-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Periodicals shelving in public libraries... --
BuddyPennington
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 08:45:29 -0500
From: Peter Picerno <ppicerno@NOVA.EDU>

One person's 'popular' periodical is another person's 'scholarly'
journal:
what would you use as criteria to decide what is 'popular reading' and
what
is not?? Such titles as Reader's Digest (popular??!!) is indexed, so
indexing is not a possible criteria. That leaved, it seems to me,
judgements
to be made on more arbitrary and therefore, possibly, unsound criteria.
In
terms of patron ease of use, it would be better, I would think, if
patrons
can go to ONE location where ALL the holdings are shelved in ONE
alphabetical range, and it would certainly save time and exasperation on
the
part of reference librarians who would, if the collection were split
into
several sections, have to explain to confused and irate patrons why a
title
is in one place and not another. Just my Monday morning $.02.

Dr. Peter V. Picerno
Acquisitions and Serials Librarian
Nova Southeastern University Libraries
3301 College Avenue
Fort Lauderdale   FL   33314
(954) 262-4662
FAX (954) 262-3946

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Periodicals shelving in public libraries...
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 10:16:37 -0600
From: "MD_Buddy (Buddy Pennington)" <MD_Buddy@KCLIBRARY.ORG>

Hi all,

We currently have our 980 periodicals in closed stacks, but we are
moving
into a new building that will allow for the periodicals to be in open
stacks.  The question has come up whether we should pull out the popular
titles and separate them from the other periodicals.  This would result
in
three periodical collections:  the newspapers, the popular periodicals,
and
the non-popular periodicals.  All would be arranged in alphabetical
order by
title.

I am leery of doing it this way for several reasons.  It creates more
work
for staff and customers end up looking in two places for the periodicals
they want.  You also have to deal with signage directing customers to
the
popular periodicals shelf, not to mention determining what exactly is a
popular title (and trying to make that consistent with what the public
considers popular!).  My thinking is that it would be easier on both
staff
and customers if the periodicals were all in one section, arranged
alphabetically, and the newspapers were in a different section, also
arranged alphabetically.

Has anyone out there tried the "popular periodical" approach?  Or does
anyone have any thoughts on the matter I can share with our library
planning
committee?

Buddy Pennington
Document Delivery Librarian
Kansas City Public Library
md_buddy@kclibrary.org
816-701-3552