College and Research Libraries DORIS CRUGER DALE Cataloging and Classification Practices In Community College Libraries Results of a questionnaire survey sent to a sample of community college librar- ies in the United States indicate that as these libraries enter the 1980s their collections are still traditionally organized. Although audiovisual materials are now cataloged and classified, there is little agreement as to how they should be organized; and most audiovisual materials are still housed in closed-access areas . Change to AACR2 seems to be accepted, but librarians are still unde- cided about participating in computerized cataloging networks. Two RECENT STUDIES have shown that the majority of community college libraries are now using the Library of Congress classifica- tion system for the organization of printed materials. 1 This is a marked increase from the results reported in earlier studies by Rowland and Taylor. 2 The dates of these studies indi- cated the need for additional research, not only on the cataloging and classification of books but also on the classification of pam- phlets, government documents, periodicals, microforms, and audiovisual materials in community college libraries. How are these materials cataloged and classified? Is there an indication that audiovisual materials are com- pletely cataloged and classified in community college libraries? Is color banding of catalog cards for audiovisual materials still being done? How are audiovisual materials shelved? In light of the emphasis on the inte- gration of all materials into learning resource centers of community colleges, are au- diovisual materials being intershelved with printed materials? What use is being made of computerized cataloging networks? What is the composition of technical service staffs? How much original cataloging is done? These problems prompted the develop- Doris Cruger Dale is a professor, Department of Curriculum, Instruction and Media, Southern Illi- nois University, Carbondale. ment of a questionnaire designed to elicit an- swers to several research questions. The questionnaire was developed and criticized by two community college librarians, one from Illinois and one from New York. A pilot study was completed by sending the ques- tionnaire to ten librarians in community col- lege libraries that this author had visited on sabbatical leave in 1975-76. Based on criti- cisms and suggestions from nine of these li- brarians, the questionnaire was revised and then sent to a random sample of 100 commu- nity college libraries in the United States . Prior to sending the questionnaires out, this research proposal was submitted to the Carbondale Committee for Research Involv- ing Human Subjects. The committee found the subjects to be not at risk and approved the research proposal on November 16, 1978. The sample of 100 libraries was randomly selected from the 1978 Community, junior, and Technical College Directory published by the American Association of Community and Junior Colleges. Membership in that or- ganization is not a criterion for inclusion of the names of two-year colleges. The Direc- tory includes all institutions that are community-based community, junior, and technical colleges. Institutions are nonprofit, are organized on a two-year basis, have re- gional accreditation and/or state recognition, and offer two-year associate degree programs. I 333 334 I College & Research Libraries • July 1981 Proprietary institutions are not included. In- dividual campuses are listed but not commu- nity centers. A total of 1,235 colleges are in- cluded of which 1,215 are in the fifty states and the District of Columbia. The total popu- lation size for this study is therefore 1,215. The sample size of 100 represented 8.23 per- cent of the total population. 3 Because of a long-standing interest in community college libraries , each college in the sample was sent, in addition to the ques- tionnaire, an information sheet that included data from the 1978 Directory for revision and correction, a request for the name of the per- son to whom future questionnaires could be sent, and a question as to whether the institu- tion would be willing to pay the postage on return questionnaires. In the cover letter, it was explained that this would be the first questionnaire in a lon- gitudinal study of community college librar- ies, and that in the future the college might expect to receive additional questionnaires (but no more than one a year) from doctoral students or from this researcher. Participa- tion in the project was requested and if the library was willing, the following primary documents were solicited: college catalog, campus map, a sample