Hi,
This is long overdue, and several people asked for a HIT on the question
I asked regarding which subject heading source most schools are using.
Most responses said Sears; a couple said Sears for elementary, LC for
secondary. AC is the children's version of LC and there was one
response on that resource. My problem has not been totally solved as I
was advised by a cataloging instructor that our Union catalog should
stick with one source for continuity: Sears, LC or LC AC. We were
using a copy cataloger for downloading records until this year, so we
have a mixed bag in there which would require some major clean-up to
narrow it down to one resource. After thinking about the responses I
received, I'm leaning toward leaving the mixed bag as it is for more
access points since there is no problem anymore with room to store the
info or the time we used to need to file the cards. See responses below
and I did not attach anyone's name but want to thank those who
responded. The first one is from a University Professor with whom I
correspond on various library issues; the rest of the responses are from
school librarians:
*We're showing students both LC and Sears so they see the difference and
can make a choice later if they have to on the job. We advise also that
they look at what has been done prior to their taking a job and assess
the situation. I still personally prefer Sears since the language is
more natural and easy. Since vendors give a choice though I'd say LC
wins most of the time. Because of the ease of searching OPACS and
adding subject headings I suspect we have become rather cavalier about
using one system and often drop into a hybrid. This has always been the
case though even before OPACS. I've had a cataloger design the new cat
class. The textbook used is : CATALOGIT BY Kaplan and Riedling for
Linworth. It's excellent and says to think carefully about LC due to
cost, language (awkward), and authority control (like you're discussing)
on p. 22. A lot of programs that are ALA accredited are dropping the
requirement that students take a cataloging class. Thus, it may be more
messy...I'd probably leave it alone unless you feel very strongly about
it.
*We use Sears but don't want to be left behind.
*We have always used Sears. Why is LC-AC better?
*We use LC in the secondary libraries and Sears in the elementary.
*We use Sears.
*I am at a K-5 school with approximately 15,000 volumes and 750
students. I use Sears List of Subject Headings and have been very happy
with the choices.
*Getting all of the subject headings is a *good* thing! The more subject
headings, the more access points in a record. The more access points in
a record, the greater the chance that a patron will find the item!
In the old days, libraries chose one of the subject heading conventions
because filing cards was tedious and space dependent. Today, with
electronic cataloging, there is no reason not to use *all* of the
various systems. Follett de-dupes records so only one occurrence of a
subject shows.
*Follett is my main vendor, and I use whatever they provide. When I have
to do original cataloging I'll use CIP if possible. When CIP gives both
LC and Sears I'll use the Sears, but if only one is given I use it.
*I used to think that is was very important to have only one search term
used (cars vs. automobiles), but lately I've started to change my mind.
If one student looks up "Cars" and another one looks up "Automobiles"
why should one of them be frustrated? Why can't they BOTH get hits?
Neither one may get all the books, but since all the books are on the
same shelf anyway, they will see all of them.
*I still only get Sears...it's what was in my collection when I got here
and what I'll continue with. We've set our profile with Follett to only
get Sears so that's all we're getting.
*Why limit at all? In the old days with cards to type subject headings
were a problem. Most people search by keyword and everything. You want
as many ways for them to find material as possible.
*The problem with AC is that it only identifies topics for which there
is an LC analogue. For example, in LC AC the topic is "spiders" but in
LC it is arachnidae, the scientific classification. For topics that
don't have children's translations (if you will), you will get NO
subject headings if you only select AC.
*I generally use Sears (grades 6-8) and if I can't find what I need, I
go to LC (great online site
http://authorities.loc.gov <http://authorities.loc.gov/> )
No matter what you do choose, be consistent with individual subject
headings so all books on a subject can be found.
These days with keyword searching, if the word a kid may look up isn't
in the subject heading, I put it in field 500 or 504 somehow.
*We use Sears.....
*I'd stick with Sears unless you're sure you'll never order from other
vendors than Follett. Most of the smaller vendors don't give a choice of
subject headings - they supply Sears only. Try contacting the ones
you'll likely do business with and ask. If my information is not
accurate, please let me know. It's based only on my experience (17
years) in school libraries.
Thanks again for all your responses!
Konnie Wightman
District Library Coordinator
Bismarck Public Schools
Hughes Ed. Center
806 N. Washington St.
Bismarck, ND 58501
701-355-3076
District web page: http://library.educ8.org/
<http://library.educ8.org/>
konda_wightman@educ8.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note: All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
You can prevent most e-mail filters from deleting LM_NET postings
by adding LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU to your e-mail address book.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL 4) SET LM_NET DIGEST * Allow for confirmation.
* LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
* LM_NET Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
* EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://elann.biglist.com/sub/
* LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LM_NET
Mailing List Home