference or circulation desks, cutbacks in staff are immediately obvious because the user must wait longer for service. However, the effects of cutbacks to cataloging staff are not seen. It may not be evident to the user that the materials are becoming harder to find; he or she will either be satisfied with what is found or will go elsewhere thinking that the library cannot meet his or her needs. As Gorman says, in his article in Library Journal, “A library user has a high probability of finding what she or he seeks very quickly if the database has quality because of the dedicated, high-level work of catalogers. If the database lacks coherence and quality, the user will spend a great deal of time in a frustrating search or, worse, o away believing that the desired document does not exist.“’ 4 The library’s database is the heart of information retrieval. Losing local control, having no one who knows what is happening in the catalog or who understands the structure of the data-
base, compromises the main purpose of the library. Attempting to economize by cutting back in the cataloging department may, in the long run, mean that the user will have to spend more time trying to retrieve the library’s materials. Time spent by the local staff maintaining and building the database is not expensive time wasted: “Essentially, productive use of a database involves the expenditure of time-time spent by a librarian at the beginning of the process to save time for thousands of potential users, or time spent by those thousands of users at the end of the process as they seek to make sense of incoherent or even random bibliographic records.“‘” These are the dangerous hidden effects of losing the local catalogers, effects about which one should think carefully. One would do well to remember Thomas Mann’s words: “The mere presence of information within a source does not ensure access to it. Access is determined by the format of its presentation, not by its mere existence.“r6 This format of presentation is both created by the catalogers in good bibliographic records and made accessible by good system design. If libraries are going to continue to provide accurate, efficient access to the materials that they collect, then the database must be maintained in a cohesive, correct manner. Local catalogers must be considered essential to this process.
NOTES
AND REFERENCES
1. Michael German, “The Corruption of Cataloguing,” Library JournaZ 120 (September 15, 1995): 32-34. 2. Ibid., p. 33. 3. Clare B. Dunkle, “Outsourcing the Catalog Department: A Meditation Inspired by the Business and Library Literature,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (January 1996): 40. 4. Eviatar Zerubavel, The Fine Line: Making Distinctions in Everyduy Life (New York: The Free Press, 1991), p. 5. 5. Ibid., p. I. 6. Karl J. Weintraub, “The Humanistic Scholar and the Library,” Library Quarterly 50 (1 1980): 35. 7. Arlene G. Taylor “On the Subject of Subjects,” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 21 (November 1995): 487. 8. Thomas Mann, Library Research Models: A Guide to Classification, Cataloging, and Computers. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 15. 9. Ibid., pp. 16-18. 10. Taylor, “On the Subject of Subjects,” p. 486. 11. Mann, Library Research Methods, p. 127. 12. Ibid., p. 48. 13. Ellen Zyroff, “Cataloging Is a Prime Number,” American Libraries 27 (May 1996): 147. 14. Got-man, “The Corruption of Cataloging,” p. 34. 15. Ibid., pp. 33-34. 16. Mann, Library Research Methods, p. 73.
November 1996
465
PERSPECTIVES
ON . . .