copy of the college newspaper, the library handbook, a recent li- brary annual report, the library organization chart, a sample library budget, the library floor plan, a sample copy of the library news- letter, the materials selection policy, a peri- odical list, and an audiovisual catalog. Librar- ians were informed that they could withdraw from participation at any time . -The questionnaire was divided into six sec- tions: cataloging and classification of printed materials, cataloging and classification of au- diovisual materials , the catalog, shelving of audiovisual materials, computerized catalog- ing networks, and cataloging and classification staff. There were thirty-three questions on four pages. The questionnaire was mailed on April 2, 1979. By June 7, fifty-two question- naires had been returned. Two of those re- turned were not completed. Two of the librar- ies were deleted from the sample population; one college was served by a local public li- brary and one by the university library in the same city. There were forty-eight usable questionnaires, 48.98 percent of the sample population of ninety-eight. Forty-six of the persons completing the questionnaires indi- cated that they would be willing to participate in further studies. Questionnaires were re- turned from every regional division in the United States with ten returns from the South Atlantic states and ten from the Pacific states. (See table 1.) TABLE 1 USABLE QL1EST IOI\I\AIRES BY Dt\"ISIOI\ II\ TilE lf. S . !\umbe r L1sabiL" Re~ional of Question - Di\'isions* Colle~es nairl's PL"rt'L"nt New England 83 1 1.20 Middle Atlantic 108 2 1.85 East North Central 220 5 2.27 West North Central 123 9 7.32 South Atlantic 234 10 -1 .27 East South Central 100 5 5.00 West South Central 107 5 -!.67 Mountain 69 1 1.45 Pacific 171 10 5.8.5 Total 1,215 48 3.9.5 *L' . S. Census Burea u dh·isions as rqJOrtL"d in " Population ol' th<" L' .S . . 196a-1970" in The \\'orld Alma11ac rL- Book of Fa cts nmo. p . l9l. Although thirteen libraries have switched from the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) to the Library of Congress Classifica- tion (LCC) since 1965, the number of two- year college libraries using LCC for books is not greater than the percentage reported in the Matthews study of 1972. In fact it is somewhat less .. This study showed 52.08 per- cent using LCC for books, while th e Mat- thews study reported 56.4 percent using LCC . DDC is favored for audiovisual mate- rials by thirteen libraries , or 25 percent, but a wider variety of classifications is used for au- diovisual materials, and sometimes a library uses more than one classification system for these materials. Eleven libraries use LCC with one of these using a modified LCC; ten libraries use an accession number and four- teen libraries use a format designation and accession number for audiovisual materials. One library assigns a course number to au- diovisual materials, as evidently all au- diovisual materials are used by students for classroom assig-nments. One library de- veloped its own classification system for au- diovisual materials, another library uses the ANSCR (Alpha-Numeric System for Classi- fication of Recordings) for sound recordings, and one library reported that all audiovisual materials were kept in the department. (See table 2.) Of the thirteen libraries switching to LCC, six started this reclassification between 1965 and 1969, four began reclassifying between 1970 and 1974, and three did not indicate when reclassification was begun. Eleven li- braries have completed reclassification: three in the same year that it was begun, four within one year, one in two years, and another in four years. Two did not indicate how long the reclassification took, and two libraries are maintaining both DDC and LCC as the reclassification project continues. Of the twenty-five libraries using LCC, six- teen are using PZ3 and 4 for fiction in English. One library uses these numbers only for authors who do not have specific numbers in the literature classes, and another library is shifting its materials out of PZ3 and 4. Nine libraries are not using PZ3 and 4. One library classifies fiction in hardback copies, but as- signs the letter F to paperbacks. Fiction and biography receive special clas- sification treatment in public libraries. This is also true of fiction and biography in two-year college libraries. Although twenty-six librar- ies classify fiction· in DDC or LCC, thirteen libraries simply assign the letters For FIC to fiction ; eight libraries use the author's last name to arrange fiction ; and one library uses a Cutter number to arrange fiction. Many libraries treat ·biography in more