INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this research is to address both library school training and subsequent on-the-job training, and consider whether or not cataloguing training in library school adequately prepares students for employment in Irish law libraries. The topic of cataloguing in Irish law libraries and in particular, whether the training provided is adequate for and responsive to, the evolving role of cataloguers has been overlooked in terms of in-depth research. Most of the current literature focuses on cataloguing practices in British law libraries or on more general library school training. This study addresses the current lack of information and explores new research territory by examining cataloguing training and practices in three specialist Irish law libraries and surveying cataloguers in Irish law libraries. The findings of this research will be of value to other researchers in this field seeking information on cataloguing practices in Irish law libraries. Any recommendations regarding the curriculum for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and further training of cataloguers in Irish law libraries will be of interest to employers, educators, cataloguers and legal information professionals.
Rationale
In June 2008, BIALL held a practical half-day pre-conference workshop entitled “Back to Basics: Cataloguing and Classification” (Holborn and Miskin, Reference Holborn and Miskin2008). The conference explored some of the practical problems and issues encountered in cataloguing and classifying legal materials. The first session delivered by Guy Holborn, Librarian of Lincoln's Inn, discussed common problems encountered when cataloguing legal materials and suggested occasions when it might be advisable to depart from a strict application of AACR2. The second session delivered by Christine Miskin, then editor of Legal Information Management, the official journal of BIALL, focused on recent developments in classification, such as “folksonomies”, and suggested ways to select and adapt a classification scheme from those currently available, including in-house schemes and Moys, a scheme devised specifically for legal materials by Betty Moys.
The conference broached some interesting issues, such as the quality of library school training and whether or not it adequately prepares students for the specific demands of cataloguing in Irish law libraries, or if further on-the-job training is necessary. The workshop also highlighted the lack of any published research or literature into cataloguing practices in Irish law libraries. This topic has been overlooked by researchers and, as such, would repay investigation.
Research Aim
The overall aim of this research is to determine the perceptions and expectations of those involved in cataloguing as to the training needs of cataloguers in Irish law libraries.
Research Objectives
In order to achieve this aim, the following objectives have been specified:
• To review all relevant and core literature in the field;
• To survey information professionals in Irish law libraries;
• To conduct several qualitative case studies of Irish law libraries for triangulation;
• To conduct an interview with an educator in the field of cataloguing;
• To analyse and report on the findings of the research;
• To make recommendations regarding the curriculum for CPD and further training of cataloguers in Irish law libraries.
METHODOLOGY
A predominantly qualitative case study approach was selected to tackle the research problem. A predominantly quantitative research design was considered unsuitable for this particular research problem because it would have required relatively large samples of cataloguers and would have been unlikely to provide the depth of insight that the case study design could achieve. The number of cataloguers in Irish law libraries is relatively small and, as a group, would not provide a sample large enough to justify a largely quantitative approach. Statistical data, however, is necessary to provide a more complete picture of the research issue, and so a survey of information professionals from various law libraries was incorporated into the research. Triangulation facilitated the validation of data through cross- verification of different sources. This process ensured the completeness of findings and the confirmation of findings and conclusions (Gorman and Clayton, Reference Gorman and Clayton2005).
Research Design
The research design comprised three in-depth case studies of Irish law libraries along with interviews and questionnaires, with triangulation to collect data from different areas. The survey of legal information professionals yielded quantitative data to complement the predominantly qualitative framework. The survey also allowed for greater participation in the research, which would otherwise have been dependent on the small group of cataloguers involved in the case studies. While a questionnaire is obviously useful, other than allowing scope for extended comments, it cannot really probe responses, which means other data gathering techniques should be employed. Interviews, therefore, elicited more detailed information from cataloguers and provided further clarification of the research issue. The combination of several strategies in conjunction with the ongoing literature review ensured a more thorough exploration of cataloguing practices and procedures in Irish law libraries.
Survey Questionnaire
In the original research design, the case studies were intended to precede the questionnaire. On further reflection, this approach was revised so that the data collected from the questionnaire could be used to clarify the research issue. The findings of the questionnaire highlighted the main concerns to be investigated in greater detail in the case studies, such as the case study participants' library schooling, cataloguing experience, on-the-job training and further training. The inclusion of the questionnaire offsets, to some extent, the argument that the findings of one or two cases lack statistical validity and are too narrow to be generalised to a larger population (Cho and Trent, Reference Cho and Trent2006). The obvious limitation of the questionnaire method is that there is no control over who submits a completed questionnaire, or indeed whether or not respondents answer all of the questions (Creswell, Reference Creswell2009). In the event of a low response rate, it is then difficult to gauge if those who submit completed questionnaires are representative of the larger survey population. Nevertheless, the questionnaire survey was incorporated into the research to yield more quantitative data and to pinpoint the main issues to be addressed in the subsequent case studies.
Survey Sample
The survey sample comprised legal information professionals from professional societies, law firm libraries, government libraries and one academic library, Trinity College Dublin. All survey participants were either individual members of BIALL or had organisational membership through their library. The questionnaire was sent to members using the most recent Directory, last updated in November 2010.
Survey Monkey was used to create the questionnaire. Before “going live”, the questionnaire was piloted on a sample of respondents. This initial testing phase ensured the questionnaire was clear and capable of yielding the necessary data to help answer the research question. The survey was completed by 37 out of 87 potential respondents and produced some valuable statistical data. The questionnaire comprised 19 questions covering background information, library schooling, on-the-job training and further training. Seven of these questions allowed for extended comments, which many respondents took time to complete. Data analysis was carried out using both Survey Monkey's functionality and Microsoft Excel.
Case Studies
Each of the three law libraries selected for the case study represent the three types of specialist law libraries in Ireland: a professional society law library, a government law library and a law firm library. The primary requirement in terms of selection for case study is that each law library must have organisational membership of the BIALL Irish Group. For logistical reasons, the law libraries selected for case study are all in Dublin, which has the highest concentration of legal information professionals in the country (BIALL Irish Group, 2010).
Parameters of the Research
This research is limited to specialist law libraries. A case study of a university or an academic library, such as Trinity College Dublin, which typically has a cataloguing department to catalogue all subject areas, goes beyond the parameters of the research question and has therefore been excluded from consideration. However, it is important to note that all members of the BIALL Irish Group email list have been surveyed by questionnaire, and some of the survey population includes information professionals from a small number of law libraries in Northern Ireland and one academic library. The research also includes an interview with a cataloguing lecturer to get the thoughts and perspective of an educator in the field.
Interviews
Permission was sought and obtained from all case study participants and the cataloguing lecturer to record interviews using a Dictaphone. Prior to the interviews taking place, participants were sent an email outlining the main issues to be addressed in the research. The interviews took place in January and February of 2012. Interaction with the research participants and contextual aspects of the interviews were documented in field notes. These field notes were then expanded after each interview while still fresh in the memory. A guided interview framework allowed a good flow and development of the research topic and gave participants considerable latitude to talk about their educational background, library school training, cataloguing experience and on-the-job training.
Ethical Considerations
The researcher-subject relationship is an important component of this study and has been carefully considered during all phases of the research. Ethical guidelines for research foster high standards of professional conduct, integrity and competence among researchers. Ethical standards and guidelines were complied with throughout all stages of the research process. Informed consent was obtained and recorded for all interviews prior to the actual interviews taking place, and the participants' rights to anonymity and confidentiality have been respected. Research participants and interviewees were all informed of the following points:
• the aims and methods of the proposed research;
• any time demands or inconveniences;
• how any personal details would be used;
• the uses to which the research may be put.
Resource Requirements
The main resource requirement for the research was time. For logistical reasons, the law libraries chosen for case study were all based in Dublin and therefore did not incur significant travel expenses.
Other resources used for the research included:
• Laptop and access to computer at work after working hours;
• Internet and email access;
• Access to the BIALL Irish Group and LIS-LAW mailing lists;
• Use of a Dictaphone to record interviews;
• Printing facilities;
• Organisational membership of BIALL which provides access to the Legal Management Information journal;
• Access to academic databases (available through Robert Gordon University);
• Trinity College Dublin (TCD) borrowing privileges;
• Access to interlibrary loans services from the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (IALS);
• Access and subscription to appropriate statistical analysis packages and software (Survey Monkey).
On completion of the research and after it has been submitted to Robert Gordon University, any findings will be made available to the three law libraries involved in the case studies and the cataloguing lecturer, who has also expressed an interest in the outcome of the research. All raw data, however, will remain with the researcher and will not be made available to other parties.
LITERATURE REVIEW
BIALL Publications
The BIALL Irish Group, an affiliate group to BIALL, currently has approximately 70 members from the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. BIALL members are information professionals from a range of organisations including professional bodies and societies, law firms, government libraries and academic libraries (BIALL Irish Group, 2010).
The Law Librarian was the first official journal of BIALL, and was originally published in April 1970. In 2001, the Law Librarian was completely revamped and its format and design brought up-to-date. At the same time, it was decided to change the journal's name to Legal Information Management in order to reflect more accurately the changing roles and responsibilities of its increasingly diverse readership (Worley, Reference Worley2006).
Legal Information Management
Legal Information Management is a valuable source of information on law libraries in Britain and Ireland. It is the principal journal for library and information professionals in the field of legal information management in the UK and Ireland, and covers developments and topical issues in law librarianship and legal information, both nationally and internationally. Most of the recent literature concerning cataloguing practices in British and Irish law libraries has been published in Legal Information Management though, as yet, none specifically examines the Irish context.
Cataloguing Surveys
One of the first surveys to address cataloguing and classification practices in British and Irish law libraries was conducted by Ian Sainsbury and published in the Law Librarian in 1989. At the end of October 1983, a questionnaire on law library cataloguing and classification practices was sent to British and Irish law libraries. A second follow-up questionnaire was enclosed with the October 1988 BIALL Newsletter. While the aim of the survey was to update the one carried out in 1983, it was particularly concerned with capturing information about the pace of automation in the intervening five years. The results of Sainsbury's surveys showed that all law firm and Bar libraries did their own cataloguing, while cataloguing was carried out centrally in 15 university and eight polytechnic libraries (1989, p. 62). Sainsbury's surveys are somewhat dated and of limited value as most law libraries circa 1983–1988 were still using card catalogues, either in typewritten and/or handwritten form. However, the study still holds some significance as the first survey to investigate cataloguing and classification practices in British and Irish law libraries. It also captures a period of flux in libraries as automation and computerisation began to emerge. The survey results show that seven law firm libraries were automated in 1988, and of the remaining 19 libraries in the survey, 14 were either hoping for automation or were in the process of becoming automated in some way during 1989. Two of the six un-automated Bar libraries were also hoping to introduce computerised procedures (Sainsbury Reference Sainsbury1989, p. 63).
