Librarianship’s Future Strengths: Are OPACs Broken?

I recently stumbled across an older ACRLog posting “Academic Librarianships’ Future Strengths?”

While the entire article gave me something to reflect upon and think about regarding our future strengths, I think the most interesting part of the post, from my perspective (and likely most of you if you’re reading this “Cataloguing” blog!) is the following:

While it’s still enough of a future strength to make the list, I’m optimistic about the OPAC. NC State, Koha, Evergreen, VuFind, Fac-Back-OPAC, WorldCat, LibraryThing, Aquabrowser, the Open Library, and the last proprietary ILS vendors standing, are making inroads. That said, your OPAC is broken if [emphasis added] it:
1. Doesn’t offer faceted browsing;
2. Doesn’t include federated search that retrieves relevant results from your entire collection (e.g. monographs, serials, other media, special collections);
3. Doesn’t have a permanent, clean URL for every item in your collection;
4. Doesn’t produce that URL in a way that shows up in Google/Yahoo/MSN/Ask, etc.;
5. Doesn’t offer useful feeds (e.g. new material, sorted by subject);
6. Requires that your constituents get trained in order to use it effectively.

Out of the 3 comments offered by readers at the end of this article, two of them are commenting on the OPAC. I find this very telling, given that the main thrust of the article is not about OPACs, nor does the section on them dominate the post.

While I wouldn’t necessarily say an OPAC is broken if it does not provide the features listed above, I believe that an OPAC that does not have these features is certainly in serious need of attention. However, if your library doesn’t have a plan or hasn’t started a dialogue about implementing these features, I would be very concerned. While some of these features already exist as an option in catalogues or have the capability of being implemented without significant expense, others require new ILS software, upgrades or the purchase of software such as Webfeat or Search 360 (federated searching). And, of course, when an OPAC requires these things, our first consideration is budget, followed closely by justifying the need for it and the demand on resources (including staff time and expertise for implementing these things).

As long as an OPAC can provide access, it isn’t broken. But, without useful features, it faces serious limitations and handicaps that will only escalate into very serious concerns for the future of any cataloguing department and the future of the catalogue in your library.

That said, I too am very optimistic about the OPAC, given all of the technology and attention it is being given by vendors, library management and professional literature. So – now we need to start making our own lists. What do you think about your own OPACs? Is yours broken? Half-broken? Just a little worse for wear? Or, are you already talking about these feaures and well on your way to implementing them?

Update on First Nations Subject Headings

With LAC’s decision to hold back on making a decision about the use of First Nations subject headings, I am still attempting to provide proper access to these names in my own work as a cataloguer. Recently, one of my staff members brought to my attention a work on the *Malecite* First Nation. They are a People geographically located primarily in New Brunswick, with one band located in Maine.

The proper LC authority for this First Nation is “Malecite Indians”. As always, this is a struggle between following LC, and reflecting the cultural differences in terminology and use in Canada. In this case, given that they are primarily located in Canada, I knew immediately we had to alter the authority to reflect that they are a First Nation, removing the term “Indian”. For a refresher on the work I have done in this area, you can view these past posts.

My research, however, indicated that the spelling of Malecite was not necessarily accurate. While Malecite appears to be the English spelling, the more commonly used spellings are Maliseet and Malisit (which is the Mi’Kmaq term). Also under consideration (or at least for inclusion as “see” references in the authority) was their own name for themselves, Wolastoqiyik, as well as the two other names, St. John’s Indians (term used in old literature) and Etchemin (French name).

So, I began to do some digging.

Not only did I visit every Malecite First Nation website that I could find, I read up on the history of these People (including Canadian government and museum resources/documents). However, one of the most interesting websites that I ran across was Daniel Paul’s website. Daniel Paul has focused an incredible amount of his career on the history and terminology of the First Nations of Canada, and more specifically, the Maritimes. What an amazing resource! The information on his website, in addition to all of the firsthand accounts and information from the Malecite First Nation sites that I had discovered assisted me in making, what I hope, is an informed decision in the proper usage name (terminology/spelling) for the Malecite.