than one way . Thirty libraries arrange indi- Cataloging and Classification I 335 vidual biographies in classified order by sub- ject, ten libraries use 92, one library uses 921, seven libraries use the class numbers 920.1- 928, and five libraries assign the letter B to biography. The Library of Congress subject headings are overwhelmingly favored for both book and audiovisual materials with one library using both lists; forty-three libraries use LC subject headings for books and forty-one use LC subject headings for audiovisual mate- rials. (See table 3.) Only for periodicals was there total agree- ment on arrangement. All forty-eight libraries in the sample arranged periodicals alpha- Jetically by title. Microforms , government documents, and pamphlets were organized in a variety of ways. In forty-five libraries, mi- croforms were arranged in special cabinets or drawers by title or author; one of these librar- ies used an accession number for arrange- ment. Several libraries used more than one arrangement for microforms. Six libraries in- tershelved their microforms ; the majority of these libraries were intershelving periodicals on microfilm with their bound periodicals. One library arranged microforms in a special location by call number. Government docu- ments were cataloged and classified in the same way as books, pamphlets, and peri- odicals in forty-one libraries; five libraries or- ganized their government documents by the Superintendent of Documents classification system. One library used both of these meth- TABLE 2 CLASSIFIC:\TIOI'\ SYSTE\IS FOH Boot..:s _-\1\D AL' DIO\ 'tSL '.-\L \l.nEHI.-\LS Classifieation DOC LCC Accession number Format and accession number Other Total Subjed Heading List Sears LC Other Total SUBJECT HEADI B< ·r l'< ' l'l'<'ll l 1:3 2.'5.00 11 2 1.1.'5 10 1!-1.2:} 1-1 2G.!-J2 -1 7.G9 .52 !-19.!-J!-J ' I) AL' ()10\ ' ISL ' .-\L l\1.-\TEHI.-\LS 6 43 49 l'l'l'l'l' lll 12.24 87.76 100.00 .-\udim i"'"' \I at<- rial, l\111llhl'r l'< ·rt·t•ul (i 41 2 4!-J 12.24 H3.67 4.0H 99.99 336 I College & Research Libraries ·. july 1981 ods. Two libraries did not respond to this question, and one library reported that it did not receive any government publications. There was more variety in the organization of pamphlets. Career pamphlets were ar- ranged in vertical files by name of occupation in seventeen libraries, in boxes on book shelves by name of occupation in two librar- ies, by SRA (Science Research Associates) numbers in two libraries, by DOT (Dictio- nary of Occupational Titles) numbers in one library, and in binders by call number in one library. Two libraries did not respond to this question, and twenty-three libraries reported that the career pamphlets were in a separate career-counseling center in the college. Other pamphlets were arranged in alpha- betical order using LC subject headings in thirty-one libraries and using Sears subject headings in five libraries. Many libraries used more than one system. Five libraries used the Readers' Guide to Periodical Literature for pamphlet subject headings; and one library used Miriam Ball's Subject Headings for the Information File (8th ed.; New York: H. W. Wilson, 1956). Two librarians did not respond to this question, and two librarians reported that they did not maintain a vertical file of pamphlets. Two librarians developed their own subject headings for pamphlets, one li- brary used a numerical arrangement, one put them in boxes on shelves, and one cataloged them. If librarians used a standardized list of subject headings for pamphlets, they often added local subject headings on demand. Both AACR1 and AACR2 were used as cataloging codes for books and audiovisual materials. A surprising number of libraries (sixteen) had already adopted AACR2 for books. (See table 4.) Some libraries used more than one catalog- ing code for audiovisual materials. Librarians were asked whether they planned to switch to AACR2; nine said yes, five said no, fifteen were undecided. Three did not answer this question, and the sixteen previously men- tioned were already using AACR2. The four "other" answers to the question regarding catalog codes for audiovisual materials in- cluded one library that used Nonbook Mate- rials by Jean Weihs (2d ed.; Ottawa: Cana- dian Library Association, 1979), one library that did not catalog those materials, one that reported that all audiovisual materials were kept in the subject department~ and one li- brary that simply checked "other" without specifying what arrangement was used. Two libraries reported both a book catalog and a card catalog, but most libraries (forty- six) still have a card catalog; three have a book catalog, and one reported