Dewey Decimal Classification Running Head: DDCS PROS, CONS, AND MODIFICATIONS

Annotated Bibliography Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC): Pros, Cons, and Modifications Alison Wilkins Emporia State University

Dewey Decimal Classification Introduction

Recently, librarians across the country have been asking themselves if the Dewey Decimal Classification System (DDC) is the right organizational system for their library. There have been several libraries that have led the way in dropping DDC completely in favor of the bookstore model used in commercial bookstores. Other libraries have been modifying DDC and changing it so that they can create the best organizational scheme possible for their library and their patrons. However, despite all this change, there are still many libraries and librarians who prefer to keep DDC. Those against DDC argue that it does not allow patrons to browse, and they state that DDC is too biased against non-Western values. Those in favor of DDC argue that DDCs hierarchical structure of organization make it an effective and useful organization system. This annotated bibliography is organized into three different sections. The first is articles that are in favor of DDC and believe it should be kept in libraries. The second is articles that are against DDC and believe it should be dropped from libraries or greatly changed. Finally, the third section is articles about librarians who want to keep DDC but acknowledge that changes need to be made, so they modify DDC to meet their library and patrons needs.

In Favor of DDC Hassett, Bob. (2007). The joys of Deweying. Library Media Connection, 26(3), 47. This editorial written by Hassett, school librarian in Falls Church, Virginia, discusses his opinion on the current debate surrounding the usefulness of the DDC. He responds to three primary arguments given by those in favor of dropping Dewey in favor of the bookstore model: first, the argument that the organization of the bookstore model is more appealing to readers; second, the argument that the use of signage in the bookstore model is very effective; and third, the argument that Dewey is too outdated and full of bias. He makes effective arguments and offers logical solutions in response to these three issues. Hassett shows obvious bias towards Dewey in this article calling switching to the bookstore model reckless and irresponsible. The style and reading level would make this editorial of interest to any reader. It would be particularly useful to a reader who is searching for a way to make Dewey work in his or her library. For a less biased article that explores the possibility of Dewey and the Bookstore model working together, read Fisters The Dewey Dilemma mentioned in this bibliography. Kepner, Linda Tiernan. (2002). Workable solutions with Dewey classification. Technicalities, 22(4), 3, 9, 12-13. In this article, Kepner, assistant director and cataloguer at the Peterborough Town Library, explores using DDC to classify Internet web sites for public reference. Kepner is biased towards the use of DDC to classify the web. She explains that DDC is superior to keyword indexing and homegrown library systems. While keyword indexing can become heavy with too much irrelevant information and homegrown systems are only known by the programmers who create them, the DDC it is possible for anyone to learn how to use it due to its wide use and it allows for easy creation of new information subject headings as information on the Internet grows. Kepner references a 1997 paper by Traugott Koch that discusses seventeen web sites organized

Dewey Decimal Classification

using DDC. Kepner states only three survived to 2002 in their original condition. She spends some time explaining and the loss of DDC for some sites, but she does not go into detail and her reasoning is unsatisfactory leaving the reader with questions about why these web sites changed their DDC organization. This paper would be ideal for an academic or librarian exploring the possibilities of indexing the web using DDC but not for the casual reader. Shorten, J., Seikel M., & Ahrberg J.H. (2005). Why do you still use Dewey? Academic libraries that continue with Dewey decimal classification. Library Resources Technology Service, 49(2), 123-136. This article, written by Shorten, Seikel, and Ahrberg (all assistant professors in library schools and are cataloging librarians), examines a survey given to academic libraries that still use DDC. The results of the survey could have been more extensive; only 34 libraries responded. The questions asked covered the reasons the library still uses DDC, the ways they use it, and the patrons reactions to DDC. The authors focused most on statistical data that could be gained from the results of the survey and fail to really dig deep and analyze the responses. They did draw the conclusion that academic libraries that still use DDC use it because they are satisfied with it, their patrons are used to it, and they dont have the resources to change to Library of Congress. However, other issues and pros and cons of DDC were not discussed leaving the reader with questions concerning DDCs effectiveness in academic libraries when most have already dropped DDC for LC. The audience for this text is other academics interested in statistical data about DDC in academic libraries. It is not meant for someone who is interested in the pros and cons of DDC in academic libraries. Stauffer, Suzanne M. (2008). Deweyor dont weclassify? Children & Libraries, 6(2), 49-51. This article by Suzanne M. Stauffer, Assistant Professor in the Louisiana State University School of Library and Information Science, examines several pros to DDC and emphasizes the pros of DDC in childrens libraries. Stauffers article is biased towards DDC. She states that common comments like Dewey doesnt facilitate browsing show a misunderstanding of DDC. She argues that DDC organizes materials in a systematic way that does allow for browsing once the patron has found the needed section. She even argues that the Western bias in DDC is beneficial to young patrons because it familiarizes them with the organizational scheme that they will encounter throughout school and career. She does state that one good idea from the bookstore model is extra signage which she believes will make DDC easier for children to use. This article references Oders Behind the Maricopa County Library Districts Dewey-less Plan (mentioned in this bibliography) in order to refute some of its claims. The audience for this article is childrens librarians who are trying to decide if DDC is right for their library. This article is a persuasive piece trying to convince these librarians that DDC is best for their young patrons. Against DDC Casey, Michael & Stephens, Michael. (2009). Its fine to drop Dewey. Library Journal, 134(12), 19.