The notable findings of Sainsbury's surveys into cataloguing practices were that AACR2 was predominantly used at the time, while a sizeable number of libraries used their own in-house schemes. Of the 23 libraries surveyed, ten were using AACR2, ten had their own in-house scheme, two had no scheme at all and one used the Anglo-American Code of 1908. Two of the libraries surveyed reported difficulties in deciding how best to accommodate corporate body entries. Problems with uniform titles and the use of Great Britain [Laws, etc.] under Rule 25.15 of AACR2 were also disclosed by some respondents. In the follow-up survey of 1988, many respondents cited the inadequate range of subject headings and non-availability of headings for new legal areas or concepts, while three replies singled out the American bias of the Library of Congress. Sudden changes in the preferred use of subject headings also created problems, even in automated systems, as was pointed out by one respondent. (Sainsbury Reference Sainsbury1989, p. 63).
Practical Guidance for Cataloguing Legal Materials
Some recent literature has addressed the practicalities of cataloguing legal materials and offers some guidance on best practice for cataloguers. James Shearer (2006) explores the practical issues and problems encountered in cataloguing legal materials, while Guy Holborn (2010) provides some practical guidance on how best to catalogue law collections while ensuring compliance with cataloguing standards, mainly AACR2. In his article on cataloguing to help law library users, Shearer argues that the particular needs of local users are paramount and catalogue entries must always be devised with their needs in mind. He also argues that users themselves are not concerned with the minutiae of cataloguing; they simply want to locate the material they require as quickly and easily as possible.
Shearer (2006, p. 11) describes some of the common characteristics that define law library users. As a rule they need information quickly, they require authoritative and current information. As for the materials themselves, they typically span a huge range of resources in a variety of forms. The commentaries and textbooks on the law need careful cataloguing because they tend to come in “families” with new editions, updates, amendments, inserts and supplements. Shearer (2006, p. 11) notes that smaller law libraries may prefer a shorter catalogue entry more suited to the needs of their local users. Catalogue entries relating to internet resources present particular difficulties for cataloguers. He recommends (2006, pp. 13,17) that for particularly important sites the cataloguer should provide a link in the catalogue record, either location mark or hypertext to that material, and include the site URL so the user can go online for the latest version if required.
Holborn (2010) also stresses the importance of having a good catalogue that follows consistent standards in order to promote a professional image. High cataloguing standards are especially important if a law library is involved in any form of co-operative cataloguing, for example at multi-site firms. Holborn (2010, pp.18–23) highlights some aspects of AACR2 that give unsatisfactory results when applied to legal materials and recommends that when and where such cases arise to weigh up the pros and cons of departing from AACR2. He notes that AACR2 is a substantial affair, replete with arcane rules that will never be needed in the average law library. He suggests (2010, p. 18) that an in-house manual can provide a quick reference guide for cataloguers, and highlight those rules that crop up most frequently when cataloguing legal materials. Continuity in the event of staff turnover and the training of new cataloguers are further benefits of maintaining a know-how database for cataloguers.
Holborn believes his article provides some useful advice for those either directly or indirectly involved in cataloguing:
“The purpose of this article…is to give some pointers both to the basics of cataloguing and to some of the tricky problems that can arise when dealing with law books. It is aimed mainly at those who do original cataloguing, either regularly or only from time to time, but those managers who have to supervise staff who do cataloguing might also find some of the content of relevance”. (Holborn Reference Holborn2010, p. 18).
Recent Studies of Cataloguing in Law Libraries
The cataloguing and classification of materials to aid their retrieval by users have long been recognised as core skills of the information professional. However, the ever-increasing amount of information available via electronic sources has sparked ongoing debate about whether or not the traditional cataloguing and classification skills of the information professional are heading towards obsolescence. A study by Sands (Reference Sands2002) considers the cataloguing and classification skills taught on information studies courses and how useful these skills are to new legal information professionals by analysing the opinions and experiences of nine new legal information professionals from both academic and law firm libraries.
As the most recent survey of cataloguing practices in law libraries, Sands' study is of particular interest and, unlike Sainsbury's earlier surveys of 1983 and Reference Sainsbury1989, specifically addresses library school training. The participants in Sands' survey were asked to reflect on their library school training, more specifically on the cataloguing and classification content of their modules, and to consider whether or not the cataloguing and classification skills that had been taught on their information studies courses had been useful in subsequent employment. Four of the nine participants were working in academic institutions representing three different law libraries and another five were employed in law firm libraries. In three cases, the individual was in their second job since completing their library schooling, having previously worked in a different legal library.
The study found that while some courses covered cataloguing and classification skills in greater depth than others, most courses included some teaching of cataloguing and classification skills in a core module usually called one of Information Retrieval, Information Handling or Organisation of Bibliographical Data. In one instance, cataloguing and classification were taught in two separate core modules. Every library school surveyed also included some teaching of one or more of the major classification schemes: Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) and, in one case, Moys Classification. Most modules incorporated either a compulsory or an optional piece of work to assist with practical cataloguing, which included AACR2 and the creation of MARC records. (Sands Reference Sands2002, pp. 19–20). However, one participant complained that students were expected to pick up advanced cataloguing in four half-day sessions, and the outcome was that most students still had no grasp of cataloguing and little inclination to learn more. Sands observed that even those who had graduated from library school the previous year had forgotten much of what was taught in library school:
“It was interesting to see how much even those people who had graduated last year had forgotten about what was covered in their information studies course, which perhaps just highlights how quickly the day-to-day skills on the job take over in immediate relevance from the theoretical teaching on courses”. (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 20).
The larger libraries, which included all three of the academic institutions represented in the survey, were found to have specialised staff in a central department dealing with the cataloguing and classification of all library materials following AACR2. All of the academic libraries imported a large number of their catalogue records from external sources including CURL, BDS, the British Library and OCLC. When records were not readily available from these external sources, MARC records were created in-house. Each library used a different classification scheme, with one using LCSH, another using DDC and the third opting for its own in-house scheme. Unlike the academic libraries, each of the five law firm libraries catalogued and classified in-house rather than importing records. Two law firms had central cataloguing departments dealing with the acquisition, cataloguing and classification of all materials and the remaining three firms shared out cataloguing and classification responsibilities among non-specialist staff (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 20).
Several of the law firm information professionals reported that, unlike academic libraries, no formal cataloguing standards were used. Information contained in catalogue records was entered on a “need to know” basis. One individual who had previously worked in an academic library observed that in the law firm library, with its smaller collection, there was more reliance on staff members' recall and familiarity with the collection than on formal cataloguing and classification procedures. Several of the information professionals in law firms also mentioned the existence of in-house know-how databases of internal information, separate from the library catalogue, that were generally maintained by professional support lawyers and information professionals (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 20).
Those who had used or were currently using cataloguing and classification skills for their library work felt they had to re-learn these skills on the job, either because they had not been adequately covered in library school or what had been taught differed from the systems in place in their libraries. Two law firm information professionals who were involved in some cataloguing as part of their job, suggested it required common sense rather than the application of any recognised standards or systematic approach. In contrast, two others believed that studying thesauri in library school had helped prepare them for the work they were doing on in-house databases of abstracts and indexes of materials. Contrary to feeling that such skills were now redundant, they identified a continuing need for the development of these skills. Four participants from a mixture of academic and law firm libraries reported that their cataloguing and classification skills were particularly useful when navigating library management systems and undertaking catalogue searches, which in turn helped them to answer enquiries more effectively. (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 20).
When respondents were asked if they believed cataloguing and classification skills would prove useful to them in the future, seven of the nine replied that they definitely would. One information professional from an academic library and one from a law firm library disagreed, and felt such skills were of limited value. Of the other academic librarians, one who worked in a cataloguing department hoped to continue developing skills in that area and expected to need them in a future job. Two others doubted they would be involved in traditional cataloguing and classification (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 21). The fourth academic librarian would certainly be using these skills as some sections of the law collection in their library were due to be re-classified for greater ease of access for the library users. This librarian indicated that they would be heavily involved in this project and would be taught the necessary classification skills in-house during the term. All but one of the information professionals in law firms thought that at least basic cataloguing and classification skills would prove useful to them in the future, as many law firm libraries divide the cataloguing and classification of their collections between different library staff. This required staff to have a broad skills set rather than having a specialised cataloguing department like those in academic institutions (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 21).
Several participants in the study suggested that library schools should include more practical work in the curriculum as it was impossible to learn through reading cataloguing theory alone. Only one participant agreed that basic theory was sufficient. Others highlighted the difficulty of making classes interesting, or the problem of library schools trying to cover too much content when it was only feasible to cover the basics within the limited time available. Many of the comments indicated a need for library schools to find a balance whereby the subject is covered in enough detail to be worthwhile without trying to cover advanced skills in an unrealistic timeframe. Respondents also suggested that more practical cataloguing should be incorporated into coursework (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 21).
The rise of the internet poses a challenge for traditional cataloguing and is also addressed in the study. Two respondents, one from a law firm and one from an academic library, argued that the internet, far from rendering traditional cataloguing and classification redundant, provides the opportunity for information professionals to apply their skills in a new information environment. The sheer scale of the internet makes information increasingly difficult to find and decipher without the indexing skills of information professionals. The use of a controlled vocabulary to complement natural language searching is necessary to ensure the retrieval of relevant documents for end-users. Also, as several respondents pointed out, hard-copy resources are still purchased in large quantities by law libraries and, as this would most likely continue for the foreseeable future, there would continue to be a need for the cataloguing and classification skills of information professionals to organise this material (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 22).
Postgraduate Education in Cataloguing and Classification
In a survey of postgraduate education and training for cataloguing and classification in the British Isles carried out in 2003, J.H. Bowman found that most courses in the UK and Ireland still included some mention of cataloguing and classification, though not always as a compulsory module and usually without much practical coursework. Bowman's survey focused mainly on the course content of British library schools but also referenced the cataloguing and classification module of University College Dublin, which was the only library school in Ireland at the time (Bowman 2003, p. 310).
Bowman found that many students were critical of their library schooling and expressed dissatisfaction with the way in which cataloguing and classification were taught. Interestingly, Bowman (2003, p. 315) mentions a respondent who studied in Dublin some ten years prior to the survey. This respondent detailed the changes that had taken place in the teaching of cataloguing and classification over time. While the respondent was at library school, the module was taught by practicing external librarians. Later, this changed and the cataloguing component was taught by an existing member of the library department, who, according to the respondent's recollection, was inexperienced in cataloguing. Subsequently, the amount of time dedicated to cataloguing and classification was considerably reduced on the grounds that fewer libraries did original cataloguing and relied on importing records. This individual reasoned that although those who have been taught cataloguing at library school did not necessarily make the best cataloguers, it should not be possible to complete a professional qualification without having some knowledge of cataloguing.