having a COM catalog. Of the forty-eight libraries, twenty- one arrange catalog entries in dictionary or- der, seventeen have a divided catalog (sixteen divide their entries into author/title and sub- ject order; and one library uses author and title/subject arrangement), nine libraries use a three-way divided catalog, and one librarian checked "other" and indicated that arrange- ment was by DDC . Cataloging of audiovisual materials does not approach the same consistency of ar- rangement of entries as the cataloging of book materials. Many libraries use more than one arrangement for their audiovisual mate- rials, but twenty-four libraries do full catalog- ing with data interfiled in the central catalog; eight libraries do full cataloging but file the audiovisual entries in a separate catalog near the central catalog; one library does full cataloging and files the entries in separate drawers of the central catalog; six libraries do full cataloging but file the entries in a separate catalog in the audiovisual center; and nine li- braries do full cataloging and file entries in both the central catalog and in a separate TABLE 4 CATALOG CoDES UsED FOH Boo..:s _.\ ·D Al 1Dtm ·tst 1:\L l\1.-\TEHI.-\Ls Books .-\udioYi sua l \lall'rials Catalog Codt" 1\umher l'ereent 1\umlwr Percent AACR1 26 54.17 19 38.00 AACR2 16 33.33 14 28 .00 AECT Standards , 4th ed ., 1976 5 10.00 Other 4 8.00 Not answered 6 12 .. 50 8 16.00 Total 48 100.00 50 100.00 catalog in the audiovisual center. Three li- braries use computer printouts for the record- ing of audiovisual materials, and this allows them to send copies to departmental offices and to branch libraries. Five libraries issue a mimeographed list of audiovisual materials, and seven libraries use a printed list (some- times this printed list is sent to faculty mem- bers only). Two libraries do not catalog au- diovisual materials. The identification of audiovisual materials in the catalog takes many forms. Again, more than one form may be used by a single li- brary . Three designations were equally fa- vored. Eighteen libraries use symbol designa- tions , another eighteen use the medium des- ignation, and eighteen libraries use a color code or color banding. Two libraries use a medium designation in the body of the card similar to , or according to , the general mate- rial designation recommended by AACR2. Two libraries reported using no designation. Of the eighteen libraries using a color code or banding, fifteen indicated the colors used, while three did not . It was difficult to bring order out of these patterns, as there seems to be no consistency as to which color code or banding is used for which medium . Six librar- ies used one color to designate audiovisual materials, but there was no agreement on the color-two used red, one used blue, two used green, and one used orange . One library used blue for audio materials , and green for visual materials . One library used eleven different colors ; after running out of single colors , stripes were used . One library used ten colors; . in addition to a two-color stripe, wide and narrow , single-color stripes were used. Instead of using color banding for media des- ignations, one library used colors to indicate subject areas in the library: red for humanities , light blue for social sciences, dark blue for business and science technol- ogy, brown for industrial technology, and green for natural sciences. The application of a color code or color banding seems fraught with difficulties, given the multiplicity of formats and subjects. One librarian reported that all audiovisual call numbers were headed with a W, followed by a medium designation and the call number, such as WKT LB2735. F6. Another library used a format designation plus the year acquired and an accession number, i.e., Cataloging and Classification I 337 FS/TC 75-167-a filmstrip with a tape cas- sette acquired in 1975 as the one hundred sixty-seventh filmstrip received that year. One librarian stated: "At one time , we used color codes and abbreviations for the various forms of A V materials. We also used sequen- tial numbering for each medium , e . g ., AT10-audiotape-tenth tape to be added to the collection. We now assign LC classifica- tion numbers and use the same color card that we use for books . We are considering going back to using color-coded cards because our students often ask for a list of audiovisual ma- terials owned by our library . It will be easier to access this information if we used a color- coded system." The shelving of audiovisual materials pre- sents many problems because of the varying sizes and shapes of these materials. Librarians do not agree on shelving