In the end, I decided that Maliseet is actually the most commonly used and accepted spelling. While it is arguable that I should adopt Wolastoqiyik as the proper authority or leave the LC authority as is, I had to consider access to the general public (in Canada), and not just our First Nations communities. And, from what I found in my research, Maliseet rather than Wolastoqiyik is used more frequently among all groups of communities/peoples (First Nations included).

This is now our authority for Maliseet First Nation. It is not complete, as you notice if you compare LC’s authority, with our newly created authority. We have to add additional 450s and 550s, but at least it now reflects what, in Canada, is perhaps a better term for this First Nation.
Authority screen shots comparison

RA Training Day Slides – The Catalogue as an RA Tool

The RA training day went well this past Monday. It was great to see a room of about 19 library staff members eager to learn about readers’ advisory! In addition, we had a handful of staff from libraries throughout Nova Scotia, from Yarmouth to Cape Breton, attending our session.

I think the training went well, and all of the attendees appeared to find the session on the catalogue interesting. I was able to cover all of the content I was hoping to in 30 minutes (I tend to be energetic and talk a bit fast). However, it didn’t look like I lost anyone, and no one appeared bored or uninterested. Phew! My slides are a bit different from last year. I’m sorry there are no speaking notes to go along with these slides, but I don’t use notes, unless I’m uncomfortable and unfamiliar with the topic. However, as always, I’d love to hear your comments or questions!

Being a librarian is no laughing matter

Lately, my husband and I have been out car shopping on the weekends.  Just a couple of weekends ago, we went to a local used car lot and had a discussion with one of the salesmen.  My story starts as we’re sitting in the salesman’s office:

Out of curiosity (and likely in an effort to judge how much we could spend on a car), the salesman asked my husband and me what we do for a living.

When my husband indicated he was a lawyer, the salesman nodded and smiled.  When I told him I was a librarian, he laughed.  Yes, laughed.  As he leaned back in his chair, he went on to say derisively “ahh, I know Dewey is going the way of the dodo.” 

At this point, I felt like saying “I heard the same about used car salesmen”.  Or at least asking, “how do you think your sales pitch is going?  Do you think you’re doing a good job?”  However, I simply stated reasonably that yes, while some libraries are moving away from Dewey, at this time our library has no intention of doing so.  He seemed mystified and said something along the lines of “hanging on to a dying tradition” or some such comment.  I encouraged him to visit our library.

How is it that when stating our profession, individuals find it laughable?  In this instance, I am hoping to chalk it up to ignorance and the salesman’s idea of coming off as clever.  But I am assuming, however dangerous this might be, that there are plenty of other members of the public who also have little respect for our profession.  Why this is and what can we do about is something we need to think about. Or do we?

In the end, my husband and I laughed it off (as a lawyer, he’s learned you need to have a sense of humour).  And we decided NOT to buy a car at that lot. I think the lesson learned is that all professions are made fun of or laughed at by some people. We can’t take it too seriously as long as we continue to change, grow and learn, just as we have always done – trying our best and reaching out to as many people as possible.

Upcoming e-forum on communication between public and technical services

This was just posted on AUTOCAT. Given the need for communication, let’s hope that professionals from technical services and front-line services participate. I think this is a great first step in beginning the conversation and bridging the divide between front-line and backroom services.

The information, with registration form is below:
Please mark your calendars and share with anyone who might be interested!

Please join us for an e-forum discussion. It’s free and open to everyone!
Registration information is at the end of the message.

“The Art of Conversation: Improving Communication between Technical
Services and Public Services”
November 18 – November 20, 2009
Moderated by Sarah Simpson and Keri Cascio

How do you communicate with other departments at your institution? Is
your day filled with a flurry of emails, or do you hear the crickets
chirping? Sarah Simpson, Technical Services Manager at the Tulsa
City-County Library, and Keri Cascio, Branch Manager at the St. Louis
City-County Library District, will moderate a discussion about sharing
information between departments and creating points of contact. The
Tulsa City-County Library Tech Services department set up a Help Desk to open their lines of communication. What have you done at your institution?