Bowman identifies other possible factors responsible for the decline of cataloguing and classification in library schools, such as the long-standing perception that both are boring and old-fashioned, or the argument that so much of cataloguing depends on local practice that it cannot be adequately taught. He further suspects that some of those teaching cataloguing and classification are not experts in these subjects and are doing so reluctantly, though he does not proffer any hard evidence in support of this theory. Bowman argues that cataloguing and classification are fundamental to all library and information work and it is essential that all librarians, not just those involved in cataloguing, are taught these skills. He contends that without considerable practical coursework in library school, students will never fully learn how to use a cataloguing code or a classification scheme. He appeals to CILIP to reassess the curriculum in light of recent developments:
“There seems to have been too much dilution of these skills which are specific to the profession in favour of other skills, which although important, are not specific. It would be encouraging if CILIP would give clearer guidance as to what subjects should be included in the curriculum and which of them should be compulsory. The current growing interest in metadata and in cataloguing the web ought to make this an appropriate time to do so.” (Bowman 2003, p. 327).
In conclusion, Bowman emphasises a pressing need to educate senior library managers about the importance of the catalogue and the role of cataloguers. Without a marked change of attitude on the part of employers and a greater willingness to invest in the training and development of cataloguers, he fears that any overhaul of cataloguing will be virtually impossible. He pins his hopes on library students themselves who, he claims, now recognise that the treatment of these subjects in the curriculum is inadequate and are demanding more from their library schools.
Other Cataloguing Studies
Like Bowman, other commentators have called for a reinstatement of cataloguing and classification and a greater awareness of their value. Trickey (Reference Trickey2004, pp. 1–2), for one, argues that the teaching of cataloguing and classification has been downgraded to such as extent that both disciplines are no longer given the recognition they deserve. K.E. Attar (Reference Attar2006, p.173) also criticises the devaluation of cataloguing as a core library skill, and argues that it is part of the broader trend of the “de-professionalisation of librarianship”. Attar attributes the downgrading of cataloguing to a misplaced perception that the onset of digitisation has reduced the need for skilled cataloguers.
Attar's Reference Attar2006 study concerned a retrospective cataloguing project in a university which used university students with minimum training to catalogue stock from the book-in-hand to AACR2, level 2. The students were expected to apply notes, added entries and LCSH, with the intention of cataloguing books to a professional standard. Attar's investigation concluded (Reference Attar2006, pp. 176–184) that intelligence or aptitude alone does not guarantee library ability, and that cataloguing beyond the creation of minimum records is not an intuitive task which can simply be picked up without training.
The study found (2003, p. 181) that mistakes in students' catalogue records were largely attributable to insufficient training and supervision. Training emphasised MARC rather than AACR, and students did not grasp the connection between their work on the catalogue and the results for the end-user. One of the student cataloguers, who subsequently completed a postgraduate library course, recalled that the meaning of the cataloguing work she had been involved in only became clear during her cataloguing training at library school. Attar concludes that the prevailing “derisory attitude” towards library skills is unjustified and insists that a place remains for qualified librarians to do qualified library work:
“Students cannot master two detailed, sometimes arcane sets of rules – AACR and LCSH – and provide library work of professional standard without concomitant training and adequate ongoing supervision. At worst their work will be inferior to that of (supervised) junior library assistants. The expense for the library, if it desires professional results, will be greater than to appoint professionals in the first instance”.(Attar 2003, p. 183).
To reinforce this point, Attar cites (2006, p. 184) the variable quality of catalogue records found on the CURL database to illustrate that wherever cataloguing is uncontrolled and not highly regarded, quality will suffer. Although there may be less need for original cataloguing nowadays, there remains a need to know and understand cataloguing rules for editing purposes and in order to prevent the proliferation of error.
Whalen-Moss (Reference Whalen-Moss2007, p. 3) believes that cataloguing and classification reflects the “disorderly state of LIS education in general”. While the library profession searches for an ideal “core curriculum” from ever-increasing options, cataloguing and classification, once mainstays of the curriculum, now struggle to find a place. She notes (2007, p. 5) an increase in part-time and distance-learning courses, as well as a trend towards offering individual modules as training or continuing education to those already working in the information profession. Whalen-Moss's study found that of the 14 library schools surveyed, 11 offered at least a small amount of practical, hands-on experience of cataloguing and/or classifying books using traditional standards such as AACR2, MARC and DDC. Most modules that included practical work required students to demonstrate this skill in their assessed coursework. Students were usually asked, either in groups or individually, to produce catalogue records and to assign classmarks to real books, or, more frequently, to made-up titles so that students could not simply download existing records. Several modules also required a discursive essay instead of, or in addition to, the practical assessed coursework (2007, p. 10).
However, the amount of time library schools devoted to cataloguing and classification varied considerably. For example, one library school spent only two to four hours covering AACR2 and DDC, while in the module outline for Information Searching & Retrieval from another library school, AACR2 was allotted a single slide in a lecture series of 144 slides, though students did have an option to undertake further work on the subject in a later assignment (2007, p. 6). Only three departments surveyed used the term “cataloguing and classification” in the module title. In most cases, cataloguing and classification were more likely to be part of Organising Knowledge, Information Retrieval, Organisation & Retrieval of Information or Organisation of Bibliographical Data. According to Whalen-Moss:
“Sometimes this could be explained by the fact that cat & class is considered part of a larger conceptual unity, usually with database or internet search strategies, which are seen by many library schools as the other side of the coin. At other times, this may be more of an attempt to camouflage cat & class offerings or to make the course appear more up-to-date.” (Whalen-Moss Reference Whalen-Moss2007, p. 7).
She ventures (2007, p. 7) that this trend is just as likely to be part of the tendency in recent times to “re-language the entire curriculum as part of the larger reinvention of the Information Professional”.
In response to Whalen-Moss's study, Batley (Reference Batley2007), a cataloguing and classification lecturer on CILIP accredited courses, believes that the central role of cataloguing and classification has been gradually eroded with the emergence of the business-oriented information professional and the growth of electronic information storage and delivery, but finds this situation perplexing (2007, p. 15): “It's rather curious that today when we are generating and publishing more information than ever before we seem to assume that it's unnecessary to record and organise it. That doesn't seem to me to be a sensible business plan.” Batley argues (2007, p. 16) that cataloguing and classification are intellectually challenging and stimulating skills, and students need to develop the kind of intellectual and analytical ability that cataloguing practice engenders: the ability to analyse an item, extract information from it, and finally reproduce it in a precise and detailed form.
Coburn (Reference Coburn2007 p. 22) concurs that library schools are needed to produce information professionals equipped with the basic theory of cataloguing and who have at least some hands-on practical experience. He also identifies a need for affordable and accessible continuing education for those who graduated from various library courses unschooled in the basics of cataloguing. He also recommends (2007, pp. 22–23) further training for those paraprofessionals who will be involved in cataloguing: “There are some opportunities to be grasped by the library schools but also by those of us already practising, both to safeguard the status of catalogues and cataloguers, but also to make them attractive areas for new entrants”.
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
Survey
The questionnaire was first piloted in October 2011 and received a positive response from the sample respondents. Some questions were rephrased for greater clarity at the suggestion of colleagues. Permission was then sought and obtained from the BIALL Irish Group co- coordinator to send out the survey to members. The survey was distributed by email in November 2011. The survey was emailed to 87 potential recipients. A total of 34 respondents completed the survey, 50 people did not respond and 3 people opted out of the survey altogether. A reminder email was sent a week after the original email and yielded three further completed surveys. The final total of completed surveys was 37. The survey comprised 19 questions in total covering job description, professional qualification, library school training and on-the-job training.
The survey yielded a good response rate but, somewhat disappointingly, the response rate from law firm libraries was low, with only three law firm information professionals completing the survey. There are several possible explanations for this: they may not be involved in cataloguing or have library school training, they may have moved to another job since the list was last updated in 2010, or they may have decided to ignore the survey due to time constraints or lack of interest. Non-response to questionnaires is a perennial problem and despite the reminder emails, no further responses from law firm libraries were received. However, the response rate from the professional society and government law libraries was encouraging. In particular, the response rate for government libraries exceeded expectations, and many of these respondents provided detailed answers in the extended comments section of the questionnaire. Survey Monkey's professional tools were used to organise and analyse the collected data.
Survey Population
The questionnaire surveyed a good cross-section of legal information professionals ranging from library assistants to senior library managers. The survey results, rounded to the nearest percentage, showed that the majority of respondents (49%) were employed in professional societies and bodies reflecting their status as the largest law libraries in Ireland. Government law libraries were the next largest group comprising 26% of respondents. Law firm library staff accounted for 9% of respondents, while academic and university libraries made up 17% of the survey population.
On the whole, the survey sample had considerable law library experience with 42% of respondents employed between one and five years, 28% employed between six to ten years and a further 31% with more than ten years of service in a law library. None of the respondents had less than one year's experience in their current library. Of those surveyed, a majority of 92% either held, or were in the process of obtaining, a professional qualification in information and library studies.
Organisational Membership
In terms of organisational membership, the majority of respondents (82%) were members of BIALL, while a similarly large percentage (76%) reported membership of the Library Association of Ireland (LAI). A much smaller percentage of respondents (21%) were members of CILIP. The survey results showed a relatively small number of respondents were members of the cataloguing groups within these organisations. A total of eight respondents were currently members of the LAI's Cataloguing and Metadata Group (CMG) and just two respondents were members of CILIP's Cataloguing and Indexing Group (CIG). Another five respondents, drawn mainly from academic libraries, were members of the Academic and Special Libraries Group of the LAI.
Library School Training
Following the background questions, the survey addressed respondents' library school training with 94% of those surveyed confirming that their library school training included either a cataloguing or a cataloguing-related module. A total of just two respondents (6%) of the sample reported not receiving any cataloguing training as part of their overall library school training.
Cataloguing Theory
There was mixed feedback when respondents were asked to rate the way in which cataloguing theory was taught. The results showed that 30% of respondents rated the theoretical aspect of their library training as “good”, while the same percentage rated it as “poor”. A further 21% rated it “very good” and 15% felt it was “adequate”. Of the 33 respondents who completed this question, only 6% rated it as “excellent”. Clearly, the statistics indicate a divergence of opinion. When respondents were invited to elaborate on their answers, it became more apparent that many felt they knew little about cataloguing theory upon graduating. While a few respondents commented that basic cataloguing was well taught, most of the comments were critical. One respondent remarked that their training “largely consisted of downloading records from now-obsolete databases. There was very little on the theory of cataloguing and nothing on what contributes to the quality of a good record”. Several respondents acknowledged the difficulty of teaching the fundamentals of cataloguing theory within a limited time-frame, with one noting:
“It is important to have an awareness and understanding of the theoretical and historical elements involved in cataloguing, but when you only have one module to grasp the concepts and practical elements of cataloguing, more of the module should be dedicated to practical rather than theoretical aspects”.
