When I first started here, way back in October, one of the first things I did was to organize all the print books by subject. It was pretty haphazard, since a lot of my books were either uncataloged or missing call number labels, but I rationalized that at least students could go to, say, the Allied Health section, and find books in their subject.
However, now that my collection is growing and my cataloging is speeding up, I'm having a hard time keeping my original subject areas. I originally organized my print books in an almost Barnes & Noble-esque set up - as I said before, each program had its own subject area, including General Education, and I organized by call number WITHIN each subject area. But now, I'm wondering if I should re-organize the books and simply have everything in call number order (i.e. traditional academic library structure), and then identify collections within that call number order.
I feel that both have pros and cons. On the one hand, students feel more comfortable with the bookstore model, and can quickly identify that one subject section is "their" section. On the other hand, I find myself fighting with the LC numbers and disagreeing with where individual books should go. Following the traditional LC classification for the entire collection would then allow students to explore additional subject areas through browsing.
I know this is a common library science debate, but I would love to hear from you guys on how you organized your print collections. What model do you prefer: traditional library or "bookstore" model? Or do you somehow combine both models? What would you suggest?
GOA9: Progress Report
2 days ago
8 comments:
I have rearranged the library into LC classification. This happened when I couldn't find a book that a student needed that wasn't checked out. Now that everything is in LC order, I have no trouble finding things. I have a separate General Reference section at the beginning and then all is LC. For the most part, the program areas wind up together on the shelf anyway. We also have a tutor who is very interested in working in the library, so she recently did shelf reading of the entire library and all is in order!
I separate my collection into Schools: Allied Health / Business / Education / Technology and Design / Justice Studies. I have a Career Services section, a General Studies, and even an Office 2007 section. I've also organized the periodicals in the same way.
I've further separated some of categories: in AH, Medical Coding / Massage Therapy & Pharmacy Technician; in Business, Office Management, Business Management & Accounting.
I have only one wall to work with for shelving, so the top shelves are all Reference books for that particular area.
I've found that this is a very useful way of organizing the books here. Students don't seem as hesitant to just browse "their" section, and I highly encourage them to do that.
My collection is organized by discipline and then by LC call number within the collection. I believe most of our campuses are set up in a similar fashion, as we were advised about a year and a half ago to set-up or collections this way.
It is possible that various libraries have decided to drop this system, as sometimes it's quite difficult to place the book in one specific discpline. For instance, I've always struggled with deciding if child behavioral disorder materials should go into Allied Health or into the Early Childhood Education collection. (In this case, Early Childhood typically wins because usually it's the ECE students that are looking for that type of book.)
It's an interesting discussion. It leaves me wondering who still uses the "dot" system, and who has dropped it.
Great comments - and Kate, I think you bring up an interesting point about our "dot" system. I've been adding our dots, but I often times disagree with the dot system - for instance, I feel that a lot of our Gen Ed section should really go in a different section. I also have the same problem with early childhood and psychology. Any more thoughts?
Karen, I assume then that you organize by call number within each section and mini-section?
I'll be the first to admit that, perhaps, the dots were a bad idea. I still believe, however, that is important to help students locate resources within their discipline if they are browsing the print collection. Additionally, programs like Digital Design can be hairy. So, if you are arranging solely by LC (that's fine), how do you identify those programs that span multiple LC subject areas?
Yes, I put items in LC order within sections.
Like Karen, I put books in LC order within program sections. The admissions team uses that as a selling point to highlight how student-friendly our library is.
I use LC, and use dots to designate program. Whether you arrange by program and then LC, or by LC then program (dots) neither one works 100%. I just like knowing that LC is sub-catergorized for me already. Either way it is the teaching/learning of the system, so you understand "how" to find it that is counts.
Post a Comment