Maintaining the Cohesive Collection: The Case for the Local Cataloger by Ruth Sheeran
T
he recent trend to economize in cataloging departments by reducing the numbers of professional catalogers and highly trained paraprofessionals is a he recent trend to economize in cataloging departments by reducing the numbers of professional catalogers and highly trained paraprofessionals is a worrying development which could have far-reaching effects. In some instances, where entire operations are outsourced to large bibliographic utilities, cataloging departments are virtually eliminated, and local control of the database is effectively lost. Michael Gorman, writing in Librav Journal, addresses this trend and opens his article with a warning: “terrible things are happening to catalogs and cataloging; terrible things with implications for service to library users and the future of libraries.“t The bibliographic database is at the center of the library, and, in order to provide effective access to the library materials, it must necessarily be of a high quality. As Gorman explains, “to the informed librarian, cataloging is seen to be at the heart of librarianship; the central core of everything librarians do.“’ Gorman’s allusion to “the informed librarian” suggests that a full appreciation of the nature and the importance of the catalog is not a simple matter. All too frequently, neither librarians nor users realize the depth of their dependence on a cohesive catalog. (This is perhaps because of the “invisibility” of cataloging-at its most successful, it is least apparent.) Thus, the effects of a poor catalog on users may never be appreciated by the users themselves. Moreover, when decisions are made regarding the role of the cataloging department, these decisions may not be made from a fully enlightened perspective. Many fail to realize that cataloging is not only at the “heart of librarianship,” but also at the center of all academic activity; consequently, they simply do not foresee the problems that may arise from an erosion of the quality of the catalog. As Clare Dunkle points out in her article on outsourcing, “If cataloging staff fail to couch cataloging issues in terms that make sense to management, they may see their manager reaching for outsourcing as a way to understand what is going on.“3 The Need to Categorize For a full understanding of the centrality of cataloging, one must appreciate certain aspects of human cognition, and how
Ruth Sheeran is a reference Bishop’s
University
librarian,
Lennoxville,
John Bassett Memorial Library,
Quebec,
462
The Journal
of Academic
Librarianship
Canada /lM
127
these aspects influence even the most sophisticated type of research. One primary act of human cognition seems to be categorizing, a function which seeks to impose order on the chaos of experience. In The Fine Line, Eviatar Zerubavel, a sociologist at Rutgers University, explores this human need to impose order on phenomena: “We transform the natural world into a social one by carving out of it mental chunks we treat as if they were discrete, totally detached from their surroundings.“4 This necessary dividing of the world into categories is done for library users by the catalogers who apply order to the chaos of accumulated knowledge and categorize it so that users can retrieve the mental chunks that they require. The need to divide the world, however, is balanced by a need to distinguish entities one from another. Zerubavel writes: “The process of placing the various things we perceive in categories, however, is usually accompanied by a complementary process of separating them from other things.. . Separating things from the context in which they are embedded (decontextualization) is the basic model for mental differentiation in general.“” Within the complex organization of various scholarly discourse communities, cataloging has this twofold function: to place materials that are the same together; and, to distinguish each item from all the others and identify what makes it unique. Everything that a cataloger does when creating a bibliographic record involves either defining the similarities or the differences of a given item. Ultimately, the researcher’s ability to retrieve materials depends on how well this “sameness” and “differentness” is specified, and how accurately the catalog reflects distinctions present in the researcher’s academic field. Researchers approach the library catalog with many different needs, but essentially these needs can all be reduced to one of two basic questions. Does the library have something specific and individual? Or, does it have something similar to other things in a group? If the researcher wants a specific item, it must be possible to distinguish that individual item from all the like items surrounding it. Eroding the uniqueness of the description means that the user is never sure of what exactly has been located until it is retrieved physically from the shelf. If the researcher wishes to retrieve related materials, it is necessary to find those grouped materials together, either in the catalog or on the shelf. Eroding the sameness of the description means that the user must spend much more time trying to gather together the materials. In order for the researcher to make sense of the chaos of knowledge, the cataloger must provide the necessary categorization and differentiation of the materials which contain that knowledge. According to Karl Weintraub, “The producers and the users of knowledge have helped to create the