Some respondents recognised that the nature of cataloguing was changing at the time of their library schooling and lecturers were constrained by the curriculum as set at that time. Other respondents were highly critical of the way in which the theory of cataloguing was taught at library school, with one respondent dismissing the teaching of cataloguing for their Higher Diploma as “entirely inadequate”, and another describing it as “dreadful”. Overall, a majority of the 11 extended answers were critical of the way in which cataloguing theory was taught in library school.
Practical Cataloguing
A similar trend emerged when respondents were asked to rate the practical cataloguing coursework with 34% of respondents rating it as “poor”, 28% rating it “good” and the same percentage rating it “adequate”. Of the remainder, 13% described it as “very good”, and none opted for “excellent”. Several respondents noted that their training took place before the advent of electronic resources in libraries, and expressed the hope that practical coursework had improved with current library courses. One respondent conceded that their library schooling was a “bit dated” because the cataloguing of electronic resources was uncommon at that time, practical coursework was mainly hard-copy based and MARC was taught in theory only. These sentiments were echoed by another respondent who mentioned that while cataloguing principles were well taught, the scope for online methods at that time was very limited. One respondent, whose library training dated back to 1998, explained that practical cataloguing only received a cursory mention: “I had to ask the lecturer to explain to us what MARC records were and could we have a class devoted to them. We got a handout of MARC fields and a brief overview. I felt very underprepared for ‘real-world’ library cataloguing using MARC”.
A recent library school graduate mentioned that class size and time constraints presented major difficulties for students:
“I and most of my library class found the practical cataloguing activities/assignments of the module very difficult. The group was too large (70+) to adequately teach the practical elements of cataloguing and the lecturer had very little time or scope to help people with difficulties. The material was covered too quickly and not enough time was given to providing concrete examples or explaining the terms. The coursework readings did not properly explain or complement the practical elements of cataloguing”.
This respondent further suggested that smaller tutorial groups would work better for practical cataloguing coursework. In a similar vein, another respondent complained that cataloguing coursework “didn't really show the principles behind cataloguing: it was more of a form-filling exercise.” Another recent graduate acknowledged both the difficulty of covering practical cataloguing coursework in a short space of time coupled with the challenge of teaching practical cataloguing to novice cataloguers:
“I had previous experience of cataloguing and this made the practical cataloguing coursework much easier, but someone new to cataloguing may have found it difficult to grasp with just a few examples given. To really get a handle on it you need to create a lot of records and with the limited timeframe for the module, this is probably not possible”.
Preparation for Employment
When asked how library school training and cataloguing coursework prepared them specifically for employment in a law library, there was a divergence of opinion (Fig 1). According to the results, 33% of respondents rated their overall training as “poor”, 27% felt it was “good”, 21% rated it “very good” and 18% thought it was “adequate”. In the additional comments section for this question, several respondents noted that on-the-job training was ultimately more beneficial to them than their library school training. One respondent remarked: “Teaching was good [in library school] but would have benefited from more practical application. I can't say it helped in law library work specifically. My most relevant experience [was] gained through my first job in a university cataloguing department”. Another respondent made a similar point:
“I did my library school training while working full-time in a law library and by this time I had a considerable amount of cataloguing experience. The practical cataloguing coursework expanded my understanding of cataloguing generally, but wouldn't have made a massive difference in my ability to do my job”.
None of the respondents recalled undertaking any cataloguing coursework specific to law libraries. However, one respondent's library schooling included a general module in legal information which they found was good preparation for employment in a law library.
Figure 1: Survey Result for Library School Training.
On-The-Job Training
The third section of the questionnaire addressed on-the-job training with 6% rating their initial on-the-job training as “excellent”, 34% rating it as “very good”, a further 25% describing it as “good”, 19% rating it as “adequate” and 16% rating it as “poor” (Fig 2). When asked to suggest how their initial training might be improved, several respondents revealed that they never received any on-the-job cataloguing training, while for others their training was more informal. The following response is typical:
“A lot of the cataloguing training received in the library is ad hoc and given as a situation arises e.g. how to change the location of a book. Initially training is only given to those involved in cataloguing, whereas all staff should receive some kind of cataloguing training as it overlaps into every area of library work. If you were designated a piece of cataloguing work upon employment in the library, the training was good, it was quite comprehensive and covered most of what you needed to know to perform the task proficiently”.
This respondent proposed that there should be a cataloguing guide developed for all new staff which would cover all the basic cataloguing functions of the library management system, for example editing items and changing the locations of items.
Figure 2: Survey Results for Initial In-House Training.
Other respondents recalled feeling overwhelmed when first starting to work with law materials, and suggested some structured training would have eased the transition. One respondent related their experience:
“I think it would have been a good idea to have had more formal training in cataloguing. Much of what I learned I either learned in a very informal way from other staff or by seeking out the information myself (either from the library database, SirsiDynix's online help pages or by asking for help from someone working on the helpdesk of this company). I was trained as a cataloguer in my previous post and I brought this experience to my present post. It would have been more difficult to learn cataloguing in my present post without the benefit of having had previous experience of it”.
Several respondents cited the value of previous cataloguing experience; others reported being the first or only professional librarian in their institution and receiving little or no training and instruction. One respondent stated: “I am a one-person library and replaced an outgoing librarian. I had to learn myself by seeing how my predecessor catalogued and classified items”. Another respondent described a similar scenario: “I was the first professional librarian here so there was no support in the form of library-related training within my parent organisation. I imagine this will be the case with many librarians, and even cataloguers where there is more than one librarian”.
Cataloguing Know-How
There was an almost even split in the number of respondents who worked in a law library which maintained a know-how database for cataloguers and those who did not. A total of 17 respondents worked in a library with a know-how database, while 16 respondents had no access to know-how materials. Those with access to know-how materials were asked to rate the range and scope of the materials and resources available to cataloguers (Fig 3). In response, 42% of the sample selected “very good”, 30% chose “good”, 12% opted for “adequate” while the same percentage selected “poor”. One respondent (4%) described their training resources as “excellent”.
Figure 3: Survey Result for Range and Scope of Training Materials.
Some respondents recounted creating their own training guides for cataloguing legal materials. One particularly resourceful respondent built their own practice manual as a wiki on the web. Some respondents also reported having access to know-how records on more general areas of library work, but nothing specifically on cataloguing procedures. Others remarked that their training guides, although useful, were in need of more regular updating. Another respondent mentioned that the training guides and know-how materials in their library were stored electronically among many other files and folders making them difficult to locate.
The next question in the survey invited respondents to rate the importance of understanding cataloguing theory, on-the job training, previous cataloguing experience and further training in their ability to catalogue in a law library (Fig 4). Most respondents rated on-the-job training as being most important in their professional development. 23 rated it as “very important”, nine as “important” and just one respondent felt it was “quite important”. A similarly large number of felt understanding cataloguing theory was important in their ability to catalogue. 13 respondents described it as “very important”, 14 as “important”, while five respondents rated it “quite important”. The value of previous cataloguing experience drew a more mixed response with eight respondents rating it “very important”, four “important” and the same number describing it as just “quite important”. Only one respondent rated it as “not important”. The value of further training, such as seminars and workshops, was rated “very important” by 13 respondents, “important” by 11 and “quite important” by nine. The number of respondents describing any of these four aspects as “not important” was negligible.
Figure 4: Survey Results for Cataloguing Competencies.
Respondents were next invited to select the statement which best described their overall experience of cataloguing training and development in their law library (Fig 5). The majority (38%) described their overall training as “good”, 28% “adequate” and 25% “good”. The percentage of respondents who selected “excellent” and “poor” was much lower, at 6% and 3% respectively. The overall response indicates that most respondents were reasonably satisfied with their overall cataloguing training and development in their law library.
Figure 5: Survey Results for Overall Training and Development.
Further Cataloguing Training
The final part of the questionnaire concerned further cataloguing training (Fig 6). Respondents were asked how often, if ever, they attended cataloguing training, seminars and workshops, such as those organised by the LAI. A lone respondent (3%) attended cataloguing training and seminars frequently. Of the remainder, 13 (40%) occasionally attended training and seminars, while 19 (58%), the largest percentage of the sample, answered that they never attended any further training seminars or workshops.
Figure 6: Survey Results for Further Training.
The survey responses showed that respondents who availed themselves of further training, either frequently or occasionally, attended seminars, lectures and workshops hosted by various library groups such as the LAI, BIALL, CILIP and ASLIB. These seminars and workshops were wide-ranging, covering diverse topics such as cataloguing legal materials, cataloguing e-resources, metadata, LCSH, index and thesaurus training, copyright, rare books cataloguing, MARC 21, MODS and Dublin Core. Most respondents found any additional cataloguing training beneficial and have been able to apply this training to their library work. One respondent enthused about some recent seminars and workshops:
“I attended a cataloguing seminar organised by BIALL and found it beneficial, but there was a lot to take in and I was relatively new at the time. I also attended a training workshop on MODS and Dublin Core organised by CILIP and the LAI. Although we don't use either in our library it was an interesting workshop and it was good to get an idea of some of the other cataloguing standards libraries use”.
Some respondents also reported attending training that was not immediately relevant to their library work, but nonetheless both interesting and enlightening:
“I attended a seminar on metadata recently and I found it really interesting, but very detailed and not really relevant to my work at the moment. At the same time I think it's important to keep up to date with the latest developments in libraries, and this kind of training is definitely worthwhile, not just for cataloguing”.
Others claimed that further training from CILIP and ASLIB compensated in some measure for their inadequate library school training. Two respondents reported receiving regular in- house cataloguing training, one of whom mentioned that the acquisitions librarian in their library provided regular training sessions for staff with some cataloguing responsibilities, and that the training “is completely tailored to our library service”. The second respondent received training via webinars and conference calls and described this type of training as “beneficial, though not as good as face-to-face training”.
Another respondent attended in-house CILIP training in cataloguing and classification for non-professional library staff and found it very beneficial in providing an overview of the concepts and rationale behind cataloguing. In addition, they reported attending library vendor training in the use of cataloguing modules and cataloguing configuration, but while it was interesting, it was not specific to their local library management system set-up. This individual also attended library conferences hosted by various library organisations including COSI, BIALL and LAI/CILIP, which they described as “very useful”.
In the final question of the survey, respondents were invited to offer any final thoughts or observations on cataloguing in Irish law libraries. One respondent concluded that cataloguing standards and requirements vary greatly between organisations and that it is more important for a library to have a good in-house training programme for cataloguers than it is for a library to hire qualified cataloguers. Another respondent argued that one of the problems with some library schools is their unwillingness to allow practitioners to teach some subjects, including cataloguing and classification, “which [to me], looking back, is so important for the newly qualified librarian”. The responses to the final question of the questionnaire showed a desire on the part of many respondents to continue to improve their cataloguing skills and to attend more training sessions in the future. External training sessions such as those hosted by BIALL, the LAI and CILIP were recommended by several respondents as a means of providing networking opportunities for law librarians, particularly those from smaller libraries. One such respondent remarked that as the only librarian in a small law firm, involvement with external library groups and CPD events were particularly beneficial.