patterns, and in many cases they use different patterns to shelve different types of materials. All au- diovisual materials may be on closed shelves or in a closed area with the exception of sound recordings , which might be in open bins for browsing. All audiovisual materials might be intershelved with book materials with the ex- ception of 16mm films. Among the libraries that responded to this survey, thirty-nine re- ported that audiovisual materials were in a closed area (twenty-six on closed shelves and thirteen in closed cabinets) but in some cases this area was open to faculty members , and twenty-four reported that audiovisual mate- rials, or at least some of them, were in an area open to faculty and students (nineteen kept these materials on open shelves and five kept them in open access cabinets or drawers). One librarian reported that these materials were kept in the subject department. Of the libraries that shelved these materials in open areas, six intershelved audiovisual materials with books , twelve separated them by format or medium, and eight separated them by clas- sification number. One librarian did not re- spond. Although it seems that there are more exceptions for the shelving gf audiovisual ma- terials, it must be remembered that there are also exceptions for printed materials because periodicals , government publications, and pamphlets are shelved in special ways. The more patterns of arrangement of materials by format or by the package in which materials are organized, the more difficult it becomes 338 I College & Research Libraries • july 1981 to try to gather together all the materials that a library owns on one subject. Librarians were asked about their partici- pation in computerized cataloging networks. Although two librarians did not respond to this question, thirty-nine reported that they did not participate in computerized catalog- ing networks. Two of these libraries were using commercial processing services and two received their cataloging from a centralized technical service operation for the district. Only seven libraries were participating in computerized cataloging networks, six of them with OCLC and one with WLN (Wash- ington Library Network). Librarians were asked if they were planning to participate in such a network; twenty-three said no, seven said yes, eight were undecided, and three did not respond. The final section of the questionnaire in- cluded questions regarding cataloging and classification staff, numbers of materials added, and percentage of cataloging copy from original and commercial sources. Most of the forty-eight libraries responding re- ported that they had only one full-time pro- fessional cataloging person; nineteen libraries reported one professional, and fifteen re- ported one paraprofessional staff. Another twenty reported none, or less than one, pro- fessional staff, and sixteen reported none, or less than one, paraprofessional staff. Four li- braries reported two professionals, and one library reported three professionals . Four did not report their professional staff. Fourteen libraries reported more than one paraprofes- sional staff, and three did not respond to this question. (See table 5.) Of the forty-eight li- braries, twenty reported no weekly hours of student workers, nine reported one to ten hours, ten reported eleven to twenty hours, four reported twenty-one to thirty hours, and two reported forty-one to fifty hours. Three did not respond to this question. On a monthly basis, libraries added more books than audiovisual materials to their col- lections. Five hundred books or fewer were added monthly by thirty-three libraries; thirty-one libraries added 100 or fewer au- diovisual items. Several librarians reported that they did not keep these statistics, and five librarians did not respond to this ques- tion. (See table 6.) More original cataloging was done for au- diovisual materials than for book materials. Only three libraries reported doing 91 to 100 percent original cataloging for books while twenty libraries reported doing 91 to 100 per- cent original cataloging for audiovisual mate- rials. Ten libraries reported that they did not record this data. (See table 7.) Librarians were asked if they had done any studies on cataloging costs; three said yes and forty no. Two were in the process of completing cost studies, and three did not answer this ques- tion. One librarian reported that a study had been done a number of years ago but was no longer valid. The cataloging and classification practices of typical two-year college libraries as they entered the 1980s can be summarized as fol- lows: book collections are classified by either the Dewey