complexity of the library world, and then they expect the librarian to reduce this to a set of simplicities.“6 Local Control of the Database Essentially, the intellectual exercise of cataloging is the piece-by-piece creation of a comprehensive map of the world of knowledge. By carefully analyzing each new item and placing it correctly, the cataloger builds and maintains a guide through the accumulated complexity of the library’s materials. Each library, however, has developed slightly different paths based on the needs of the local users. The catalogers have, in effect, created a local knowledge neighborhood which is friendly and comprehensible to the library’s researchers. In many libraries, the catalogers have accumulated collective knowledge and experience which allow for a cohesive collection designed to meet the needs of the local users. This cohesiveness is reflected in the ease with which the local users can retrieve the material. It is probable, therefore, that the necessary high quality of the bibliographic database will diminish if local control of cataloging is compromised or lost. Maintaining Shelf Order Browsing the shelves has always been an effective and much used method of finding materials. Indeed, this is the very reason that materials are classified on the shelves in call number order. In a recent article on subject access, Arlene Taylor notes that “despite rumours to the contrary classification is far from dead. Both research and experiments have shown the usefulness of classification for enhanced subject access.“’ Research has shown that finding similar materials on the shelf beside the original item sought is an important method of retrieval for the researcher. Thomas Mann, in Library Research Methods, persuasively argues the merits of this method and gives examples of when shelf browsing is useful and valuable. He points out that “a researcher can . . browse through full texts-not just brief catalog records representing those texts but the texts themselvesin a systematic fashion. Such an arrangement provides much greater depth of access to the actual contents of the books than does a card or computer catalog consisting merely of brief surrogate records representing the books.“8 Mann also emphasises the importance of serendipity in information retrieval and explains how this is enhanced through good shelf order. To illustrate his point he gives examples of reference questions that could only be answered by shelf browsing.’ However, this method of information retrieval is only possible if the catalogers thoughtfully and accurately situate the items in the collection. By carefully following established policies, catalogers develop and maintain an integrity in the collection. The “mental chunks” evolve and develop as the library grows, and the shelf order corresponds to the categorized whole. The mental mapping out of human knowledge is reflected in the physical placement of items in correct shelf order. This order says to the browser that a given item stands beside other items because it deals with the same ideas. Due to the catalogers’ decisions over the years about the preference of one class number over another, the organization of knowledge develops a cohesiveness appropriate to the local collection. It is this cohesion that must be maintained if the browsing aspect of information retrieval is not to be jeopardized. Knowledge is ever expanding, and new areas are continually developing; classification schemes grow and develop to reflect this expansion. The organization of the local library must change and develop along with this growth. Changes in classi-
fication must be monitored to ensure that the local shelf order does not become fragmented or stagnant. The individual library must respond to the growth of the classification scheme if the knowledge mapping of the shelf order is to remain coherent and if effective browsing is to continue. Classification number expansion results from a closer de& nition of a subject. Materials that previously could only reflect a general, broad topic in their class number can be more precisely delineated and situated. Thus, the cataloger is able not only to expand the knowledge map as ideas develop but also to reflect this development in the shelf order in a more detailed fashion. The shelf order can then say more to the browser about the content of the material and about how it fits into the development of new areas of knowledge. Maintaining Subject Control While classification physically arranges the materials using coded categories, subject classification describes the subject in semantic terms. Placing materials together under defined subject headings describes the knowledge map through text and carves out in words the “mental chunks” for the researcher. Instead of grouping like materials together on the shelves, subject access groups like materials together in an alphabetical list. While alphabetizing is the easiest and most universally understood method of imposing order on chaos, it does not, by itself, create an order which defines relationships and suggests similarities. An alphabetical list files subjects adjacently which bare no relationship to each other. Easy and direct access to an individual subject is supplied, but there is no coherent picture of the universe of knowledge. While man’s knowledge is mapped out for the user on the shelves, knowledge is scattered and split in an alphabetical subject listing. However, a coherence in the subject map can be developed for the user, thus allowing the cataloger to overcome this problem of fragmentation. Through the use of a controlled vocabulary, coupled with a good syndetic structure, the cataloger can impose a system of relationships on the alphabetical