Florida Senator Can't Master Dewey Decimal

[Shisho]

Look, I grew up in Miami, so I'll always have a soft sport for the Sunshine State, but what the hell is in the water over there? It's almost not funny anymore just how many idiotic crackpot news items come out of there, many of them from idiotic crackpot politicians.

So, apparently, Sen. Rhonda Storms thinks the Dewey Decimal System is just too hard, and should therefore be eliminated from libraries because, gosh darn it, it costs too much money to pay those little old ladies to learn such a complicated system. Nevermind that any school worth it's salt is teaching Dewey in first grade. She is obviously not smarter than a 5th grader. I read this today (http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/dec/19/na-libraries-offer-plenty-for-storms-to-stew-over/). Good lord.


TALLAHASSEE - The economy is a shambles. State revenue is in a free-fall. House leaders in both parties stand accused of misusing their political powers.

This week, state Sen. Ronda Storms identified another menace:

The Dewey Decimal System.

Storms, R-Valrico, railed against the book-cataloging system during a budget hearing on state library aid, calling the Dewey Decimal System "anachronistic," costly and just plain frustrating.

The system requires training for both staff and users, she complained. If Barnes & Noble organizes its books more simply, why can't libraries?

"A lot of little old librarians are going to have a heart attack that I even said that out loud," Storms said during Wednesday's hearing. "But it really is ridiculous."

Secretary of State Kurt Browning, who oversees state support of libraries, told the committee that Dewey Decimal is the national standard, set by the Library of Congress.

"The Library of Congress can do what the Library of Congress wants," Storms said. "If it's costing us money ... it's time to wake up and smell the coffee."

Browning spokeswoman Jennifer Davis later addressed the money issue. "Conversion to another system would be very costly," she said.

The senator had another bone to pick as well - over "Seinfeld."

Storms objects to public libraries loaning out copies of TV show episodes.

"If there's one thing this country doesn't need more of, it's more TV," she said. "More books is good; more cultural arts ... but I'm not sure we need more episodes of 'Seinfeld' in our library."

Committee Chairman Mike Fasano, R-New Port Richey, said Storms could propose instructions to insert in the state budget about libraries' specific use of funding. That prompted Storms to speculate about more funding for libraries that agree to spend it on purchases of books instead of TV shows.

That smacks of censorship and micromanagement, said Larry Spalding, lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union.

"It would be wonderful if all children were motivated to listen to Mozart and read things that are educational," he said. "But not all children are the same. Libraries adapt."

What a freakin' moron. I was almost disappointed to learn that yes, she is a republican. Yes, she hates gay people, and yes, she believes that schools should teach intelligent design. It's like this woman is a walking stereotype. You couldn't write a more 2 dimentional character.

[TCJohnson]

You have to train people to use the dewey decimal system?

I don't understand the dewey decimal system. Never have. It is hocus pocus to me.

ALl I know is I look up a book in the computer or in the card file, find the number, find the numbers on the shelves and the book will be somewhere on the shelf.

How hard is it to train library visitors to do that and what more training do standard library patrons need?

[Stressfactor]

:eek: :rolleyes:

Wonder what she would do if she found out that many or most libraries are also starting to carry comic book graphic novels and trade paperbacks including.... gasp.... manga (which originates in a Furreign country! Horror! What will happen to American children?!)

You know what's worse? She was ELECTED.... to paraphrase Jeff Foxworthy: "Someone voted for that WOMAN!"



ETA: Even before I started getting a second Masters degree in library science I was such a library geek as a kid that I had the general classifications for Dewey memorized. I knew EXACTLY where to go to get the comic books (before they moved them into the general fiction) and EXACTLY where to go to get the books on mythology, etc. Hell, after four years of college I has huge general swaths of the Library of Congress system memorized!

Yes, I AM a book geek.

[Agent Helix]

Fuck, I can't master it either.

[Dr Ray Palmer]

I'm waiting for someone to point out to the people in this article that the Library of Congress doesn't use Dewey, either.

[Shisho]

I'm waiting for someone to point out to the people in this article that the Library of Congress doesn't use Dewey, either.

There were so many things wrong with the things she said, to list them would have made my head explode. :mad:

[titanfan]

Quick! What subject the 400-499 range in the Dewey Decimal System? (Not you, Stressfactor)

The senator would sort of right. Given today's technology, there shouldn't be any reason to learn the Dewey Decimal System. There are hundreds (if not thousands) of classification systems out there, one of them has got to be superior than the DDS.

