[Web4lib] RE: [lita-l] Innovation: NYT articleon Dewey-lessArizona public library

[Louise Alcorn]

> In the same vein, where does on place a book on medical
ethics--philosophy or medicine?  Unless one purchases multiple volumes
to cover each topic a book may address, there is a fair chance that a
patron would miss a subject unless she went to the catalog first.

>Also, libraries and bookstores stock books differently.  Even if a
bookstore has as many volumes as a typical branch library, it would
almost certainly have many fewer titles. 

I think bookstores get around the first of your questions above by
having multiple copies and putting them in both subject areas to be
found when browsing.  However, not all libraries can afford to do this.
As you say, you'd need the catalog to find the cross-reference, which it
sounds like they have.  As to the second question - do we know if this
branch library is treating itself as a browsing library of current
titles, and so is buying more multiple copies, but of fewer titles?  I
didn't find that entirely clear.  I think it's a valid approach, though
you'd need to rotate your stock frequently - perhaps eventually rotating
it into a larger, call numbered district system?  This is part of the
Maricopa system, which is huge, but it's a branch library attached to a
school.  I think their approach has some merit in that instance.    

>This would seem to make the very broad categories used in bookstores
less effective for browsing, since one would have to pick through so
many more titles in a given category.

I think it would be successful in fiction, where you could make several
divisions in genres and age-specific areas (though technically you can
do that now in Dewey, if you're willing to put in the work in your ILS).
In nonfiction, as you say, it could cause confusion, but it's possible
this library is again looking toward a more browsing type collection??
Again, it was not clear from the article or anything else I've read
about the branch.  

For what it's worth, I'm asked at least twice a month "why don't you put
them together by subject like in bookstores".  When I "gently" (and why
did they use that term in the NYT article? - it's very condescending)
explain that Dewey does, in fact, group by subject and that furthermore,
we group our fiction by genre for browsing, patrons are genuinely
surprised.  They assume (I guess) that Dewey just puts them in numbers
by, what?, date of purchase?  Random math?  Librarian whim?  It seems
arcane and arbitrary to many users.  I contend that this is a matter of
education and promotion, but we can't dismiss the complaint when it
comes so often.  It sounds as if Courtright is taking the complaint by
the horns and experimenting with "giving them what they want" (remember
all the debates about THAT concept back in the 90's?).  

I know someone down at Maricopa, and I know many of them are very
excited to see how this pans out at that branch - they are expecting to
have to do some tweaking, but want to let it play out.  I keep meaning
to ask them more of the specifics of how they're doing this that we've
mentioned here, such as how this affects staff interactions with
patrons.  

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Louise E. Alcorn
Reference Technology Librarian
West Des Moines Public Library
4000 Mills Civic Pkwy
West Des Moines IA 50265
(515) 222-3573      louise.alcorn at wdm-ia.com
http://www.wdmlibrary.org