Decimal Classification system or the Library of Congress Classification system, and audiovisual materials are classified in a variety of arrangements. Library of Congress subject headings are used for both books and audiovisual materials. Periodicals are shelved in alphabetical order by title. Microforms are arranged in special cabinets or drawers by TABLE 5 CATALOGING AND CLASSIFI C ATIOI\ STAFF 11\ FTE ( FL1LL-TI\IE E()L' I\ ':\LEI\T) Prnft"ssional Parapnlfcssional I\ umb er of 1\umhcr or FTE Librari es Pl'rn·nt Libraries Pcrn•nt None 4 8.33 5 10.42 Less than 1 16 33.33 11 22 .92 1.00 19 39.58 15 31.25 1.50 5 10.42 2. ()() 4 8.33 5 10.42 2.50 1 2.08 2.75 1 2.08 3. ()() 1 2.08 2 4.17 No answer 4 8.33 3 6.25 Total 48 99 .98 48 100.01 Cataloging am/ Classificatiou I 339 TABLE 6 B OO KS AND AL1DIO\'ISL' AL l\.1.-H EHI:\LS ADD EIJ TO COLL ECTIO ·s Books !'\umbe r or .\udim·isual \lat e ri als l\uuJIJ<•r of Numbe r Libra ri e s Pt•rct·nt Lib raries p,.,'l'<' nl 0 1-50 51- 100 101-150 151-200 201- 250 251-300 301-350 351-400 401-450 451-500 500+ Not recorded Not answe red Total 2 12 5 3 4 2 3 1 1 1 9 5 48 title or author. Government publications are cataloged and classified in the same way as other books, pamphlets , and periodicals. Career pamphlets are housed in a separate career-counseling center. Other pamphlets are arranged in alphabetical order using Li- brary of Congress subject headings. AACR1 is used as the cataloging code for both books and audiovisual materials, and change to AACR2 is anticipated. Libraries have a card catalog arranged either in dictionary or in divided or- der. Audiovisual materials are classified and cataloged in a variety of ways; call number designations for these materials are varied. Most audiovisual materials are shelved in TABLE 7 UsE OF ORI G IN AL Al\D Co~I\IERCIAL CATALOG I ·c Autli o\'isual Boo ks \l ate rial s Pe rce nt Orig. C ml. Ori~. C ml. 0 1 3 18 1-10 15 4 ll-20 5 2 1 21-30 4 1 31-40 1 1 1 41-50 2 2 3 3 51-60 1 1 61-70 1 1 71-80 6 1 2 81-90 9 3 91-100 3 9 20 Unusable or no response 6 6 7 7 Data not recorded 10 10 10 10 Total 48 48 48 48 -! . 17 25.00 10.-!2 G.2.5 8. :33 -!.17 6.25 2.08 2.08 2.0H 18.7.5 10.-!2 100.00 27 :3 1 11 5 -tH 2.0H 5{) .2.5 G.25 2.0H 22 .92 10.-!2 100.00 closed-access areas. Libraries do not yet par- ticipate in computerized cataloging networks and either are not planning to participate or are undecided. Cataloging staffs consist of one full-time professional and one paraprofes- sional person or less with no student help . On a monthly basis , 500 books or fewer are added to the collection and 100 audiovisual items or fewer are added. More original cataloging is done for audiovisual materials than for books. The data indicate that two-year college li- braries are traditionally organized libraries as they enter the 1980s. Most audiovisual mate- rials are classified and cataloged, but it seems evident that they have not been fully ac- cepted or integrated into the book collection. With the advent of the computer age, it will be interesting to replicate this study in the year 2000 to see what impact the computer will have on these libraries. REFERENCES 1. Elizabeth Woodfin Matthews , "Characteristics and Academic Preparation of Directors of Library-Learning Resource Centers in Selected Community Colleges " (Ph . D . dissertation, Southern Illinois Univ., Carbondale, 1972), p . 129. LCC was used by 56.4 percent of the 420 libraries in this study and DDC was used by 42.9 percent. Catherine Johnson, " Classification Systems Used in Illinois Public Community Col- lege Learning Resource Centers" (M . S. re- search paper, Southern Illinois Univ. , Carbon- dale, 1974), p . l6. LCC was used by 70 percent of 40 community college libraries in Illinois, DDC was used by 30 percent. 340 I College & Research Libraries • July 1981 2. Arthur Ray Rowland, " Cataloging and Classi- fication in Junior College Libraries ," Library Resources & Technical Services 7:254 (Summer 1963). Rowland reported that 96 .5 percent of 315 junior college libraries were using D DC and only 3.5 percent were using LCC. Desmond Taylor, " Classification Trends in Junior College Libraries ," College & Research Libraries 29:352 (Sept. 1968). Taylor reported 77.1 percent of 690 junior college libraries using DDC and 13.3 percent using LCC . He also reported that 8.4 percent were changing from DDC to LCC, and 0.6 percent were planning to change . 3 . Rand Corporation , A Million Random Digits with 100,000 Normal Deviates (Glencoe , Ill .: Free Pr. , 1955), p.4. Reprinted in Ray L. Car- p ente r and Ellen Storey Vasu , Statistical Meth- ods for Librarians (Chicago: Ame rican Library Assn. , 1978), p . 96---97.