To register:

Go to: http://lists.ala.org/sympa, click on ALCTS (spelled out) under the ALA Division heading, then choose alcts-eforum@ala.org
 (mailto: alcts-eforum@ala.org).   A login and password are required to
register. Instructions for obtaining a login and password may be found
on the list homepage. Participation is free and open to anyone..

The Catalogue IS an RA tool: Annual RA Training Day

In November, our Readers’ Services Team will be holding our annual Ra training day. As usual, it is an introductory training for new staff, or for readers’ advisors in the library who either need a refresher or haven’t yet attended a formal RA training. New this year, we’ll also include a handful of staff from our regional libraries, exposing them to RA work in the library.

Last year, I blogged about this as it was the first ever RA training that included a catalogue component. As you know, I am a BIG advocate of using the catalogue for readers’ advisory services and that yes, it is indeed an RA tool.

Last year, my presentation was a bare-bones introduction to this concept, with a total of 15 minutes to present on the catalogue. But this year, even though I’ve been allotted a larger time-slot, I’m finding that my presentation is longer than the new 45 minutes I’ve been given.

Because it’s an introduction and a training course for RA’s, I’m attempting to find a balance between ideas and concepts, and hands-on, useful information regarding readers’ advisory services in the catalogue. I’m taking a lot of this information from my APLA presentation this past Spring, but tailoring it into how these ideas are actually practiced within our library system.

While I want to go in to social catalogues, enriched content and examples of what other libraries are doing to enhance readers’ advisory work, I have to remind myself that these professionals need practical information on how to analyze a bib record and bring out information that will assist them in searching for appeals and read-a-likes using structured searches based on subject headings and genres. As important, I need to expose them to all of the collaborative work that goes on between front-line RAs and backroom RAs (cataloguers). This includes the creation of new genres, reading lists and links from a bib record to our readers’ blog (currently a proposed collaborative idea).

In addition to this, I want to explore why the catalogue has not traditionally been considered an RA tool (ex. The card catalogue) and how it has been evolving into an RA tool through collaboration, enhanced cataloguing practices, the emergence of social catalogues and vendor products such as NoveList Select.

After the training session (November 9th), I will post my finalized slides, along with my thoughts on how the presentation went.

I’m also interested to hear if any of you host RA training days at your libraries and if a catalogue component is included – and why or why not.

A Digital Branch: Your Next Generation Library Catalogue

Like many of you, I follow what David Lee King has to say. His ideas on digital branches, what they are and their capabilities excite me. However, where David promotes a digital branch through a library website, I believe that a library’s digital branch should be delivered through the library catalogue.

While my copy of Library Technology Reports’ September issue “Building the Digital Branch: Guidelines for Transforming your Library Website” is still on order (and I’m anxiously awaiting its arrival!), I did see David’s recent article in American Libraries (October 2009 pg 43).

The Digital Branch: Website vs. Catalogue
Reading David Lee King’s article has resulted in my brain buzzing with dreams of next generation catalogues as the library’s digital branch. While his work focuses on library websites, I see next generation catalogue software that can extract the information from our library’s website and display it in the catalogue. The information can be sorted by facets, too. So, if patrons want to explore local programs, book clubs or events, all they have to do is search one place – the catalogue. And, once they find the program in a results page that looks similar to a bibliographic record, a list of holdings can be attached that reflect the topic of the program. If they find one item particularly useful, they can tag it, provide a review or comment on the item. Perhaps they can even download the information onto their phone, or send it to a friend.

Considerations for Building a Digital Branch
It is with this type of technology in mind that I see the library catalogue becoming the home of the digital library branch. Next generation catalogues are progressing toward a space that builds community. In David’s article, he emphasizes three points that are necessary to building a digital branch. They are:

1. To carefully document who the branch will be serving;
2. To determine what services those people desire; and
3. To determine what we are capable of providing based on budgets and technological capabilities.