That said, users don't really need to learn the system these days. I can check out a book at the library online and have it waiting for me at the front desk when I arrive at the library. If I need to know the exact positioning, these days you can search a book by author at the terminal, and it will show you close to the exact position. You do need to know the number to pinpoint the exact position on the shelf though, although it's not a huge problem by them.

[K-DoG7p7]

Quick! What subject the 400-499 range in the Dewey Decimal System? (Not you, Stressfactor)

The senator would sort of right. Given today's technology, there shouldn't be any reason to learn the Dewey Decimal System. There are hundreds (if not thousands) of classification systems out there, one of them has got to be superior than the DDS.

That said, users don't really need to learn the system these days. I can check out a book at the library online and have it waiting for me at the front desk when I arrive at the library. If I need to know the exact positioning, these days you can search a book by author at the terminal, and it will show you close to the exact position. You do need to know the number to pinpoint the exact position on the shelf though, although it's not a huge problem by them.

Languages
hsajdvgcuad

[Stressfactor]

Quick! What subject the 400-499 range in the Dewey Decimal System? (Not you, Stressfactor)

The senator would sort of right. Given today's technology, there shouldn't be any reason to learn the Dewey Decimal System. There are hundreds (if not thousands) of classification systems out there, one of them has got to be superior than the DDS.

That said, users don't really need to learn the system these days. I can check out a book at the library online and have it waiting for me at the front desk when I arrive at the library. If I need to know the exact positioning, these days you can search a book by author at the terminal, and it will show you close to the exact position. You do need to know the number to pinpoint the exact position on the shelf though, although it's not a huge problem by them.
Having JUST finished a class on Reference Services allow me to shed a little light on this thing.....

Y'see here's the thing. No matter WHAT you are dealing with -- it HAS to be classified in order to be found. Even stuff on the internet has to be tagged so that when you search for it you can find it.

So, if you're looking for Batman Comic Books on the internet people selling Batman comics or people showcasing their Batman comic book collection have to put things like "Batman", "Comic books" or "Gil Kane" or "Grant Morrison" etc. in the tagging so that a search engine can find them.

Well, essentially Dewey Decimal does the same thing. It provides the librarians and those looking for information with "tags" so that the things can be found. More importantly, all those little numbers allow for more precise "tagging". Say you want a book on philosophy but not just ANY book on philosophy -- you want a book on Ancient Greek Philosophy. Rather than just having to find and go to the "Philosophy" section in your local Borders store and wander around the Dewey Decimal system can take you RIGHT to the books on ancient Greek Philosophy.

And also, don't kid yourself (and this Storms woman shouldn't kid herself either) if you go to your local Borders and LOOK, really LOOK at the non-fiction section you will find that it's organized pretty closely along either Dewey Decimal or Library of Congress classification systems.

So, in the end, LC (Library of Congress) is, actually, probably the most precise of the current classification systems BUT it also goes into FAR more detail than your average local library really needs. That's why Dewey remains the king.

And as someone already pointed out here, there are searchable online catalogs to help you find the books you need and if you STILL can't find them your reference librarian will be more than happy to help you out.

[Stressfactor]

P.S., something else we learned in Reference Services is that even using search engines like Google don't turn up the kind of stuff a lot of people expect them to.

There is an art and a science to doing proper searching even on the internet. For general, quick reference info most people can get what they want but when you want or need something specific sometimes you have to know the BEST way to go looking for it in order to get what you REALLY want.

[Nick Soapdish]

You have to train people to use the dewey decimal system?

I don't understand the dewey decimal system. Never have. It is hocus pocus to me.

ALl I know is I look up a book in the computer or in the card file, find the number, find the numbers on the shelves and the book will be somewhere on the shelf.

How hard is it to train library visitors to do that and what more training do standard library patrons need?

Beats me. We spent a day on that in elementary school. I probably had to learn it for a test in middle school sometime, but I don't remember. But I've been able to use it since I was six.

Like you said, it's not hard.

And yeah, the book stores do use something similar even if they don't have the numbers (when it's organized, which isn't always - sometimes, it's a big mushup).

[Shisho]

Quick! What subject the 400-499 range in the Dewey Decimal System? (Not you, Stressfactor)

The senator would sort of right. Given today's technology, there shouldn't be any reason to learn the Dewey Decimal System. There are hundreds (if not thousands) of classification systems out there, one of them has got to be superior than the DDS.