Case Study 1: Professional Society Law Library
Participant Profile: Participant A
Participant A, an assistant librarian who was also qualified as a solicitor (Participant A, Reference Participant2012).
Her library school training included a compulsory module on cataloguing and classification which gave her a basis to build upon her existing cataloguing skills. Her library schooling coupled with her previous legal experience gave her a greater awareness of how an end-user searches and uses the catalogue to find legal information. Participant A has a wealth of specialist library experience having worked in both a management library and an engineering library as a student.
Participant Profile: Participant B
Participant B is an assistant librarian, who spent several years working in a law library in Australia and learned many of the principles of cataloguing while working there. Her library schooling included a compulsory module in cataloguing and classification which introduced students to the basics of both disciplines, but focused solely on DDC and did not cover other classification schemes. Her summation of her library schooling was that it equipped her with the fundamental skills for employment in a law library but that further on-the-job training or refresher cataloguing courses were required. The need for further training was not specific to law libraries though and the same could be said for students going on to work in medical libraries, corporate libraries or any type of specialist libraries (Participant B, Reference Participant2012). Participant B worked in other law libraries in Australia, and described the cataloguing processes and procedures there as very similar to those of the Law Library in Dublin. The libraries used the same MARC notation for catalogue records and the Moys Classification was used for classifying legal materials. As many of the law texts in the Australian libraries were UK publications and can also be found in Irish law libraries, she commented that it was reassuring to find the catalogue records for both libraries were very similar. However, she expressed misgivings about the lack of opportunities for further training afforded to Irish cataloguers compared to cataloguers in British, and particularly Australian law libraries. In her experience, law libraries in Britain and Australia are more proactive when it comes to training new recruits:
“BIALL in the UK and also in Australia run a fantastic course to introduce new recruits to law libraries – the Reference Materials Course. It is widely recommended. I know in Australia, any new recruit to a law library would be sent on the course.” (Participant B, Reference Participant2012).
Participant Profile: Participant C
Participant C is an assistant librarian and holds a Higher Diploma in Information Studies from Trinity College Dublin. This library course is now defunct, but at the time was the only library course available in Ireland. Most of what Participant C has learned about cataloguing has been from on-the-job experience and working closely with other cataloguers. She is also responsible for the maintenance of the SirsiDynix LMS and takes a particular interest in the functionality and operability of its cataloguing module. (Participant C, Reference Participant2012).
Library Assistants
Of the library assistants involved in cataloguing, one is currently studying for a professional library qualification and another has already obtained a Masters of Library Studies (MLIS). The other three library assistants are non-professionals with no previous library experience. The cataloguing of bulk materials such as statutory instruments (SI's) and Employment Appeals Tribunal decisions (EAT's) is generally designated to the library assistants. For the most part, this type of basic cataloguing does not require any previous cataloguing experience; however what falls to be catalogued by the library assistants has been overseen by the assistant librarians or has been catalogued during previous years by assistant librarians who have then detailed the cataloguing process. SI's tend to be the most time-consuming and difficult items to catalogue and are usually assigned to the more experienced library assistants.
Cataloguing training is usually only provided for those directly involved in cataloguing but, according to Participant C, some staff members have in the past requested training, usually on brief cataloguing. The training process in all cases involves an assistant librarian using templates and cataloguing guides to explain and demonstrate how the record should be completed. When a new process or format comes along, such as e-books and e-resources, this cataloguing is generally assigned to the assistant librarians. The catalogue records for textbooks are also periodically spot-checked by the assistant librarians to ensure accuracy and consistency.
All three assistant librarians mentioned attention to detail and accuracy as being two of the qualities which would be desirable in any staff assigned to cataloguing duties. The library assistants are selected for cataloguing work because they have shown attention to detail in other tasks or because they have some previous cataloguing experience (Participant A, Reference Participant2012). The consensus among the assistant librarians was that library assistants who come in with previous cataloguing experience or library schooling often have a better grasp of why cataloguing must be consistent and accurate, and this is clear from the quality of their work on the catalogue. Those with no library schooling or previous cataloguing experience are also less likely to pick up errors or suggest improvements (Participant A and Participant C, Reference Participant2012).
Cataloguing Procedures
The library maintains procedural guides for cataloguing on the shared staff drive. UK Participant C explained that templates are the best way to capture and relay cataloguing procedures to Library Assistants:
“I think that the use of templates for different types of materials in the library management system and cataloguing guides means that most staff can catalogue a range of materials e.g. EAT's, SI's, Acts etc. However, original cataloguing of old books or other materials would require some previous experience of AACR or library school training on cataloguing”. (Participant C, Reference Participant2012).
The library creates all of its catalogue records in-house and adheres to AACR as far as possible, but there is flexibility to deviate from strict application in order to meet the needs of local users. The usual method for cataloguing textbooks is to obtain bibliographical details for book orders from the publisher's website which are then checked and amended where necessary once the title arrives. For non-book formats, the cataloguers extract the necessary information from the act, bill, SI or EAT and fill in the relevant MARC fields of the catalogue record. Cataloguing of these types of materials is made more straightforward by the use of templates, but SI's can be quite complicated and usually require the assistant librarian to spend more time explaining the cataloguing procedures to the library assistant and checking their work until they are competent enough to catalogue independently. Participant C recalled that on a few occasions the library has made its catalogue available to other law libraries: “We supplied our catalogue records to the King's Inns [law library for solicitors] when they automated their library and I think we may have supplied some records to the Law Society [government law library] at some stage.”
UKMARC
The library uses UKMARC format for its cataloguing. SirsiDynix provides an option to convert all catalogue records to MARC21, but the cost of conversion is considered prohibitive so the library has continued to use UKMARC. When asked if the library had any intention of changing over to MARC21, Participant C expressed doubt that any such change would take place for the foreseeable future. She also felt that because the library is not involved in any co-operative cataloguing, UKMARC is a perfectly adequate format for cataloguing and there is not a pressing need to change to another format.
Issues and Anomalies in Cataloguing Procedures
When asked if there are any particular difficulties encountered when cataloguing law materials, most of the research participants expressed satisfaction with the ability of the library management system to catalogue a wide variety of legal materials. Most of the new legal textbooks are straightforward and rarely pose problems. When problems do arise, they are primarily classification-related. Occasionally, a text spans a variety of legal subjects and may not fit easily into any of the subject or item type categories and the cataloguer usually consults other cataloguers in order to gauge the best way to treat the item. Participant A also expressed satisfaction with the overall cataloguing practices and procedures, but felt there was a tendency to use the MARC 500 general note field too freely, and reckoned there may be a more targeted field into which this information could be inserted. However, she qualified this observation by stating that she was unsure if this was an issue with the law materials or the library management system, or simply a long standing practice that had built up over time and would require a massive input to fix: “I do find it [the library management system] adequate - we could make better use of its capabilities and have just recently expanded the item types and locations to enable us to extract more relevant information. My remarks on the MARC 500 field probably also fall in here.”
The catalogue records sometimes include extra information to ensure library users can locate items. A good example of this is the Civil Procedure series which is published by Sweet and Maxwell. Library users usually refer to this publication as the “White Book” and so “White Book” is included in the catalogue record as an added title entry in the MARC 745 field. When asked to explain how the library deals with the problem of cataloguing books associated with deceased authors, Participant C explained that she tackled this problem by adding in some extra information in the title field and including the deceased author as an additional author/editor in the MARC 700 field. For a time, the original authors were not added if they were not named as authors on the title page, but library users and staff encountered problems locating books, so they are now included as added authors and sometimes also in the title. The library uses strict authority control for author and subject fields, and the Moys Classification handbook is always consulted before assigning subject headings.
Further Training
All three assistant librarians are members of BIALL and attend its meetings. However, cataloguing is something that is rarely, if ever discussed at these meetings:
“The problem is that BIALL, although British and Irish, seems to be much more organised on the British side and there are numerous training courses organised by the group in the UK and I am sure they have run courses on Moys. However, in Ireland the only interaction is the 3 or 4 times a year BIALL meetings are held which tend to cover more general issues such as pricing, publishers etc. although any member is free to propose a topic.” (Participant B, Reference Participant2012).
Other than the half-day cataloguing seminar which preceded the BIALL conference of 2008, Participant B was unaware of any other catalogue-specific courses but noted that courses on serials and e-books regularly have modules on cataloguing included in them and staff have been sent on these courses. Participant A attended seminars on e-books and e-resources recently and generally found cataloguing training beneficial, particularly having an awareness of how other librarians are cataloguing resources, and how their users locate items using the catalogue. Participant C found previous workshops and seminars useful as a way of keeping up with new developments and engaging with other legal information professionals:
“I haven't attended any training courses for a while, but I do find them useful as a way of keeping up with new developments - sometimes they may be too detailed for our needs but it is still good to get an overview of what other libraries are doing – I have attended seminars on metadata, electronic publications etc.” (Participant C, Reference Participant2012).
Other library staff occasionally attend seminars organised by the LAI on cataloguing or cataloguing-related issues, but these seminars are aimed at all types of libraries, not just law libraries. In 2011, two library assistants attended a training course on MODS and Dublin Core jointly organised by CILIP and the LAI. Although MODS and Dublin Core are not used in the library, both library assistants found the training beneficial and felt it gave them a good introduction to cataloguing standards and procedures with which they had previously been unfamiliar.
When questioned about the collegiality of legal information professionals in Ireland, Participant B responded that in all of her years as a member of BIALL, she had never heard of law librarians coming together to discuss shared cataloguing issues or concerns. Most law libraries tend to use their own procedures and adhere to Moys Classification (Participant B, Reference Participant2012). Participant C observed that general training in cataloguing is sufficient for law librarians as most library management systems make cataloguing relatively straightforward once formats are set up for different item types. Most libraries, she argued, would have their own local rules for dealing with particular items and this sort of training would be done in-house:
“I don't think there would be much interaction between libraries on the subject of cataloguing except among those sharing systems. Sirsi Symphony [LMS] is fine for cataloguing and allows you to set up new templates and add or take away fields as required. Our previous system, Urica, was also good and easy to use. Conversion of the data from Urica to Unicorn resulted in extra tags with information we don't require anymore – this makes some records look untidy but it would be costly to have this information removed by the LMS supplier.” (Participant C, Reference Participant2012).
Case Study 2: Two Government Law Libraries
Participant Profile: Participant D
These two libraries share a common pool of staff, including a manager, a librarian and a team of legal researchers employed in a range of paralegal and general civil service grades. Participant D has worked in the special library sector for more than 20 years, and is currently a librarian. Her role involves managing the resources and services of two libraries. Her responsibilities, in addition to cataloguing, include administration of the joint library management system and digital archive.
She is an active member of the Government Libraries Section of the LAI and is also a member of BIALL and the Irish and European user groups for SirsiDynix customers.
