3 messages, 139 lines

(1)-------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 08:15:03 +1000
From: Jean Dartnall <Jean.Dartnall@jcu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Periodicals shelving arrangement changed from title to call number

We are a medium sized regional academic library and we shelve
periodicals by call number.  The main advantages are keeping together
title changes (and corporate author changes for annual reports, etc).  I
think it is also helpful for students working in a particular discipline
to choose study areas near all the things they are likely to need during
a study session.  I suppose the main disadvantages are having to put a
call number on each loose issue and a little bit more intellectual
effort for the shelvers.  We don't find this a problem.

Jean
--
Jean Dartnall
Serials Librarian

Jean.Dartnall@jcu.edu.au

(07) 4781 4492 (tel)
(07) 4781 5886 (fax)

James Cook University
Townsville
Queensland 4811

(2)-------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 19:56:24 -0400
From: David Goodman <dgoodman@Princeton.EDU>
Subject: Re: Periodicals shelving arrangement changed from title to call number

You have asked the great unsolved question of serials librarianship.
Although it is unsolved, there are a great many who deny that, and a vote
of those who think the evidence is clearly on one side or another will
hardly settle the question.  Nor will a Cochrane style meta-analysis,
because there are simply too many factors involved. I have worked as a
librarian or user in libraries with every possible variation. Some of them
have had very usable periodical collections, and some have not. One can do
well or poorly either way. There are one factor on which I think all
agree: the size and diversity of the collection. In a really large
collection with a very wide spectrum of users, an alphabetic arrangment is
relatively unsuitable; in a small specialized collection, the opposite
holds, at least to a certain extent.

I would suggest that the question becomes much less important if you limit
print holdings to a browsing collection of those titles actually read (as
distinct from merely photocopied), put older volumes in easily accessible
storage, and rely on electronic resources to the extent possible.  You can
then start in on the next great unsolved question, of how to organize
lists of electronic resources.

Dr. David Goodman
Princeton University Library
and
Palmer School of Library & Information Science, Long Island University
dgoodman@princeton.edu

(3)-------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 20:28:05 -0400
From: "Crissinger, John" <crissinger.5@osu.edu>
Subject: RE: Periodicals shelving arrangement changed from title to call number

I personally like the idea of call number shelving. I find all materials
of my subject area together and those horrid title changes don't land a
periodical in a dozen different alphabetical locations.

I changed from alpha to call number order at a previous position and must
admit the idea was not well received by the faculty or students. It was a
change and perceived as unnecessary. The compromise was new issues were
alphabetized while bound were put in call # order.

Justification?

        Provided 2 distinct points of access into the collection. If you
remembered the name but not the call number you looked at a loose issue;
if you remembered the subject but couldn't quite get the name right
(Journals of Gerontology for example) you looked at the call # subject.

        Loose issues don't need to be marked individually with a call
number. Bound issues can have the call number placed on them by the
bindery and come ready to shelve.

        Student workers don't confuse titles such as Journals of
Gerontology with Journal of Genetics or Journal on Mental Health with
Journal of Military History if shelving by call #. Trying to decide which
part of the "title" IS the title can be very confusing at times.
Reshelving appeared to become more accurate.

        And, all the "parts" of a journal are together regardless of what
the title of the month happens to be (Historic Preservation and
Preservation or Ziff Davis Smart Business-Smart Business-PC Computing).

You could always take a survey of your users and get their reasons for
what they want. Be sure your library committee buys into the idea; they
are your most effective defense against disgruntled faculty and students.
And be proactive. If you do it, go into proactive mode and promote the
idea in the campus paper, newsletters, department meetings, or whatever
public outreach technique you have available. Promote the idea and maybe
you won't have to defend it later.

Just my 2 cents...

John

John D. Crissinger
Head Librarian
Newark Campus Library
OSUN/COTC
Newark, OH 43055

crissinger.5@osu.edu
(740) 366-9306

-----Original Message-----
From: Shirley Lin [mailto:linh@OIT.EDU]
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 5:06 PM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Periodicals shelving arrangement changed from title to call
number

Oregon Institute of Technology is reviewing our current shelving
arrangement, which is alphabetically by title. My supervisor would like to
change our current shelving system; she would prefer the periodicals (Bound
and current issues) shelved by LC Call Number rather than title.

I would like to know if any of your libraries have re-shelved periodicals
from title to classification number and what impact that change had on
staffing requirements. I would also appreciated any information form
libraries that shelve by call number on the advantages or disadvantages of
shelving that way.

Any comments, advise would be greatly appreciated.