An “In-House” Divide

With RDA on the horizon and next generation catalogues actively attempting to include technological trends to fulfill patrons’ needs, should we continue to separate our resources, creating yet another divide? Are we asking patrons’ to belong to two communities within the same library (or to flip flop back and forth between two online sources?) While in the past it has been the physical branch vs. the catalogue, we are creating a divide between the website (a digital branch) and the library catalogue (a digital branch).

I continue to eagerly read the tech trends for library websites, especially those focusing on websites that build a community. But when I read them, I am applying them to library catalogues and their potential.

Many professionals have stressed that information on the website shouldn’t be included in the catalogue. Library catalogues have their function and the website, yet another function. We seem to be breaking down the silos in other areas of librarianship, so my question is why can’t we work on pushing the limits and redefining the expectations and abilities of library catalogues?

Just because library catalogues have traditionally been considered an inventory that provides access to a library’s holdings, should it always remain just an inventory? Or, can it also become the digital branch that reaches out to our patrons and forms a community?

Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup: AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC

For those of you who attended, or weren’t able to attend, the slides are now available from yesterday’s NISO webinar: Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup: AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC

Cataloguing Potpourri

A couple of interesting items for discussion have come across various listservs lately. So, while many of you may have seen the following items, I thought I’d post them for those who haven’t.

Article of Interest
After losing users in catalogs, libraries find better search software
This is an article by Marc Parry in the Chronicle of High Education.
Here’s a sampling of what’s discussed:

The problem is that traditional online library catalogs don’t tend to order search results by ranked relevance, and they can befuddle users with clunky interfaces…

…That’s changing because of two technology trends. First, a growing number of universities are shelling out serious money for sophisticated software that makes exploring their collections more like the easy-to-filter experience you might find in an online Sears catalog.

Second, Virginia and several other colleges, including Villanova University and the University of Rochester, are producing free open-source programs that tackle the same problems with no licensing fees.

A key feature of this software genre is that it helps you make sense of data through “faceted” searching, common when you shop online for a new jacket or a stereo system. Say you type in “Susan B. Anthony.” The new system will ask if you want books by her or about her, said Susan L. Gibbons, vice provost and dean of Rochester’s River Campus Libraries. Users can also sort by media type, language, and date.

Discussion Paper addressing the subject access treatment for cooking and cookbooks
This came across several listservs, but as they are asking for feedback, I’m reposting the announcement in its entirety.

In response to a long-standing and generally recognized need to modernize the subject headings treatment for cooking and cookbooks, the ABA Policy and Standards Division (PSD) of the Library of Congress is in the initial planning stages of a project to revise the headings used in this area. A discussion paper has been posted. Tentative decisions have been made about some aspects of the project; for other aspects, various options are under consideration and no decisions have yet been made. PSD invites public comment on the plans described in the discussion paper.

In recognition of public interest in this topic and of the enormous number of subject heading revisions involved, as well as the volume of materials affected by this policy decision, comment is encouraged. Interested parties are invited to send comments on these plans to Libby Dechman at edec@loc.gov. The deadline for comment is December 1, 2009.

Cataloguing Braille Books for Children

Parents love to read to their children. Even before a child can read, we share stories through board books which introduce them to stories and word recognition. But what happens when your child is blind, or has a visual impairment?

Our library has recently been introduced to a collection of books through Seedlings. They take picture books and add a Braille overlay onto the existing text. This collection is new to our library, and will be new to our cataloguing department. A new collection code has to be created, a decision on where the items should be shelved has to be made, and access points need to be considered.

While I can create access points and a precedent for cataloguing these items (as most of you can as well), I’m hoping to hear from some of you because this is a relatively new collection for libraries. Do any of you have these books in your collections? If so, what type of cataloguing issues have you encountered? What type of feedback have you received?

I’m interested in how these items display in the catalogue. If they are treated as a separate collection, have you used a form field ($h) in your 245 tag? Have you continued to use the standard subject headings for picture books?