That said, users don't really need to learn the system these days. I can check out a book at the library online and have it waiting for me at the front desk when I arrive at the library. If I need to know the exact positioning, these days you can search a book by author at the terminal, and it will show you close to the exact position. You do need to know the number to pinpoint the exact position on the shelf though, although it's not a huge problem by them.

That isn't exactly what she's saying. She's saying completely deconstruct the library system so that anyone working at the library can shelve the books wherever they want to like a bookstore. What she isn't taking into consideration is that even bookstores have a form of cataloging, and that bookstore clerks follow that system the same way librarians do. As you have stated, any patron can do what patrons have been doing for years, which is to look up a number and follow that number to find a book. Or to have that book waiting for you at the front desk of your library to save you some time. But in order to do that, the book must have some kind of system in order to find it, tag it, and make sure it comes back. It takes as much time to find a book with Dewey as it would be to look up a book with one of those terminals at Barnes and Noble or Borders. Also, to completely tear Dewey down from all libraries across the nation would cost more money than it would to maintain it, and for what? So that libraries can look like Borders? She's talking out of her ass, with no concept of how libraries are actually run. But then, I expect nothing more from someone who wants to turn our public schools into weekday Sunday Schools.

[Matt Doc Martin]

I've only been in Florida for a few years, but Ronda Storms is a dimwitted jackass.

[Nick Soapdish]

That isn't exactly what she's saying. She's saying completely deconstruct the library system so that anyone working at the library can shelve the books wherever they want to like a bookstore. What she isn't taking into consideration is that even bookstores have a form of cataloging, and that bookstore clerks follow that system the same way librarians do. As you have stated, any patron can do what patrons have been doing for years, which is to look up a number and follow that number to find a book. Or to have that book waiting for you at the front desk of your library to save you some time. But in order to do that, the book must have some kind of system in order to find it, tag it, and make sure it comes back. It takes as much time to find a book with Dewey as it would be to look up a book with one of those terminals at Barnes and Noble or Borders. Also, to completely tear Dewey down from all libraries across the nation would cost more money than it would to maintain it, and for what? So that libraries can look like Borders? She's talking out of her ass, with no concept of how libraries are actually run. But then, I expect nothing more from someone who wants to turn our public schools into weekday Sunday Schools.

It's doable.

Tag every book with a barcode and a GPS receiver. Then you can click search on the terminal, pick up the GPS unit to track down the library book and return it when you're done. I'm sure that would be a completely reasonable government expense in today's economic climate.

[Stressfactor]

It's doable.

Tag every book with a barcode and a GPS receiver. Then you can click search on the terminal, pick up the GPS unit to track down the library book and return it when you're done. I'm sure that would be a completely reasonable government expense in today's economic climate.
Actually, some cutting edge libraries are looking at placing RFID chips in their books. However, it does smack a bit of laziness to me.


What it all boils down to in this case is one woman who would be safe if ever there were a zombie attack because she doesn't have any brains for them to eat.

ETA: And she scares the crap out of me with her delight in an idea that she could hold out an offer of money to libraries that are willing to buy the kinds of things SHE wants them to buy. *Shudder*

[Shisho]

It's doable.

Tag every book with a barcode and a GPS receiver. Then you can click search on the terminal, pick up the GPS unit to track down the library book and return it when you're done. I'm sure that would be a completely reasonable government expense in today's economic climate.

Only if you rename Dewey to "General Motors." I'm still waiting for my government bailout. :wink:

[Calvin Government]

... but, you can't find things in bookstores. That's the point - you have to wander around a lot to find what you want (unless you always head to the exact same section and only read from there), tempting you into impulse buying.

Also, is there a class I'm missing? I think there was, like, 3 hours on it total so far.

And I've naught to say on the TV show thing other than to express a gladness that I don't know her and hopefully will never be put under her authority in any meaningful way.

[Reverend Smooth]

What it all boils down to in this case is one woman who would be safe if ever there were a zombie attack because she doesn't have any brains for them to eat.
Funniest thing I've read all day.

Whatever happened to 'ask a librarian' if you're confused? Sounds a whole lot cheaper.

