Dewey...or Dewey not?

I recently read an article on the School Library Journal website that mentioned the impending Common Core school standards, and whether Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) remains the best fit for school libraries implementing them (for the full article, go to In Light of Common Core, Seeking Ways to Circumvent Dewey). While the debate over using Dewey is nothing new to the library field (it has been controversial almost since its inception), it has nonetheless been a mainstay of many public and school libraries across the country. However, recent trends have seen some libraries begin to move away from the vaunted classification scheme in favor of other schemes, including classifying by genre.

A good breakdown of the arguments pro- and anti-Dewey can be found at the AASL Blog (Dewey vs. Genre Shelving...the Conversation Continues Here). Arguments in favor of DDC point out its logical structure (designed to divide all knowledge down into distinct categories), the openness of the system to alteration and revision, and its familiarity to users across the world. Arguments against DDC tend to not dismiss the classification scheme altogether, but instead advocate a hybrid approach, where libraries tailor the organization of their resources according to the needs of their users. In some cases, this is simply the separation of sections of popular subjects for easier location, while for other libraries, this is the complete reorganization of items into subject categories. It seems pretty clear to most proponents on both sides, that the likelihood of a completely new classification scheme being implemented on a widespread level is fairly unlikely. Most libraries simply lack the resources to undertake such a complete overhaul and re-organization.

As someone who grew up with the Dewey system, and who uses it on a daily basis in his own library, I often see these types of debates as librarians trying to "re-invent the wheel" to an extent. There are no doubts that Dewey has faults: it relies on patrons being able to locate call numbers in order to find the subjects they want,  the placement of specific types of books can often be unclear (do books about artists go into the Art section, or Biography?), and while flexible, that flexibility is often gained through the use of more and more decimal placings, which increases complexity for librarian and patron alike. That said, its advantages in terms of its ubiquitous use (libraries across the world utilize it), consistency, logical organization, and familiarity make its elimination as the classification scheme of choice unlikely.

Frankly, I don't even see the arguments against Dewey to really even favor the scrapping of the system. One of Dewey's great features is that it is a system that can be altered and modified and still work pretty well. The use of Fiction (F or Fic), Juvenile Fiction (J, JF, J Fic, etc..), and Picture Books (PB, or often E, for Easy) designations is not inherent to the Dewey system, but is seen in widespread use across public and school libraries, with little negative affect to the classification of non-fiction titles. There is no real reason that libraries cannot extend this modification scheme further, as some of the "anti-Dewey" proponents seem to be advocating. I think the bigger issue is whether we want most libraries to be utilizing the same exact classification scheme, to ensure consistency for a patron from library to library, or if we are willing to allow individual libraries to tailor organizational schemes to the specific needs of their patrons. And that is an interesting question, does the library owe more to the needs of its local community, or to conformity and consistency with the rest of its field?

Dewey vs. genre shelving…the conversation continues here. 2013. AASL blog (February 15). http://www.aasl.ala.org/aaslblog/?p=3461 (accessed 4/24/13).

Harris, Christopher. 2013. In light of common core, seeking ways to circumvent Dewey. The Digital Shift. School Library Journal website (March 25). http://www.thedigitalshift.com/2013/03/opinion/the-next-big-thing/tipping-a-sacred-cow-the-next-big-thing/ (accessed 4/24/13).

Librarians: ...or not to code?

Of a rather different flavor than the article I mentioned in last week's post, another recent article I came across, Why You Should Not Learn HTML, takes a rather opposing view of the necessity of librarians acquiring programming skills.

My first thoughts, before even reading the article, were "Why would ANYONE actually advocate against librarians developing useful computer and programming skills in this day and age?" My next thoughts were to naturally assume (incorrectly, of course) that the author was clearly a bit of a reactionary; a stodgy, "old school" librarian still clinging to sliding cart catalogs and cursing the day that electronics invaded the library world. As it turns out, the author, Roy Tennant, has been involved with information technology for over 20 years, is a Senior Program Officer for the largest online library cooperative in the world (OCLC), has helped develop several digital libraries, and has even written several books dealing with computer programming, including one on HTML Needless to say, I was a bit confused, and intrigued, by the reasons he might have for telling us not to learn HTML.

The main point of the article seems to be less that librarians should not learn HTML, and more that all librarians do not need to learn HTML. Arguments used to support this position include: the availability of software programs that will do the necessary coding for you, the superiority of professional coding to amateur coding, and the problems and complications that arise from amateur coders trying to develop items from scratch ("reinventing the wheel"). These factors considered, Tennant does believe it is good practice for all young librarians to establish a base of programming skills that they can build from, and that coding skills such as HTML are vital to any librarian looking to write software or web code. Those cases aside, however, he lets the rest of the library world off the hook. If you haven't learned HTML, if you don't need to learn it, and you don't want to learn it, then don't bother.

I do find that there is some merit to the notion that not all librarians NEED to learn HTML. Programming is not an easy skill to learn, no matter how "basic" the language, and there are going to be a fair share of people for which learning HTML is going to produce more frustration than it ever will benefit. There are also some for which an HTML coding base will never be a necessity in their professional lives, and thus would not be worth the hassle of trying to learn.

That said, there are definite benefits to learning even the slightest bit of HTML coding. Simply understanding the syntax and language, or how to identify problems with such, can enable one to troubleshoot problems that even software programs (i.e. Dreamweaver or other WYSIWYG interface) create. Additionally, it seems pretty short-sighted to leave coding knowledge only to those who write software, or only to professionals, since amateurs cannot necessarily create the same quality of product. It is just continuing to concede the more technical elements of information technology to professionals outside the library field, which further confines librarians to physical libraries, a trend that should be seen as very disturbing to anyone considering the rate at which digital information (and books) continues to be available.