Cataloguing
The two libraries create all catalogue records in-house. Participant D recalled that several years ago the library briefly subscribed to a service that allowed it to download ready-made catalogue records, but the service was prohibitively expensive and so it was decided to discontinue the subscription. Since then, all cataloguing has been done in-house. The library uses Trinity College Dublin and the British Library catalogues for guidance when checking bibliographic details. Volumes of DDC, Edition 22 are also kept in the library for reference. One library uses Moys Classification for subject headings and the other uses an international thesaurus of terminology.
The four item types catalogued are textbooks, journals, country of origin documents and query response documents. Query responses are replies to requests for information submitted in the course of the refugee status determination process. Country of Origin (COI) information is used in procedures that assess claims of individuals to refugee status or other forms of international protection. Both queries and COI responses are first catalogued and compiled in a query management system before being digitally archived.
The library employs a staff of 15. Two librarians hold professional qualifications while the remaining 13 are non-professional staff. Two of the non-professionals are currently undertaking postgraduate library information studies. The library does not have a team of dedicated cataloguers, so those involved in cataloguing combine cataloguing duties with other library work, mainly research work. Participant D noted in the interview that the majority of legal researchers do not come from an information studies background and the SirsiDynix LMS would be daunting for someone untutored in cataloguing: “Most of the staff working here are civil servants. They are not trained cataloguers and don't come from a library background at all, so we try to keep things simple and find that this works best”. Cataloguing is therefore pitched at a quite basic level, and the qualified librarians are responsible for the more complex cataloguing, such as the cataloguing of textbooks.
Cataloguing Training
The libraries provide in-house cataloguing training, although this is primarily for new recruits. Staff inductions include basic cataloguing training for newcomers, but due to the current moratorium on recruitment and replacement in the civil service, the libraries have not recruited any new staff in recent years. There are in-house procedural files uploaded onto a shared drive. Cataloguing know-how files document the correct procedures for cataloguing different item types. These “how to” guides are essentially a series of screenshots of existing records with notes explaining how to enter data into the relevant MARC fields. Most of the catalogue records are basic containing the title of the document, the author, the date of publication, the place of publication and a hyperlink to the electronic document.
Issues and Anomalies in Cataloguing Procedures
The guiding principle is to always catalogue with the needs of end-users in mind. For catalogue records the COI and country code fields are particularly important. The COI and query response records are usually very basic and contain a hyperlink to an electronic copy of the document. The fact that records do not adhere strictly to AACR gives the cataloguer more autonomy to make decisions on what should or should not be included in the record. However, one of the problems Participant D mentioned was that because the library does not adhere to “proper” MARC cataloguing, the catalogue records are not exportable. This became apparent in 2007 when the library migrated to the SirsiDynix LMS and many catalogue records had to be amended in order to rectify various anomalies, such as corporate authors not displaying correctly.
In 2008, three library graduate interns from Dublin Business School were recruited to assist with a cataloguing and classification project carried out over the summer period. The project involved the cataloguing and classification of electronic and hard-copy materials, uploading electronic documents to the digital archive, and retrospective conversion of catalogue records using Unicorn/Hyperion Library Management software. Participant D noted the graduate interns were able to produce records of a higher standard than those of the non-professional library staff:
“One of the interns really had an aptitude for cataloguing. He knew where every comma and semi-colon was supposed to go. He followed AACR to the letter and knew the ins and outs of the latest DDC. I don't think anyone else in the library had this kind of skill, which just goes to show the difference training can make. It was a shame that he was only here for a short time”. (Participant D, Reference Participant2012).
This exemplifies the need for cataloguers to understand the concepts and theories that underpin cataloguing. The more a cataloguer understands of the theories, processes and standards of cataloguing and what contributes to the quality of a record, the less liable they are to make errors.
Following an independent strategic review carried out in 2003 the library invited CILIP to provide in-house cataloguing and classification training for non-professional staff over a two-day period in 2007. The training provided a basic introduction to the skills of information organisation for library and services and training sessions covered AACR, MARC, DDC and computerised bibliographic data, LCSH and authority control. The training received positive feedback from those who attended, and made staff more aware of the importance of authority control in maintaining data quality:
“The training was very successful and everyone who attended found it worthwhile. If we had the finances to do so, it is something we would consider doing again. I feel anybody involved in cataloguing needs to have some kind of introductory training to explain the basics. This is especially important for our non-professional staff who, as I explained earlier, are civil servants and don't come from library backgrounds. For these people, following complex rules and schemes which they don't really understand properly is a problem. Training is really the best way to educate them about cataloguing”. (Participant D, Reference Participant2012).
Further Training
Library management in the two libraries actively encourages the training and development of all library staff. Participant D mentioned that senior management recognises and appreciates the value of library skills, and fully supports staff involvement in professional development activities. According to Participant D, cataloguing and classification are often flagged by non-professional staff as areas which require further training and development, though finding the time and resources to meet these needs is often problematic due to budgetary constraints.
Case Study 3: Law Firm Library
The third type of specialist law library selected for case study is a law firm library. Law firms typically have a small collection of books and legal materials, but some of the larger law firm libraries may appoint two or three information professionals to oversee their collections. Cataloguing in law firm libraries differs in that there is less of a requirement for detailed catalogue entries and records can be tailored to meet local user needs. Co-operative cataloguing is uncommon in law firm libraries in Ireland (Participant B and Participant C, Reference Participant2012).
Legal information professionals in law firms comprise a significant proportion of BIALL members and it is important to investigate their cataloguing procedures to ensure the research is representative of all law libraries in Ireland. The law firm library in this case study has been selected on the basis that as one of Ireland's premier law firms with a staff of three legal information professionals, it will give a valuable insight into cataloguing practices and procedures in a law firm library.
The law firm employs approximately 200 solicitors and a further 200 support staff including paralegal staff, secretaries, Information Technology (IT) and Human Resources (HR). Unlike the other libraries surveyed there is not a lot of footfall in this library. Solicitors typically work on a case for several months so the library serves primarily as a quiet space for them to conduct their research. There is less emphasis on the physical collection and the main concern of solicitors in the firm is to have access to legal information on a 24-hour basis. The vast majority of queries are sent and answered via email. There is no issue desk and any issuing of materials is done using the self-service machine.
Participant Profile: Participant E
The law firm library research participant (Participant E) has spent the past six years employed as the librarian there. She completed a professional library qualification in University College Dublin - and spoke highly of the library school and mentioned how she was able to draw on her library experience for her cataloguing coursework:
“I found the cataloguing module quite straightforward and the theory behind it made more sense because I was able to draw on my years of previous cataloguing experience. I did a lot of cataloguing in public libraries in Waterford so I was very familiar with AACR, MARC and Dewey Classification by the time I went to library school, although if I remember correctly, we never covered Moys”. (Participant E, Reference Participant2012).
Day-to-day cataloguing enhanced her knowledge and understanding of AACR2 and MARC, which she was then able to transfer to her later roles.
Cataloguing in the Law Firm Library
As is the case in most of the larger law firm libraries, there is not enough cataloguing to warrant a dedicated cataloguer (Participant A and Participant E, Reference Participant2012). Cataloguing is part of the information professional's job along with enquiry work, training, management of the library management system and information literacy. According to the Participant E, in smaller law firms an office manager decides which books should be bought and any collection would be quite small, usually comprising legal materials for the firm's specialisms. These smaller law firms would not have a library management system, but would keep basic records of books and other legal materials, probably in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. She also explained that all qualified solicitors in Ireland have access to the Law Society of Ireland's library catalogue and are entitled to borrow books through its interlibrary loan service. The Law Society's catalogue maintains detailed records of legal textbooks, and librarians from other law firms tend to use this catalogue for reference purposes.
The law firm library is staffed by three information professionals, all of whom participate in some cataloguing in addition to their other duties. Of the three staff, the librarian and the assistant librarian hold professional library qualifications. The enquiry service is staffed on a rota basis. Cataloguing is generally carried out during quiet periods and is not considered a priority task.
Cataloguing Procedures
Two library staff members are involved in creating catalogue records for textbooks. Most of the library collection is made up of general legal texts. All catalogue records are created in-house and new records are always created for new editions of textbooks. The catalogue records for textbooks are more detailed and include partial contents in the 505 MARC field. Strict authority control is used for authors. Participant E summed up cataloguing procedures in the library as “quite straightforward”. She periodically checks catalogue records against those of Trinity College Dublin and the Law Society of Ireland to ensure accuracy and consistency, but otherwise rarely encounters difficulties when cataloguing legal textbooks.
The classification system used by the library borrows from both Moys Classification and DDC, and runs from public into private law. Acts, bills and SI's are catalogued using the same MARC fields and notation used by the library in Case Study 1. Journals are circulated among the firm's solicitors but are not catalogued. For non-book formats such as acts, bills and SI's, Participant E stressed the importance of linking the record to a PDF document in the MARC 856 field for electronic location and access. The library catalogue runs on the SirsiDynix Symphony LMS with OPAC available online via the members' section of the website. SirsiDynix has been used for about 15 years and Participant E expressed satisfaction with the functionality of its cataloguing module. Most of the main law libraries in Dublin use the SirsiDynix LMS. (Participant B, Participant C and Participant E, Reference Participant2012).
Issues and Anomalies in Cataloguing Procedures
When questioned about any particular difficulties encountered when cataloguing legal materials, Participant E mentioned that many well-known legal texts and tomes continue to be associated with one author even long after they are dead. Participant E always includes them in the catalogue record as additional authors. As solicitors typically search for them as authors, so to adhere to strict cataloguing rules in this case would not be particularly intuitive or helpful.
One problem Participant E observed when she first entered the library was that there were multiple records for some items where one would suffice. This problem was particularly pronounced in the case of multiple catalogue records for bills. The practice now is to keep one catalogue record for each bill. When a bill is eventually enacted, the bill record is deleted and then referenced in the new act record in the MARC 500 field. The aim is to keep cataloguing procedures simple rather than creating superfluous records.
Training Resources for Cataloguing
As Participant E explained, library materials and know-how files live in the library database:
“It is not called the catalogue because it includes other types of know-how beyond the scope of what you would have on a typical library catalogue. The database has a lot of useful information, mainly training user guides, a-z of subscription sites and favourites. I can write text and upload it onto the database and control content in this way”. (Participant E, Reference Participant2012).
The library maintains an extensive collection of procedural guides on how to catalogue different item types. There are individual guides for cataloguing textbooks, acts, bills and SI's. Participant E created these guides herself and they comprise a series of screenshots and templates outlining how each MARC field of the record is to be filled out. SI's are the most time consuming records to catalogue. Acts and bills are more straightforward and are always linked to a PDF version in the MARC 856 field for electronic location and access.
Further Training
Participant E reported that she only occasionally attends further training. However, she attended a recent discussion on metadata standards and the revamping of cataloguing rules hosted by the LAI.