order and present to the user a systematically configured picture of the whole. Although alphabetical order destroys the related nature of knowledge, controlling the vocabulary used in subject definition prevents the scattering of materials under a variety of different terms. The syndetic structure preserves the knowledge map which the cataloger has drawn for the user and describes the relationships that exist between the different areas of knowledge. The local cataloger’s acquired knowledge of the users and the collection also aids in subject definition. The local cataloger knows which subject heading will be more appropriate for the users, has a sense of how the subject catalog has developed, and applies this knowledge to the materials. The cataloger knows the needs of the users and can tailor the subject catalog to reflect this. As with classification maintenance, subject catalog maintenance must be an ongoing task if the users are going to retrieve materials easily and accurately. Keyword Access While keyword access is a useful method of retrieval, it cannot compensate for good controlled subject definition. Arlene Taylor, in her discussion of subject access, lists some of the disadvantages of keyword searching and says, “If one just wants to find something regardless of source or quality, keyword will probably do it. However, if one is a researcher looking for the best on a subject or everything on a subject, keyword is quite chancy.“” Keyword searching can enhance
November
1996
463
subject access but cannot be relied upon to replace the controlled vocabulary. Mann explains that controlled vocabulary, coupled with subdivisions, provides accurate and predictable information access. “With key words one has an avenue of access but not a system, precisely because there is no predictability to it. One cannot tell in advance which key words will work best, and if a searcher’s specification is even slightly off, she will miss whole areas of records-perhaps even the large majority of works on her topic-without realizing that she’s missed anything.“” Maintaining Name Authority Control The control of name and series entries is just as important to the retrieval of information as the control of subjects and classification. Making sure that the same heading is always used for names and series is another way in which accurate retrieval is maintained. Failure to maintain the correct forms of entry will seriously diminish the usefulness of the catalog and jeopardize the researcher’s ability to find like items together or distinguish items one from another. Cataloging the Internet With the advent of the Internet, access to knowledge has taken on a new dimension which is both exciting and disquieting. The organized, categorized system that catalogers are able to create for the library user through the local database is now challenged by a vast and ever-growing arena where order is virtually nonexistent. Very often, what is missing from the Internet is precisely the necessary defined sameness and differentness which makes the knowledge contained in the library easily and coherently accessible. The development of methods to integrate references to useful parts of the Internet into the local catalog means that some order can be applied to the chaos. The knowledge map that the cataloger has developed within the library can be extended to include paths to information available outside the physical building. The cohesive defined order that exists for the user in the local database can, thus, include access to knowledge that does not exist physically on the library shelves. Even so, diminishing the importance of the local catalog, or allowing it to fall into desuetude in favor of the huge world of knowledge accessible through the Internet would render a grave disservice to the local library user. A far more useful endeavor would be to devise ways to extend the already defined methods of organizing knowledge to the vast expanse of networked information outside the library walls. Database Design The cohesive collection, however, must be coupled with the appropriate database system design if the user is to benefit fully from the organization that the catalogers have created. Creating the database is only half the work of making information available; the other half is devising the retrieval methods which lead to the materials. The library’s comprehensive knowledge map must be presented in ways that reflect the integrated geography of the different disciplines, and it is the local catalogers who have the best vision of this integrated whole. In a sense, creation of the bibliographic record is the concrete manifestation of the catalogers’ abstract concept of “connectedness;” the complementary step involves providing means that relate the bibliographic record back to its abstract terms. This blending of practical methods with abstract organizational ideas makes the information comprehensible and retrievable. As Ellen Zyroff points out, “A cataloger’s mind-set is crucial to the establishment and oversight of information organization and is
464
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