[titanfan]

That isn't exactly what she's saying. She's saying completely deconstruct the library system so that anyone working at the library can shelve the books wherever they want to like a bookstore. What she isn't taking into consideration is that even bookstores have a form of cataloging, and that bookstore clerks follow that system the same way librarians do. As you have stated, any patron can do what patrons have been doing for years, which is to look up a number and follow that number to find a book. Or to have that book waiting for you at the front desk of your library to save you some time. But in order to do that, the book must have some kind of system in order to find it, tag it, and make sure it comes back. It takes as much time to find a book with Dewey as it would be to look up a book with one of those terminals at Barnes and Noble or Borders. Also, to completely tear Dewey down from all libraries across the nation would cost more money than it would to maintain it, and for what? So that libraries can look like Borders? She's talking out of her ass, with no concept of how libraries are actually run. But then, I expect nothing more from someone who wants to turn our public schools into weekday Sunday Schools.

I know, she's not saying it exactly like I probably am thinking. But whenever something is old(er), I do think think it's important that we look at things and make sure that things are run in the most efficient and modern way as possible. The cost of switching may be more up front, but if it's better and easier in the long run? I'm not necessarily opposed as long as the system is better. Change can be good.


P.S., something else we learned in Reference Services is that even using search engines like Google don't turn up the kind of stuff a lot of people expect them to.

There is an art and a science to doing proper searching even on the internet. For general, quick reference info most people can get what they want but when you want or need something specific sometimes you have to know the BEST way to go looking for it in order to get what you REALLY want.

Now we're talking about something I know more about. You're right, but it's also not a fair comparison. The key thing about Google and other search engines is that they are always *dynamic*. If someone is searching for the "Vulcan Academy Murder", and it's classified as "Star Trek", but more people are searching for it under "Mystery", it will eventually re-classify itself as such. Or maybe even a combination of both depending on other user searches.

I know at the library, because I don't have the Dewey Decimal Subjects memorized, I run into the "I'm totally in the wrong section" problem because I classified something differently than what it was in the DDS. Something like classification can be subjective too. (For example, play the Google Image Labeling Game: http://images.google.com/imagelabeler/)

I don't know the specifics of how a library works, but as a computer scientist, finding a way to encapsulate things for both users and workers so that they don't need to know what 431.66 is while keeping the precision of the DDS is an interesting problem.

As a side note--as someone who is completely ignorant to the responsibilities of a Libarian---Why do you need a master's degree to be a librarian anyway? Personally I think this is what the senator is really wondering--the part of the librarian that the public sees is the "book store clerk" part. I think that she's thinking that she can replace you with a book store clerk and it's only the Dewey Decimal System keeping their job security....I at least know it's not the DDS, but the only part of the librarian I've seen is the part where they find and return books....



Languages
hsajdvgcuad

I hate you.

[Stressfactor]

As a side note--as someone who is completely ignorant to the responsibilities of a Libarian---Why do you need a master's degree to be a librarian anyway? Personally I think this is what the senator is really wondering--the part of the librarian that the public sees is the "book store clerk" part. I think that she's thinking that she can replace you with a book store clerk and it's only the Dewey Decimal System keeping their job security....I at least know it's not the DDS, but the only part of the librarian I've seen is the part where they find and return books....
The part of the librarian you've seen -- the checking out and shelving of books is now routinely done by library pages or library clerks -- most of whom don't have Master's Degrees. Even your average reference librarian probably won't have a Master's Degree.

PART of the reason for the degree is simply the phenomenon of "credit inflation" (and no, we're not talking the monetary version of credit -- we're talking credentials credit) . Once upon a time having any kind of college degree was rare. In that case the person with the college degree usually got the edge over the person who didn't. As more and more people went to college having a simple bachelor's degree was no longer special and no longer gave you an edge so you needed an even higher degree to give you an edge. At the same time companies started using this as a way of weeding out candidates for jobs.

The other part of the reason, however, is that libraries are a LOT more complcated than they used to be. Libraries USED to just be places where people got books. Now libraries provide all kinds of SERVICES -- some offer classes in various things like computers or doing ancestor searches. Some offer childrens' reading programs, some offer adult reading programs, some offer all of the above and more. Someone has to design these programs, plan them and run them. Someone has to look at a library's constituency and decide what kinds of programs will best serve the community.

Libraries may be tax supported but when budget crunch times come for communities libraries are often the first to see cuts and the last to see those cuts reversed when economies get better. Even during flush times libraries often have to PROVE that what they do is worth their budget.