Dewey Decimal Classification

In this article by Michael Casey, Information Technology Division Director, Gwinett County Public Library, and Michael Stephens, Assistant Professor, GSLIS, Dominican University, defend the decision made by Rangeview Library District, Colorado to drop DDC in one branch and use the bookstore model instead. The authors argue that simple solutions to DDC used by some libraries, like using more signage, is not enough, and that drastic changes need to be made in order to improve service to patrons. They say that the librarys goal needs to be to create an environment with user-centered self-service and easy-to-access collections. They state that DDC does not allow todays busy library user to get what they want easily and quickly. This article is heavily biased against DDC. The writers only offer criticism for DDC and offer no solutions other than completely ditching DDC. While this article does a good job of giving an overview of their opinions, it does not provide the reader with any in-depth explanations of DDCs deficiencies nor does it give an in-depth explanation of possible solutions. The library mentioned in this article was also mentioned in Fisters The Dewey Dilemma (discussed in this bibliography). This article would be readable for any audience. Oder, Norman. (2007). Behind the Maricopa County library districts Dewey-less plan. Library Journal. Retrieved from [Link] This article by Norman Oder, journalist for Library Journal, explains the decision of one library district to drop for the bookstore model. This library is also mentioned in Fisters article The Dewey Dilemma (discussed in this bibliography). In this article, Oder explains that the library made the decision after patrons said they felt DDC does not allow for easy browsing. In the new system (influenced by the bookstore model), books are organized by subject heading then alphabetized by author. This article was written before the new system had been in place very long, so the author was still speculating as to the response to this change but had no solid facts. This lack of knowledge after the fact leaves the reader with many unanswered questions and the desire to find a follow-up article. This article is referenced in Stauffers Deweyor Dont WeClassify? (discussed in this bibliography). This article would also be a great companion the Casey and Stephens article (mentioned in this bibliography). Both discuss the process of libraries dropping DDC. This article would be readable for any audience, but its main audience is librarians considering dropping or modifying DDC in their library. Olson, Hope A. (1998). Mapping beyond Deweys boundaries: constructing classificatory space for marginalized knowledge domains. Library Trends, 47(2), 233-254. This article by Hope A. Olson, Associate Professor, School of Library and Information Studies, University of Alberta, Canada, explores the biases present in DDC. In order to analyze and address these biases, Olson created paradoxical space, which allows both sides of a limit to exist simultaneously or alternately, by linking concepts from DDC and A Womans Thesaurus. Olson compares several terms from DDC and this Thesaurus in order to show where biases are in DDC and what the meaning of the paradoxical space that the comparison of the two indicates. Olson spends more time explaining the theoretical concepts of paradoxical space than she does the implications of her findings leaving the reader wanting further explanation and analysis of her findings. Her own personal biases are well controlled as she states that classification systems are products of their time instead of simply criticizing DDC. This article is intended for other academics and not for the casual reader. The reading level used and the concepts discussed are at a very high level of understanding and require thorough understanding and study of the topics in

Dewey Decimal Classification order to fully grasp the articles meaning. This article is like others by Olson (some discussed in this bibliography) which analyze and discuss the biases found in DDC.