key to successful access. The intellectual framework of reference is based on the intellectual framework of cataloging.“‘* Providing this practical comprehensive picture is a function of two processes-creating the indexing structure of the database and designing the OPAC interface. The indexing structure determines what pieces of information will be retrieved when various search keys are utilized. Defining this structure is a complex task which demands a complete understanding of the bibliographic record. The OPAC interface must present the user with a comprehensible method of accessing the information contained in the database. All the screens which the OPAC presents to the user must not only delineate the information clearly and simply but also reflect as closely as possible the connectedness of the ideas. Catalogers have a complete understanding of the way information is put into the database and this leads naturally to an understanding of the best way to get the information out. When this is coupled with the local catalogers’ knowledge of the library’s collection it becomes evident that their contributions are essential for good access. Not utilizing the expertise of the catalogers in the design of the database retrieval process overlooks the library’s most knowledgeable employees in this area. As Zyroff says, “Those who have not spent time applying and creating subject and name headings, authority records, descriptive cataloging and classification codes, and indexing norms don’t have in-depth perspective on the structure of knowledge.“‘3 Bibliographic Instruction Another valuable area where catalogers can utilize their expertise is in bibliographic instruction. Teaching the users the correct methods of accessing the database is an important step in the provision of information. Catalogers, because of their accumulated knowledge of the collection and their knowledge of the database construction, can provide valuable insights into the intricacies of OPAC searching. CONCLUSION Losing the expertise of the local catalogers either through a reduction in staff or through outsourcing can result in a diminishing of the users’ abilities to retrieve the desired library materials easily and accurately. In fact, reducing any of the important functions discussed above can make retrieval more difficult and vitiate the effects of the local tailoring of the database. A disturbing aspect of a deterioration in the quality of the database is that the effects are often invisible. The slowly diminishing quality is not readily perceived by the library user. At the reference or circulation desks, cutbacks in staff are immediately obvious because the user must wait longer for service. However, the effects of cutbacks to cataloging staff are not seen. It may not be evident to the user that the materials are becoming harder to find; he or she will either be satisfied with what is found or will go elsewhere thinking that the library cannot meet his or her needs. As Gorman says, in his article in Library Journal, “A library user has a high probability of finding what she or he seeks very quickly if the database has quality because of the dedicated, high-level work of catalogers. If the database lacks coherence and quality, the user will spend a great deal of time in a frustrating search or, worse, o away believing that the desired document does not exist.“’ 4 The library’s database is the heart of information retrieval. Losing local control, having no one who knows what is happening in the catalog or who understands the structure of the data-
base, compromises the main purpose of the library. Attempting to economize by cutting back in the cataloging department may, in the long run, mean that the user will have to spend more time trying to retrieve the library’s materials. Time spent by the local staff maintaining and building the database is not expensive time wasted: “Essentially, productive use of a database involves the expenditure of time-time spent by a librarian at the beginning of the process to save time for thousands of potential users, or time spent by those thousands of users at the end of the process as they seek to make sense of incoherent or even random bibliographic records.“‘” These are the dangerous hidden effects of losing the local catalogers, effects about which one should think carefully. One would do well to remember Thomas Mann’s words: “The mere presence of information within a source does not ensure access to it. Access is determined by the format of its presentation, not by its mere existence.“r6 This format of presentation is both created by the catalogers in good bibliographic records and made accessible by good system design. If libraries are going to continue to provide accurate, efficient access to the materials that they collect, then the database must be maintained in a cohesive, correct manner. Local catalogers must be considered essential to this process.
NOTES
AND REFERENCES
1. Michael German, “The Corruption of Cataloguing,” Library JournaZ 120 (September 15, 1995): 32-34. 2. Ibid., p. 33. 3. Clare B. Dunkle, “Outsourcing the Catalog Department: A Meditation Inspired by the Business and Library Literature,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 22 (January 1996): 40. 4. Eviatar Zerubavel, The Fine Line: Making Distinctions in Everyduy Life (New York: The Free Press, 1991), p. 5. 5. Ibid., p. I. 6. Karl J. Weintraub, “The Humanistic Scholar and the Library,” Library Quarterly 50 (1 1980): 35. 7. Arlene G. Taylor “On the Subject of Subjects,” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 21 (November 1995): 487. 8. Thomas Mann, Library Research Models: A Guide to Classification, Cataloging, and Computers. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 15. 9. Ibid., pp. 16-18. 10. Taylor, “On the Subject of Subjects,” p. 486. 11. Mann, Library Research Methods, p. 127. 12. Ibid., p. 48. 13. Ellen Zyroff, “Cataloging Is a Prime Number,” American Libraries 27 (May 1996): 147. 14. Got-man, “The Corruption of Cataloging,” p. 34. 15. Ibid., pp. 33-34. 16. Mann, Library Research Methods, p. 73.
November 1996
465