“Demonstrate understanding of basic principles and standards involved in organizing information, including classification, cataloging, metadata, or other systems”
Introduction
As librarians and information science professionals, we know better than most the importance of having a well-organized system of information. The purpose of an organizational system is to make finding and using information easier. The ways information can be organized depends on the composition of that information, and it can be simple or very complex. A list of groceries requires a different type of organization than a database of phone numbers and names.
Classification is dividing things up into categories based upon certain attributes. Typically, an object is examined, and then categorized. An excellent example of classification would be the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system. When a new book is added to a library collection, it will be examined in order to classify it according to subject matter, the primary classifier of the DDC. A DDC call number will then be assigned, along with an association to a digital record of the book, and the book will be processed for shelving.
Cataloging involves creating a catalog record, a unique listing in an organized index. Before the digital era, cataloging simply meant creating a DDC card entry, or something similar, for each object. Now a MARC or RDA record is made in the library’s OPAC or similar IR system. These digital entries are rapidly searchable because they are created in a consistent form. Information resource collections held online, such as subscription databases of articles, or the OPAC library records, can be keyword searched or browsed. For example, a MARC record of a book has the element 600 which represents a personal name in the subject field. Looking at another book’s MARC record, the element 600 would also refer to the same thing. Most catalog records are created within industry standards, such as using an authority control like the Library of Congress subject names to create subject listings.
Metadata is data about data. Every book, magazine, and other physical object in a collection has digital records in the library’s OPAC or other information retrieval systems. Catalog records are an example of metadata, as these records contain information -mainly bibliographic- about the object and where to locate it. A book’s record contains its title, author, subject, publisher, publication date, and call number. Metadata is extensible and can also contain information about technical specifications, past management, and other useful information, as there are different standards of metadata which are optimized for different collections and different purposes. For example, MIX is a metadata schema (written in XML) designed for static or raster images, meaning that the elements in the schema are specifically created for and tailorable to digital image objects.
Linking two similar articles together in a database means that the user can gain access to both articles extremely easily. Yet in the physical realm, two similar articles may be linked together because they were in a pathfinder, or citation. Actually accessing the two articles may mean walking to a different shelf, or waiting for ILL to arrive. Both types of information can be made equally accessible to the user with a well-organized system of information retrieval.
Different information environments require different organizational standards. For example, a small library houses a physical collection of the local newspaper, but no other monthly publications. Their organization of their collection of the newspaper would be different and likely more simplistic compared to a larger library with a diverse and multiple volume collection of monthly publications. Different standards would be required if the newspaper collection also existed online, or transitioned to being published online only.
Evidence
My first piece of evidence is a discussion post from week 2 from LIBR 247. This post tasked me with explaining the process of indexing from a step by step point of view. First, the type of index needs to be selected, then the indexer can examine the document and read the bibliographic information associated with the document. Then the aboutness of the document is selected and translated into terms. Finally, the terms are checked against a already predetermined thesaurus or other authority control and brought into consistency. Then relationships between terms such as broader and narrower terms are determined and recorded.
My second piece of evidence is assignment #1 from LIBR 247. This assignment asked me to write a report examining the differences and similarities between my index terms and abstract created using ERIC’s thesaurus, and two different thesauri, resulting index terms, and abstracts of the same article. The two thesauri examined were ERIC and OIR. I compared my index terms and the abstract I wrote on an article to ERIC’s index terms and abstract of the article, and OIR’s keywords and abstract of the same article. I described my process for indexing and abstracting in detail. Overall I found ERIC’s thesaurus to be a more useful resource than OIR for creating index terms. ERIC’s abstract was also found to be the best of the three.
My third piece of evidence is assignment #4 from LIBR 202. This assignment tasked me with creating a database scenario and a sample database to fulfill scenario requirements. I identified the database purpose and user group, and discussed the structure of the database. This database was designed for US Presidential and Vice Presidential biographical data, and the user group was people interested in using that data, such as research students. The chosen structure is similar to a data dictionary that shows the different element fields and their attributes. I populated this database with sample records and included screen shots. I also created a record of my time spent on the assignment.
Conclusion
Overall, effective management of a collection of information involves putting that information into some kind of order; the organization can take many forms depending on the needs of the information collection and the user base. Those collections that are very diverse and large will require more detailed and careful organization than a smaller or more uniform collection. There is also the huge difference between physical and digital objects, whose metadata require different handling and organizational strategies.