Another duty is the selection of books and journals and online databases. Books and journals are not cheap and access even to online journals like, say, National Geographic, is not free. Libraries have limited budgets so librarians have to make informed decisions about what books to buy, what journals to subscribe to and even which online databases to buy access to.

And in regards to there being something "something better" out there -- believe me, the library field is ALWAYS studying the coming thing. They look at various cataloguing systems but, in the end, LC and DDS are still the best and more importantly they are universal.

I actually work in an archive and I'm really only getting the MLS because more and more archives want an MLS rather than a Master's in History (which is what I have although my program specialized in Archives and Records Management). I've been an Archivist for 10 years now and archives is RIDDLED with different cataloguing systems. Each archive uses what works best and what they can afford for their institution. I've worked with MARC and EAD and right now just plain old Microsoft Access. It's all FINE because archives don't loan stuff from one to another. If the archive I work for happens to have the personal papers of Congressman Joe Blow we are NOT going to sent ANY of those papers to another archive in another state because someone wants to look at them. It doesn't MATTER if the database at the archive I work for matches up with the database at an archive across town. The same cannot be said of libraries.

With the advent of library systems you might have all the libraries in one county or all the libraries even in seveal counties who all agree to loan material between them for patrons. In order for this to be possible ALL of those individual libraries have to be operating on the same system.

On top of all that, while there may be a few glitches in DDS where one library classifies a book under one number while another library classifies a book under another number OVERALL you can walk into any library in the entire nation no matter where you are and find material you are looking for.

To find another system that A) works as well and is as universally accepted and B) can be afforded by EVERY library in the nation no matter how small their budget may be is very very difficult.

[Paul McEnery]

Well, that and the fact that librarians have to be skilled in saving everyone from the Vashti Narada.

[Shisho]

The part of the librarian you've seen -- the checking out and shelving of books is now routinely done by library pages or library clerks -- most of whom don't have Master's Degrees. Even your average reference librarian probably won't have a Master's Degree.

PART of the reason for the degree is simply the phenomenon of "credit inflation" (and no, we're not talking the monetary version of credit -- we're talking credentials credit) . Once upon a time having any kind of college degree was rare. In that case the person with the college degree usually got the edge over the person who didn't. As more and more people went to college having a simple bachelor's degree was no longer special and no longer gave you an edge so you needed an even higher degree to give you an edge. At the same time companies started using this as a way of weeding out candidates for jobs.

The other part of the reason, however, is that libraries are a LOT more complcated than they used to be. Libraries USED to just be places where people got books. Now libraries provide all kinds of SERVICES -- some offer classes in various things like computers or doing ancestor searches. Some offer childrens' reading programs, some offer adult reading programs, some offer all of the above and more. Someone has to design these programs, plan them and run them. Someone has to look at a library's constituency and decide what kinds of programs will best serve the community.

Libraries may be tax supported but when budget crunch times come for communities libraries are often the first to see cuts and the last to see those cuts reversed when economies get better. Even during flush times libraries often have to PROVE that what they do is worth their budget.

Another duty is the selection of books and journals and online databases. Books and journals are not cheap and access even to online journals like, say, National Geographic, is not free. Libraries have limited budgets so librarians have to make informed decisions about what books to buy, what journals to subscribe to and even which online databases to buy access to.

And in regards to there being something "something better" out there -- believe me, the library field is ALWAYS studying the coming thing. They look at various cataloguing systems but, in the end, LC and DDS are still the best and more importantly they are universal.

I actually work in an archive and I'm really only getting the MLS because more and more archives want an MLS rather than a Master's in History (which is what I have although my program specialized in Archives and Records Management). I've been an Archivist for 10 years now and archives is RIDDLED with different cataloguing systems. Each archive uses what works best and what they can afford for their institution. I've worked with MARC and EAD and right now just plain old Microsoft Access. It's all FINE because archives don't loan stuff from one to another. If the archive I work for happens to have the personal papers of Congressman Joe Blow we are NOT going to sent ANY of those papers to another archive in another state because someone wants to look at them. It doesn't MATTER if the database at the archive I work for matches up with the database at an archive across town. The same cannot be said of libraries.

With the advent of library systems you might have all the libraries in one county or all the libraries even in seveal counties who all agree to loan material between them for patrons. In order for this to be possible ALL of those individual libraries have to be operating on the same system.