Sorry Mr. Tennant, I disagree. To give people a pass to not actively engage an aspect of the technical reality we live in is an invitation to irrelevance. Learn HTML boys and girls.

Tennant, Roy. 2013. Why you should not learn HTML. The Digital Shift web page, Library Journal website. http://www.thedigitalshift.com/2013/03/roy-tennant-digital-libraries/why-you-should-not-learn-html/

Librarians: To Code...

I have long been fascinated by computers. The time in my youth that I wasn't out practicing my pitching in the backyard, shooting hoops in the driveway, playing soccer with my sisters, or playing Nintendo, I often spent fiddling around on my parents' computer.

Those were the good old days when the only Windows version was 3.1, and most computers still ran DOS as a default operating system. For a lot of kids, computer gaming just wasn't worth the hassle, as every game had a different requirement for not just memory, but specific memory configurations. One game would require a certain amount of conventional (standard) memory and extended memory (or XMS), while another would lose the extended memory parameter and instead need expanded memory (or EMS). All these setups required the careful editing of the system start up and configuration files and adjustment of how certain pieces of hardware were loaded by the computer. Essentially, it was a giant invitation to completely and utterly crash my parents' hard drive in the interest of the latest Front Page Sports Baseball game, or Sid Meier's Colonization, before the advent of internet tech support or Geek Squad, and I loved it. To my parents' credit, if they ever knew what I was doing (and I suspect they probably did), they allowed me to experiment, fiddle, make my mistakes, and correct them, fostering a love and knowledge of computer technology from a fairly early age.

Unfortunately, the advent of operating systems such as Windows 95 ended a lot of the need for such types of rudimentary programming, and most of my computer experience since then has consisted of various types of troubleshooting, and building newer and better hardware systems to feed my gaming needs. As my Information Technology class has shown me this semester, however, I am a complete novice when it comes to programming and coding. With a fire having promptly been lit under my rear end, I am determined to make amends for years of neglect to my computer skills, but have been left a bit overwhelmed by the variety of coding languages out there to learn. Additionally, one may question how much coding knowledge a future librarian may need to have.

A recent article on Library Journal's Digital Shift website, entitled Cracking the Code: Librarians Acquiring Essential Coding Skills, addresses the topic of librarians, of all skill levels, wading into the programming world. As the article points out, the modern librarian uses computer technology almost constantly, whether in catalog or article databases, websites, multimedia presentations, or any of the countless other resources that the internet places at our disposal. A solid programming base can not only "make day-to-day tasks easier," through efficient use of coding, but can also help in making changes for the benefit of all potential library users. There are some interesting projects mentioned throughout the article, about librarians that are already putting their programming skills to work, as well as some fantastic resources for anyone looking to get some basic coding skills. As for me, I think it's time to get back to Code Academy.

For the record, my mother always told me I should have gone into computers as an undergrad. Mom, as usual, you were right.

Enis, Matt. 2013. Cracking the code: Librarians acquiring essential coding skills. The Digital Shift web page, Library Journal Website. http://www.thedigitalshift.com/2013/03/software/cracking-the-code/ (last accessed 4/9/13).

Building a Web Page

I love the Internet. I love having nearly any piece of information at my fingertips. I love going to Wikipedia to brush up on the Diadochi (the successors to Alexander the Great's empire), the Battle of Chickamauga, or the life story of Ralph Vaughan Williams. I enjoy browsing sports message boards like HF Boards or Real GM to see what fellow sports fanatics think about the latest trade, winning streak, or slump. I appreciate that I have the ability to keep up with all my friends on a daily basis through internet chat, sparing my ears the pain of long phone calls (not that we would call each other anyway).

That said, I have been more than happy with being a relatively passive participant in the internet age. I don't tweet, don't do podcasts, have no desire to sign-up for Myspace or Facebook accounts, and have never had a blog (until now). You can imagine my horror when my digital anonymity was to be challenged by my Information Technology class, in which I not only have to blog, but also have to build my own website.

Let's be clear, I am great lover of technology, and have always been a bit of a troubleshooter when it comes to computers, but I know NOTHING about building websites. I don't know HTML, have never had to FTP anything, and am aesthetically challenged when it comes to page layouts, colors, backgrounds, fonts, and anything else you can slap on a webpage. Had I tried to build a website in the past, it likely would have turned up on one of those "10 Worst Websites" lists you see across the web from time to time. So my first assignment for LS 560, that of building my own website, was sure to be a bit of an adventure.

As it turns out, the assignment is actually a bit fun, albeit stressful. The book we are using as a guide, HTML 5 Step by Step, by Faithe Wempen, is easy to follow and provides some pretty helpful practice exercises to get you started. There are also a lot of great resources on the web, though I particularly recommend W3 Schools, which has been a huge help to me, especially getting started with CSS (Cascading Style Sheets). If you're looking for help getting started on your own website, definitely don't come to me, there are much better tools available to you all over the internet, but feel free to tag along as I try to make mine look remotely presentable. To check up on my turtle-like progress over this semester, head over to http://bama.ua.edu/~jdkeyes.

Blogging, Take One

Welcome! My name is Joshua Keyes, and you have somehow had the (mis) fortune of stumbling upon my blog. I am currently a graduate student, working toward my MLIS (Master of Library and Information Studies) at the University of Alabama. The primary purpose of this blog is to post my thoughts on several articles relating to information technology as part of my LS 560 (Info Technology) course, but I hope to use it beyond completion of the class. Thanks for stopping by.