Olson, Hope A. (2001). Sameness and difference: a cultural foundation of classification. Library Resources and Technical Services, 45(3), 115-122. In this article, Hope A. Olson, Associate Professor, School of Library and Information Studies, University of Alberta, Canada, explains the concept of sameness and difference and uses it to show biases in DDC. She argues the concept of sameness and differences reveals biases in the organization of DDC. She uses the example of Literature vs. Folk Literature. Literature is placed in the 800s while Folk Literature is placed in 398.2. This shows that DDC sees these disciplines as different, and Olson argues that this shows a bias towards Western culture that places greater importance on literature than folk literature. She also points out that DDC gives similar items a hierarchical ranking. By placing the English literature before literature in other languages, Olson argues that DDC creates a hierarchical order that gives preference to the English language. This article is criticizing DDC, but Olsons biases are not overwhelming. She presents her arguments in a logical way and offers 4 solutions to correct DDCs biases. This articles audience is academics researching DDC. While it is at a manageable reading level, the content would only interest someone looking to research DDC. This article would be a great companion to Olsons other articles (some of which are mentioned in this bibliography) because it, like her other articles, discusses biases in DDC. Modifying DDC Anna Porter Public Library. (2009, September). Dewey or do we not? Handout from a presentation presented at the Conference for the Association for Rural & small Libraries, Gatlinburg, TN. Retrieved February 10, 2010 from [Link] conference-awards-calendar/program-handout-files/ This handout presented by the staff of Anna Porter Public Library, a library in Gatlinburg, TN, explains the librarys process in modifying the Dewey Decimal System in order to meet their librarys needs. The handout discusses the option of simply changing Dewey in order to make it more accessible to patrons. It tells about their weeding process, their re-organization process, the way they went about cataloging, and the way they created spine labels and subject stickers. This presentation focused solely on the method of using Dewey adopted by this single library; no other options were presented. For an overview of a wider variety of ways to change, modify, or replace Dewey, refer to Fisters The Dewey Dilemma (discussed in this bibliography). The intended audience of this presentation and handout is other librarians, specifically other rural librarians. This presentation is cited in Fisters article The Dewey Dilemma. This presentation handout gives a good, general overview of this librarys modification process, but does not get into specifics. If a librarian were searching for a step-by-step guide to modifying his or her librarys classification system, this would be a good start, but would not answer all questions. Hopkins, Sarah. (2007). Decimating Dewey: introducing a bookshop arrangement for shelving the nonfiction collection. Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services, 20(1), 8-13.

Dewey Decimal Classification

In this article, Sarah Hopkins, Collection Services Librarian Bayside Library Service, Victoria, examines Bayside Librarys change of their classification system in their nonfiction section. Before the change, the librarys nonfiction was organized using DDC. Hopkins states that the library decided to make the change in order to promote browsing in the nonfiction collection. She states that patrons do not just consider subject headings when searching for a book. She states that they also consider mood, pace, and use of language which are characteristics the DDC fails to convey to the patron. Hopkins explains that the library created several collections that are grouped together by similar topics, not just DDC number. The DDC numbers were still present, but they are accompanied by a label telling what collection the book is in. Hopkins reports that this change has been received positively by patrons and library staff. This article covers this change in organization well. She readily admits there are drawbacks and candidly explains them (which helps the article be unbiased). It includes an appendix with information on each collection leaving the causal reader with few questions. This article would be good for any librarian interested in changing the organization of their library. Fister, Barbara. (2009). The Dewey dilemma. Library Journal, 134(16), 22-25. Barbara Fister, columnist in Library Journal Academic Newswire and librarian at Gustavus Adolphus College, tells about and discusses several libraries that are either abandoning the DDC or are revising it. She discusses the use of BISAC (book store cataloguing) and creations of mash-ups, which combine Dewey and BISAC, in libraries across the country. She explores the reasons for this shift in classification systems by looking at data that indicates that many patrons are frustrated or intimidated by Dewey. She also discusses the views of those who see Dewey as the core of library values and a necessary tool for researchers. Fisters word choice and style make this article possible for anyone to read. Fister discusses the Anna Porter Public Librarys presentation Dewey or Do We Not? (discussed in this bibliography) as another source. She does an excellent job of staying unbiased and discussing many different methods that libraries are using to make their classification systems more accessible to patrons whether that means dropping Dewey completely or just changing it. This article is a good source for someone trying to understand what many libraries are doing about Dewey and options for improving or changing library organization. Landry, Patrice. (2006). The use of the Dewey decimal classification (DDC) for the organisation of national bibliographies: Switzerland, Germany and Austria. International Cataloguing and Bibliographic Control, (35)3, 59-62. In this article, Patrice Landry, from the Swiss National Library in Bern, Switzerland, describes the efforts taken by the national libraries of Switzerland, Germany, and Austria to adapt DDC so that it can catalog their national bibliographies. Landry states that these decisions were made primarily because adoption of the DDC would create a uniform system between these national libraries and their countrys local libraries as well as with other national bibliographies that already use DDC. Landry also goes into great detail describing the modifications that these national libraries made to DDC in order to make them work for cataloging their bibliographies. Changes in categories were made, and the libraries combined DDC with already existing category schemes (Germany wanted to combine DDC with Switzerlands existing 65 category scheme). Much of Landrys discussion requires a high level of understanding of DDC as well as

Dewey Decimal Classification other organization schemes. The target audience is librarians at other national libraries or other large institutions, not the casual researcher. This article is an interesting companion to Anna Porter Librarys presentation (discussed in this bibliography) because the presentation discusses the process of adapting DDC to a small rural library while Landrys article discusses adapting DDC to a large national library.