On top of all that, while there may be a few glitches in DDS where one library classifies a book under one number while another library classifies a book under another number OVERALL you can walk into any library in the entire nation no matter where you are and find material you are looking for.

To find another system that A) works as well and is as universally accepted and B) can be afforded by EVERY library in the nation no matter how small their budget may be is very very difficult.

Uh...What Stressfactor said. :biggrin:

[LewisH]

000 – Computer science, information, and general works
100 – Philosophy and psychology
200 – Religion
300 – Social sciences
400 – Languages
500 – Science and Mathematics
600 – Technology and applied science
700 – Arts and recreation
800 – Literature
900 – History and geography and biography

Was that hard?

[Stressfactor]

Uh...What Stressfactor said. :biggrin:
I may not be going to be a 'traditional' librarian when I finish my classes but I still pick up a lot of info in the classes and I have a great respect for the field.

I [heart] my local library.

In fact, it's killing me that I moved across state lines recently and I haven't had time to get all my car stuff changed over and get a new driver's license so I can get a new library card!

[Expletive Deleted]

I'm waiting for someone to point out to the people in this article that the Library of Congress doesn't use Dewey, either.To be fair, it's a pretty common mistake to make. OCLC's Dewey editors work out of the Library of Congress.

As Dewey itself . . . eh, maybe it's because I'm an academic librarian and not a public librarian, but I don't have a problem with ditching Dewey in public libraries. As long as the stacks are arranged according to some relatively easy-to-parse scheme, I don't think it really matters what that scheme is.

Librarians tend to stick with systems long past the point at which they make sense. I mean, for God's sake, the MARC record should have been put out to pasture decades ago. It's a relic that's actually holding back technological advancement in some areas of our field. I wouldn't say Dewey is anywhere near as bad, and I don't think it's complexity is necessarily a negative, but there's nothing sacred or special about it. If a non-specialist library thinks they'll improve their patrons' experience by switching to a simpler system, more power to them.

By the way, here are some news articles from the last time this "controversy" erupted (an Arizona public library decided to ditch Dewey for a bookstore-style system):

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/14/us/14dewey.html?_r=1

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118340075827155554.html

[Solaris]

Look, I grew up in Miami, so I'll always have a soft sport for the Sunshine State, but what the hell is in the water over there? It's almost not funny anymore just how many idiotic crackpot news items come out of there, many of them from idiotic crackpot politicians.

So, apparently, Sen. Rhonda Storms thinks the Dewey Decimal System is just too hard, and should therefore be eliminated from libraries because, gosh darn it, it costs too much money to pay those little old ladies to learn such a complicated system. Nevermind that any school worth it's salt is teaching Dewey in first grade. She is obviously not smarter than a 5th grader. I read this today (http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/dec/19/na-libraries-offer-plenty-for-storms-to-stew-over/). Good lord.



What a freakin' moron. I was almost disappointed to learn that yes, she is a republican. Yes, she hates gay people, and yes, she believes that schools should teach intelligent design. It's like this woman is a walking stereotype. You couldn't write a more 2 dimentional character.


AHA! Now it is revealed... there are Sarah Palin clones all over!

:biggrin: LOL

Seriously, this woman isn't just a nutjob... but a STUPID nutjob. It's obvious she's hunting for ways to butter up her constituents and make herself look good as a "financial watchdog"... so of COURSE the best way to do that is to can the Dewey Decimal System. :rolleyes:

As for that, I have yet to understand how using the DDS actually costs taxpayers a dime... as you observed, the DDS is taught to children in GRADE SCHOOL (duh---are the libraries funding that?), and anyone who works in a library KNOWS THE DAMNED THING.

For that matter, I'll bet this woman has never set foot in a library. At the several branches I worked at, new materials came in the door already labeled with the system, so all we had to do was shelve them.

I think the media is falling down on the job down there, because they could make rare hay out of how not only is she stupid, but also how she's Un-American, for rejecting a time-honored system endorsed by the Library of Congress, a system far older than *she* is. Heh. :wink: (And IIRC, wasn't it INVENTED here in the U.S.?)

[Tetsuo_man]

Look, I grew up in Miami, so I'll always have a soft sport for the Sunshine State, but what the hell is in the water over there? It's almost not funny anymore just how many idiotic crackpot news items come out of there, many of them from idiotic crackpot politicians.

