[Publib] RE: Good-bye to Dewey

[Dale McNeill]

I'll be quiet on this subject after this post, I promise.  Tony's post,
though, gives me to opportunity to repeat that DDC *doesn't* force any
library to divide test books or to separate books on computing.  Instead,
decisions made by staff in LC's Dewey group make decisions and the staff who
update Dewey make decisions.  By and large, they make decisions that make
sense.  And they are, fundamentally, based on Mr. Dewey's idea of dividing
human knowledge into "aspects".  However, there is no reason that any
library shouldn't use DDC to arrange items into whatever makes logical sense
in that library for those customers.

And we already do this.  Take the examples of recorded music and DVDs.  Look
up a movie or CD in the catalogs of 10 or 20 public libraries.  You'll find
many different classifications--from none to quite complex DDC.  We, public
libraries, can easily see that a huge research-oriented collection of CDs
should be arranged very differently from a collection of 1,000 CDs of mostly
popular music.

While CIP has been a wonderful aid to libraries of all sizes, somehow
libraries have felt (often because it's cheaper, which does matter) that
they had to classify the book in the say way LC's Dewey group did.  They do
great work and I appreciate the staff there every day.  However, their only
customers are publishers and (ultimately) libraries.  The Library of
Congress doesn't arrange *their* collection in DDC order.  No LC staff are
helping people find "some study guide, I'll know it when I see it" or
answering "I need information about several careers to help me choose one".


I'm very glad that we're having this conversation.  I think that cataloging
(describing) and classifying (organizing), along with selection, are among
the things that fundamentally make libraries different from piles of
information containing items (books, LPs, CDs, DVDs, databases, etc) and
from book/music/video stores.  The other, obviously, is the people working
in public service in libraries, meeting the needs--and surpassing
expectations--of library users day in and day out.

Regards,

Dale




On 6/1/07, TNew at ci.bedford.tx.us <TNew at ci.bedford.tx.us> wrote:
>
>   I've been following this topic with interest and while I think that
> tossing Dewey out the door is a bit over the top, I do think that there are
> some things that just don't make sense to the general public.
>
> Here are some examples:
>
> The standardized exam study guides are divided by subject.  Patrons expect
> them to be all in one place and see no distinciton between the GRE, GED,
> ACT, the Civil Cervice Exams, the TOEFL, the THEA, or, my personal favorite,
> the exam to become a Railroad Engineer (the folks that drive trains, not the
> ones that build them.)  CLEP tests
>
> Information on becoming a citizen is split into two chunks in the 300s.
>
> And the one that bugs me the most.....
>
> Bbooks on repairing computers are in the 600's and the books on software
> are in the 000s?  Try explaining that one to the patron who comes in and
> says "Where are your computer books?"  And we won't even discuss the digital
> photography section in the 700s.
>
> So, in conclusion, for the small and mid-sized public library there are
> some serious flaws in Dewey which really confuse the public, and at times
> librarians :-).
>
> It will be interesting to see the library's report that is experimenting.
> Hopefully someone on the editorial staff of Public Libraries or Library
> Journal will report on the library after a year has gone by and they have a
> chance to see how it has been working.
>
> Tony New
> Information Resources Librarian
> Bedford Public Library, Bedford Texas
>
>
> =
> _______________________________________________
> Publib mailing list
> Publib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/publib
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.webjunction.org/wjlists/publib/attachments/20070601/5255565d/attachment.htm