Participant E works predominantly with the firm's trainee solicitors, organising and running formal induction sessions. Cataloguing procedures in the library are straightforward, and its relatively small collection of legal materials is catalogued primarily with the needs of local users in mind. Participant E concluded the interview by speaking positively about the networking and information-sharing opportunities presented by library associations such as BIALL, and to a lesser extent, the LAI.
Interview with Cataloguing Lecturer
Participant Profile: Participant F
In order to gauge the opinions of educators in the field, a cataloguing lecturer has participated in the research (Participant F, Reference Participant2012). The research participant teaches cataloguing courses in both University College Dublin's School of Information and Library Sciences (SILS) and Dublin Business School (DBS) and is heavily involved in the Cataloguing and Metadata Group (CMG) of the LAI. With a wealth of cataloguing experience, both as educator and practitioner, this lecturer is an ideal subject for interview.
Library Schools in Ireland
The SILS course has undergone much change since its inception. At times, cataloguing and classification have been taught separately, while at others they have been merged in one module. In addition, cataloguing has been taught by both internal and external lecturers. While SILS is long-established, the Master of Science in Information & Library Management offered by DBS is a much newer library course. This library qualification is jointly awarded by HETAC (Higher Education and Training Awards Council) and Liverpool John Moores University, and is accredited by CILIP. When asked to single out the major difference between the two courses, the lecturer identified class size as the most obvious difference. DBS limits class size to between 12 and 15 places, which facilitates more student-lecturer interaction. In SILS, the much larger class of 70 to 80 students allows less scope for such interaction. However, the UCD course is long-established and remains the leading course in Ireland for library students.
Cataloguing Syllabi in SILS and DBS
Participant F supplied the course outlines for the respective library schools' cataloguing modules. On close inspection of the course outlines and the lecturer's own observations, the design and content is very similar. In SILS, cataloguing is covered in the Organisation of Information – Cataloguing & Metadata module, while in DBS, cataloguing is included in the Information Organisation module. Both modules are compulsory for students. In the main, the lecturer covers AACR2, with a glance at RDA and FRBR, MARC21, Dublin Core, DDC and rudimentary LCSH. Moys Classification is mentioned very briefly. Participant F introduces students to traditional cataloguing principles for bibliographic control and modern metadata standards, and explores how the two approaches relate to each other.
The latest syllabi from the cataloguing modules in both SILS and DBS consider the major established codes and rules for information organisation and use them to evaluate current developments. RDA, authority control, bibliographic data and data models, metadata schema and subject access are all covered either in lectures or through practical coursework. Both courses look at RDA and give an introduction to FRBR, although it is rudimentary. Participant F teaches the basic premise behind RDA/FRBR, the conceptual framework, its pyramid structure, item and levels in between, and associated user tasks. He describes the whole process as “moving away from record space to adding metadata to different levels of different entities and then connecting them back together”.
Cataloguing Coursework
As part of the module coursework for DBS, students are asked to evaluate the effectiveness of a metadata schema against an established format such as MARC 21.
The DBS module is taught in twelve weekly three-hour sessions. The classes are taught through a variety of informal, participatory lectures, and practical lab work. The cataloguing module is assessed by a combination of individual cataloguing assignments and a group project. For the most recent DBS cataloguing assignment, which is a take-home assignment, students were shown digitised copies of the English edition of The Second Sex by Simonede Beauvoir with cover, title page and some sample pages. The cover page has “the classic manifesto of women's liberation” as a subtitle, which many students incorrectly transcribe as the title. For the assignment, students were allowed to consult each other and share ideas. Participant F justifies this approach by comparing it to workplace setting: “In the workplace, if the cataloguer is in any doubt, they should talk to their colleagues”. However, students were required to demonstrate that the final work was their own. They usually demonstrate this process by quoting and paraphrasing AACR2.
Cataloguing of Legal Materials and Non-Book Formats
Participant F could only recall one occasion when legal materials of any kind were discussed in either library school. This was during an introductory lecture to cataloguing given by one of his colleagues in SILS, who used patents as a primary example of how a cataloguer cannot afford to omit anything relevant in a catalogue record. This mention of patents was part of a lecture which examined the wider context of traditional cataloguing versus internet search engines. The colleague's argument was that internet search engines give enough information to satisfy a casual user, but for any information organisation, this is not good enough. The examples of medical searches and patents were used to illustrate how an information professional must have absolute confidence that they are not missing any relevant information. Participant F remarked in the interview that the same principle holds true for cataloguing all legal materials.
While neither of the library schools make specific reference to cataloguing legal materials, there is not much attention given to non-book formats either. Participant F cited the lack of time available as the main reason why specialist materials are not covered in any detail. He mentions in passing things like rare books, archival material, works of art, videos and websites to compare and contrast the cataloguing requirements of different “formats” and different “information communities” to those of traditional books. When discussing subject- specific classification he gives the example of Moys Classification as a specialist classification scheme used by law libraries, while also mentioning the Dickinson Classification Scheme for musical compositions and the National Library of Medicine (NLM) classification system. He explained that one of the course objectives in both library schools is to encourage students to explore different schemes and non-book formats. Neither course includes Dewey numbers for law either as it is considered too difficult for a beginners' course.
Participant F's Experience of Cataloguing Legal Materials
Participant F does have some personal experience of cataloguing law materials in the form of cataloguing government reports, primarily Law Reform Commission reports, along with legal textbooks. While he did not claim to have any specialist knowledge or understanding of law materials, he occasionally compiles Dewey numbers for law using a scaled down version of the scheme. Even though a detailed knowledge of law classification is not required for this, he conceded that he finds Dewey classification for legal texts quite challenging, and far more difficult to classify than most other subjects.
Aims and Objectives of Cataloguing in Library School
Participant F stressed that both courses are essentially beginners' courses and learning how to catalogue a book is the easiest and most logical starting point. There is insufficient time to delve into the more sophisticated theory of cataloguing. The aim of library school is therefore to prepare students for a work situation in which they have to catalogue a variety of resources, and the best way to do this is to equip students with a knowledge and understanding of one set of standards, namely AACR, which would transfer to any type of library. He hoped that the cataloguing module would get students thinking about the future of cataloguing and how it relates to information retrieval and search engines:
“The language used in cataloguing manuals can be stilted so it's important to have a basic understanding, and with this understanding we can question whether or not cataloguing is heading towards obsolescence. I encourage my students to think along these lines”. (Participant F, Reference Participant2012).
During the interview Participant F wondered if the emphasis on access and the end-user, which can be observed in some law libraries (Participant A, Participant E, Reference Participant2012) is really an excuse for not understanding or getting to grips with the different elements and complexities of cataloguing. He argued that what he terms “user-centric” cataloguing can often dilute precision. He reiterated that strict adherence to AACR2 is the only way to ensure a high quality catalogue, and any deviation from these rules results in a “watered down” catalogue. In lectures he focuses on what he believes are the main criteria which contribute to the quality of a catalogue record. He feels that understanding the differences between description and access points is crucial because this is not always obvious to a novice cataloguer. He singled out the concept of “chief source of information” as being important because the information on the spine and the cover sometimes differs. Also, the concept of statement of responsibility is important because it deals effectively with the problem of who is the author and who is the editor. The other main point he makes to students is the importance of authority control in maintaining data integrity.
Participant F's main objective is to encourage students “to be neutral” and to follow AACR2 as closely as possible, rather than taking short-cuts which ultimately result in inferior catalogue records and compromise the integrity of the catalogue. On completion of library school, students should be able to apply the basic principles of cataloguing and subject representation, critically assess metadata standards and be able to create catalogue records for library materials using AACR2, MARC21 and DDC. While Participant F did not touch on law materials in any way, he believed sound library schooling should equip students to work in any type of specialist library.
DISCUSSION
Practical Guidance for Cataloguers
While there is a lack of specific information on cataloguing practices in Irish law libraries, Legal Information Management has published articles on cataloguing and is a valuable and up-to-date source of information for cataloguers in Irish law libraries. Recent articles by Holborn and Shearer, both authorities on cataloguing legal materials, have provided practical guidance for cataloguers on how best to tackle common cataloguing problems unique to law libraries. These articles are recommended reading for cataloguers. Shearer's article is useful because it discusses occasions when it may be advisable to depart from a strict application of AACR2, such as textbooks where deceased but still well-known authors or editors might be included as the main entry rather than the current author or editor; author-name as part of the title such as Chitty on Contract, popular and official names of bodies such as commissions, changing titles of loose-leaf publications, changing names of corporate bodies, and the many potential pitfalls when authors have titles as judges or peers. These issues frequently crop up in law libraries, so it is a very helpful point of reference for cataloguers. The problem of how best to catalogue legal books associated with long-dead authors was discussed by case study participants in both the law firm and professional society law libraries. As recommended by Shearer, both libraries include the deceased original author as an additional author in the MARC 700 field.
Holborn also discusses some aspects of AACR2 that give unsatisfactory results when applied to legal materials, and recommends that when and where such cases arise to weigh up the pros and cons of departing from AACR2. He notes that AACR2 is a substantial affair with complex rules that are unnecessary in the average law library. His suggestion is for law libraries to maintain an in-house manual which can form a quick reference guide for cataloguers, and document those rules that crop up most frequently when cataloguing legal materials. Continuity in the event of staff turnover and the training-in of new cataloguers are further advantages of capturing this type of know-how. The importance of maintaining procedural guides for cataloguers was also discussed in interviews; all three case study libraries maintain up-to-date procedural guides for cataloguers. In each library these guides are stored electronically and are updated as necessary. The issue of know-how was also addressed in the questionnaire with almost half of those surveyed working in a law library which maintained a know-how database and, of these respondents, most felt the range and scope of know-how was either good or very good, although a few remarked that cataloguing know-how needed to be updated more regularly.
Library Schooling
Recent literature has focused on the role of cataloguing in the library school curriculum and whether or not it adequately prepares students for employment in libraries. Bowman, Batley and Whalen-Moss have all examined the course content of cataloguing modules in library schools and found it lacking, particularly in terms of practical application. Gillian Sands' survey of library school graduates is a useful reference point for this research because it is a comparable study that examines cataloguing and classification skills taught on information studies courses and how useful these skills are for new legal information professionals. The results of the questionnaire and the comments of many respondents in this study mirror the findings of Sands' earlier survey, with both sets of respondents highlighting the difficulty of learning the basics of cataloguing in a short space of time, or not having enough practical experience of cataloguing. None of the respondents in either this current study or Sands' survey mentioned undertaking any cataloguing coursework specific to law libraries. The cataloguing lecturer from SILS/DBS has only ever mentioned legal materials in passing and has never dealt with it in any practical cataloguing coursework. However, it is worth noting that non-book formats are not covered in great detail and the lecturer cited the lack of time available as the main reason for their omission.