So, apparently, Sen. Rhonda Storms thinks the Dewey Decimal System is just too hard, and should therefore be eliminated from libraries because, gosh darn it, it costs too much money to pay those little old ladies to learn such a complicated system. Nevermind that any school worth it's salt is teaching Dewey in first grade. She is obviously not smarter than a 5th grader. I read this today (http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/dec/19/na-libraries-offer-plenty-for-storms-to-stew-over/). Good lord.



What a freakin' moron. I was almost disappointed to learn that yes, she is a republican. Yes, she hates gay people, and yes, she believes that schools should teach intelligent design. It's like this woman is a walking stereotype. You couldn't write a more 2 dimentional character.

Well I didn't learn the dewy decimal system in the first grade or ever (I always had to use a special bookmark that told me what genres were in what numbers when I was a kid which when I think about it is sad when I'm now an aspiring writer). Might not be in every school then. Still Librarians should learn it because its a good system that has worked for so long. On top of that being made that Seinfeld or is being accessed by anyone because of libraries is redicules (is this the right spelling? If not remember I have had a little to drink). Let me also say Rev. Smooth's comment is entirely funny because it's true. Also there are many people in life (some of which I have personally met) who could be described as the type of person who would be defined as a 2-D character. Now Shisho would it make you feel ok if I mentioned there are some family friends of mine in Florida who aren't neo-con stereotypes but a couple of liberals? or is that sorta not the point?

[Expletive Deleted]

As for that, I have yet to understand how using the DDS actually costs taxpayers a dime... as you observed, the DDS is taught to children in GRADE SCHOOL (duh---are the libraries funding that?), and anyone who works in a library KNOWS THE DAMNED THING.The Dewey Decimal System is owned by the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC). Trust me, your library pays them an extortionate amount of money for their products and services. Including the license for Dewey.

The OCLC's position, as I understand it, is that you can assign numbers to anything and use them to sort things to your heart's content. They're just numbers, after all. But if you're going to be applying the Dewey Decimal System's meanings to those numbers, you're using the work of the Dewey Editors. The text associated with those numbers is copyrighted, after all.

In a slightly humorous example, a hotel in New York numbered its rooms according to the Dewey Decimal System and got sued for violating the OCLC's trademarks (NYT (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE0D71F3AF930A1575AC0A9659C8B 63)).


At the several branches I worked at, new materials came in the door already labeled with the system, so all we had to do was shelve them.I don't know if it was the publisher, the distributor, the book vendor, the library, or somebody else in the chain, but somebody paid OCLC for the right to put Dewey Decimal Numbers on those labels.

This state senator is obviously a crank and an embarrassment to her constituents, but she's not entirely wrong.

[Evan Waters]

On the one hand, I'm glad this woman isn't running anything in my jurisdiction, on the other, I kinda wish I could vote against her anyway.

Dewey is actually a pretty streamlined system- at least by the standards of book classification systems. You go from the broadest to the narrowest classification.

Seriously, one look at the Gov Docs system would make this person's head explode. I still don't understand it completely and I worked with it for one and a half years.

[Grazzt]

Trust me, your library pays them an extortionate amount of money for their products and services.

Do you think the amount they pay is more or less than they would have to pay to a) make a system of their own and b) educate the public that uses the library about how that system works?

[Expletive Deleted]

Do you think the amount they pay is more or less than they would have to pay to a) make a system of their own and b) educate the public that uses the library about how that system works?Oh, of course not. The Secretary of State's spokesperson is absolutely right in saying conversion to another system would be expensive. Even switching to something like a bookstore-style system, per the Arizona library I referenced earlier, would mean a huge commitment of time and resources.

I just wanted to point out that Dewey ain't free.

[Stressfactor]

Re: MARC -- it hasn't been a TOTAL loss. A lot of the basic functions for MARC-AMC were able to be transferred to the new system -- EAD (Encoded Archival Description). The nice thing about EAD is that it is essentially web-ready so if your institution decides to make their inventory available on the web your stuff doesn't have to all be re-tagged. Funny, personal MARC story down below...



Re: Solaris's comment that books she worked with were coming in shelf-ready.... Yep. There really are a handful of companies that specialize in providing books to libraries. Some of those companies have now started offering the shelf-ready service for a fee.


Re: Opening things up for libraries to choose a system, again, in the long run it could hamper inter-library cooperation. Where I'm living now is about to try something new for them... The (extremely well-funded) county library system in one state is about to allow reciprocal borrowing and ILL services with the county library system in the state next door. If each county system were using a different cataloguing system it could make this service a lot more difficult.











Okay, MARC story for any of you who give a darn. For those who don't know MARC stands for MAchine Readable Cataloging format. In the archival field we used a variation called MARC-AMC (Archives and Manuscript Control). When I was getting my Masters Degree in Archives and Records Management we had a class session where we had to catalogue an inventory list in MARC-AMC by hand. Imagine completely hand-tagging a web page -- it's like that only worse.

So I go home from the class completely disgusted and frustrated. When I get in one of my roommates asks me how my day went and I of course launch into a tirade of "I HATE MARC! I can't stand MARC! So annoying!" My roommates look at each other in consternation and one of them looks at me in concern and says "Who is this Mark and what did he DO to you?" At that point I'm floored, I can't figure out what she's talking about since I'd spent most of my days hanging around archivists or classmates who were studying to be archivists. Then it hits me and I have to explain that MARC is an acronym.

[Expletive Deleted]

Re: MARC -- it hasn't been a TOTAL loss. A lot of the basic functions for MARC-AMC were able to be transferred to the new system -- EAD (Encoded Archival Description). The nice thing about EAD is that it is essentially web-ready so if your institution decides to make their inventory available on the web your stuff doesn't have to all be re-tagged. Funny, personal MARC story down below...EAD is a decent standard. Really, anything XML-based is light-years better than MARC. It may have been state of the art at one point, but the fact that we continue to use it . . . I'm firmly in the "MARC Must Die" camp.

Re: Opening things up for libraries to choose a system, again, in the long run it could hamper inter-library cooperation. Where I'm living now is about to something new for them... The (extremely well-funded) county library system in one state is about to allow reciprocal borrowing and ILL services with the county library system in the state next door. If each county system were using a different cataloguing system it could make this service a lot more difficult.It's worth noting that cataloging and shelving systems don't necessarily need to correlate. Most items have several cataloging numbers associated with them, but we don't shelve them by those numbers. MARC 082 is Dewey, 050 is LC, and . . . I forget which fields are OCLC and ISBN, exactly. They're all in there, whichever system we actually use.


Okay, MARC story for any of you who give a darn. For those who don't know MARC stands for MAchine Readable Cataloging format. In the archival field we used a variation called MARC-AMC (Archives and Manuscript Control). When I was getting my Masters Degree in Archives and Records Management we had a class session where we had to catalogue an inventory list in MARC-AMC by hand. Imagine completely hand-tagging a web page -- it's like that only worse.I'm not an archivist, but we had to do that too. It was awful.


So I go home from the class completely disgusted and frustrated. When I get in one of my roommates asks me how my day went and I of course launch into a tirade of "I HATE MARC! I can't stand MARC! So annoying!" My roommates look at each other in consternation and one of them looks at me in concern and says "Who is this Mark and what did he DO to you?" At that point I'm floored, I can't figure out what she's talking about since I'd spent most of my days hanging around archivists or classmates who were studying to be archivists. Then it hits me and I have to explain that MARC is an acronym.Ha! Nice.

[Alex L]

I know, she's not saying it exactly like I probably am thinking. But whenever something is old(er), I do think think it's important that we look at things and make sure that things are run in the most efficient and modern way as possible. The cost of switching may be more up front, but if it's better and easier in the long run? I'm not necessarily opposed as long as the system is better. Change can be good.

--------------✂---------------

I know at the library, because I don't have the Dewey Decimal Subjects memorized, I run into the "I'm totally in the wrong section" problem because I classified something differently than what it was in the DDS. Something like classification can be subjective too. (For example, play the Google Image Labeling Game: http://images.google.com/imagelabeler/)

(1) Sure, I agree. It makes sense to take another look at something every once in a while, to see if it can be done better. But I don't see the DDS as outdated.

(2) At my local libraries, the Dewey Decimal System is prominently and frequently posted at various locations. Walk near the reference area and it's there. Find the "100" aisle and it's posted there again. Maybe you can recommend the librarians in your area do the same thing?

[Stressfactor]

I'm firmly in the "MARC Must Die" camp.

I don't care if it dies or not since most of the archival field has already abandoned it. As long as I, personally, don't have to DEAL with it ever, ever again I don't care. I hate it and I have been lucky that, since that ONE class I had I've NEVER had to deal with it yet.