The survey results and literature review show that most library schools in the UK and Ireland still cover cataloguing and classification, though some cover it in greater detail than others. One of the major complaints from cataloguers in this and other studies is the lack of time devoted to practical cataloguing coursework. As outlined by Sands, Bowman and Whalen–Moss, most modules that include practical cataloguing require students to demonstrate this skill in their assessed coursework. Students are usually asked, either in groups or individually, to produce catalogue records, while several modules also require a discursive essay instead of, or in addition to, the practical assessed coursework. The cataloguing classes in SILS and DBS are taught through a variety of informal, participatory lectures and practical lab work. The cataloguing modules are assessed by a combination of individual cataloguing assignments and a group project. The cataloguing lecturer from SILS/DBS explained that there is not sufficient time to delve into the more sophisticated theory of cataloguing, and that the main aim of library school is to prepare students for a work situation in which they have to catalogue a variety of resources, and the best way to do this is to equip students with a sound knowledge and understanding of one set of standards, namely AACR, which would transfer to any type of library.
Local Cataloguing Rules
Sands' study also found that information contained in catalogue records was entered on a “need to know” basis. The three case studies also indicated that in a law library with a small, specialised collection, there is more reliance on staff members' familiarity with the collection than on strict adherence to cataloguing rules. In each of the three case studies catalogue records were tailored for local users, and AACR was not always strictly adhered to. Two of the case study participants came from legal backgrounds and their previous legal experience gave them a greater awareness of how an end-user searches the catalogue to find information. This is consistent with Shearer's (Reference Shearer2002) argument that the particular needs of local users are paramount, and catalogue entries must always be devised with their needs in mind. The catalogue records obtained from the case study libraries appear to confirm Shearer's assertion that smaller law libraries may prefer a short catalogue entry, which is more suited to the needs of their local users. He recommends (2006, pp. 13, 17) that for particularly important sites the cataloguer should provide a link in the catalogue record, either location mark or hypertext to that material, and also to provide the site URL so the user can search online for the latest version if required. For non-book formats such as legislation and various government documents, all three case study libraries included links to PDF versions in the MARC 856 field for electronic access. All of those interviewed for case study emphasised the importance of creating as many access points as possible for users to enhance information retrieval.
Cataloguing Know-How
Several of the information professionals in law firms surveyed by Sands mentioned the existence of in-house know-how databases of internal information separate from the library catalogue, which were generally maintained by professional support lawyers and information professionals. One respondent in Sands' survey described a know-how system which was implemented and maintained by professional support lawyers with no background in information management. The result was a database from which neither the lawyers nor the information professionals could easily find information. At the time of the survey, the respondent explained that a new full-text know-how database was being planned, which was to be developed by the information professionals using their information management skills (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 21). Interestingly, Participant E from the law firm library also mentioned that library material lived in what she termed the “library database”. It was not called the catalogue because it included other types of know-how beyond the scope of a traditional library catalogue, such as training guides and an “a to z” of subscription sites. Participant E used her information skills and legal expertise to write text and upload it to the database, thus controlling its content and making it easier to use for both solicitors and library staff.
Further Training
Neither the current cataloguing literature nor any previous studies explored further training for cataloguers in any depth. This study addressed the issue of further training in the questionnaire and the case studies. Many survey respondents and case study participants expressed a wish to continue to improve their cataloguing skills and to attend more cataloguing training sessions in the future. External training sessions such as those hosted by BIALL, the LAI and CILIP were also found by respondents to provide networking opportunities for law librarians. Several respondents remarked that as the only librarian in a small law library, involvement with external library groups and CPD events was particularly beneficial. However, the number of cataloguers availing themselves of further training is very low with 58% of the survey sample never attending any cataloguing training, seminars or workshops. Of the 39% of the sample that occasionally attended training, the general consensus was that further training provided by BIALL, the LAI and CILIP was particularly beneficial for cataloguers. The study shows that involvement in further training courses and workshops, along with membership of email discussion groups, are good ways for cataloguers to keep abreast of the latest developments in cataloguing and to discuss shared issues and concerns with other cataloguers.
The findings of this research indicate that even though a significant number of legal information professionals feel that library school has not adequately prepared them for employment in law libraries or that they have not directly used the skills which they had been taught in library school, there is a general consensus that these skills are important and should continue to be taught. As one respondent noted, cataloguing overlaps into all areas of library work and is a core skill of librarianship. A sound knowledge of cataloguing is also necessary in order to understand the more recent developments in cataloguing and librarianship, such as the trend towards the use of metadata. (Sands Reference Sands2002, p. 22). Several respondents in the questionnaire commented on the growing importance of metadata, while several others reported attending recent seminars on metadata and finding this type of training worthwhile and an important aspect of their professional development.
The Research Methodology in Practice
One of the problems encountered at the planning stage of the research was finding participants willing to take part in the case studies. It took several weeks to find volunteers from the three specialist law libraries. The government library provided several willing research participants, but the search for other participants was more arduous. Eventually a librarian from a government library offered to participate in the research. It took longer to find a volunteer from a law firm library and at one point it looked like the law firm case study would have to be abandoned; however, a colleague provided a contact address for a law firm librarian who agreed to participate in the research.
Each case study involved a practical demonstration of cataloguing procedures in the library, and all participants allowed the inspection of training guides and other know-how materials for cataloguers in their library. In some instances, follow-up emails with participants clarified certain points which were unclear when compiling the field notes.
One of the challenges encountered in the interviews was to maintain the focus on cataloguing, and to avoid drifting into other related or overlapping areas such as acquisitions and classification, for example. Several of the case study participants completed their library schooling many years ago and so their recollections of the cataloguing element of their training was understandably sketchy. The cataloguing lecturer (Participant F) did not cover legal materials in any detail either as lecturer or practitioner. Nonetheless, it was important to get the perspective of an educator in the field and his contribution is an important component of the research. It should also be noted that he was very helpful and enthusiastic and provided course outlines and syllabi for both SILS and DBS.
The questionnaire was first piloted on a sample of respondents from the government library. Some minor alterations were made before it was sent to the BIALL Irish Group. Survey Monkey's professional tools made the process of designing, distributing and collating the questionnaire considerably easier. The response rate from law firm librarians was disappointing and follow-up emails to BIALL Irish Group members from law firm libraries did not yield any further responses. In fact, the number of respondents from academic libraries outweighed those from law firm libraries.
This was one of the reasons why the cataloguing librarian from TCD was approached for interview. Of those surveyed, the vast majority (92%) either held, or were in the process of obtaining, a professional qualification in information and library studies, which was important for the purposes of this study as it is primarily concerned with the library schooling of information professionals. The questionnaire proved to be very valuable not just in providing important statistical data, but in the extended comments which many respondents took time to fill out. For example, the value of further training became apparent following the results of the questionnaire and was this was flagged as an area to be addressed in each of the case studies.
CONCLUSION
This research problem asks whether or not library school adequately prepare students for cataloguing in Irish law libraries. The evidence appears to suggest that most cataloguers find their library schooling lacking. However, it must also be borne in mind that the level of specialist training necessary to work in a law library would be difficult to provide given the relatively small number of library schools, and the possibility that a librarian may work in different types of specialist libraries in the course of their career. A library school can only equip students with a knowledge and understanding of the basic principles of cataloguing. More detailed training must then be provided within each library. Cataloguing standards and requirements vary between organisations so it is important that a library has a strong in-house training programme for its cataloguers. Law libraries need to capture and maintain cataloguing know-how and provide structured in-house training for cataloguers so they can adapt to local cataloguing practices.
Some law libraries are small operations and there is not the same scope for in-house training or the same incentive for compiling in-house cataloguing manuals as in a larger law library. In such scenarios, and in order for a cataloguer to obtain the requisite level of support, the library school would have to provide very detailed training in the cataloguing of legal materials or other specialist library materials, which is both impractical and unlikely. The onus is therefore on professional library organisations such as BIALL, the LAI and CILIP, along with their various sub-groups, to provide CPD in such areas as dealing with metadata, changes to standards such as AACR2 and dealing with the particular challenges of cataloguing legal materials. BIALL has run further training courses and seminars for Irish cataloguers in recent times. The LAI has also been active in further training, but its training is generally aimed at all cataloguers. As the government law library case study revealed, CILIP has also provided in-house training for some Irish libraries. One practical suggestion would be for the BIALL Irish Group to investigate the possibility of revisiting the cataloguing workshop held in 2008, and maybe holding another session at some point in the future. A further suggestion would be, cost permitting, for law libraries to consider the feasibility of in-house CILIP training, which would provide legal information professionals with an overview of the concepts and rationale behind cataloguing. This training would be beneficial for any non-professional library staff, and would also be useful refresher training for more seasoned cataloguers.
It is hoped that this exploratory research will meet and maintain the standard of academic quality set by Robert Gordon University, add to the body of existing research on cataloguing in law libraries, or even lead to further to examination of cataloguing in other contexts. This is the first in-depth study of cataloguing in Irish law libraries and its findings will be of interest to educators, employers, practitioners, legal information professionals and of course, those involved in cataloguing legal materials. This area has long been overlooked in academic research so this study may serve as a starting point for further studies and discussion.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Library schools should try, where possible, to incorporate more practical cataloguing into the curriculum. Students should also be given more opportunities to explore non-book formats. Smaller tutorial groups may work better for cataloguing coursework and give students the opportunity to share ideas and discuss the intricacies of cataloguing in greater detail than is possible in lectures.
Cataloguing standards and requirements vary between organisations so it is important that each library has a good in-house training programme for its cataloguers. In-house training is necessary as cataloguing overlaps into every area of library work. While it is the role of the library school to equip students with the basics of cataloguing, it falls on the law libraries themselves to provide the necessary on-the-job training for cataloguers. This is particularly important in the case of specialist libraries where many local rules apply. Structured training for new cataloguers and refresher courses for other cataloguers are highly recommended.
It is recommended that all law libraries, regardless of size, should maintain some form of procedural guidance and know-how for cataloguing, which would cover all of the basic cataloguing functions of the library. This is particularly important in the event of staff turnover so that cataloguing procedures and standards are maintained. All libraries would benefit from developing a set of instructions for anyone who will be involved in cataloguing in the future. It is also important to ensure any cataloguing know-how is updated when necessary and that all library staff should be able to access this know-how.
Legal Information Management provides regular, up-to-date information on cataloguing and is the only specialist library journal which covers Irish law libraries. Recent articles by experts on cataloguing legal information have featured in the journal and it is recommended reading for all cataloguers and a recommended acquisition for all Irish law libraries.
Attendance at CPD events is highly recommended for all legal information professionals in Irish law libraries. Those involved in cataloguing should avail themselves of learning opportunities and further training provided by external library groups such as BIALL, the LAI, CILIP and their various sub-groups. Membership of the BIALL Irish group and access to its email list is also recommended for cataloguers to keep up-to-date with topical issues and developments in law libraries.
