----------(1)
>From amiller@BU.EDU Thu Apr 29 08:52:07 1999
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 15:14:57 -0400
From: Anne Miller <amiller@BU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Serials Shelving Schemes (Kathleen Thorne)

  I've worked in three or four large academic libraries, one of which did
not assign call numbers to journals, one of which assigned partial call
numbers only (indicating the broad LC class such as QC, only, and then a
cutter for the title) and my current library which fully catalogs and
assigns LC call numbers.

  I can see the advantages to each. Oddly enough, I think the advantage of
call numbers is mostly a practical one, making it easier to keep changing
and related titles together. But it is slightly more work for the
catalogers, and not all that useful to people in the sciences, I think. On
the other hand, I suspect it IS helpful in the humanities, especially if
the bound issues are integrated in the book collection, where patrons
appear to do more browsing. But I suppose the issue of call numbers and
the issue of integrated book/journal collections are separate ones.

  I feel more strongly about government documents, which I feel benefit
greatly from being integrated into regular collections, via LC or
whatever.

--Anne Miller
  Serials Cataloger
  Boston University

----------(2)
>From crissinger.5@OSU.EDU Thu Apr 29 08:52:07 1999
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:51:41 -0400
From: "John D. Crissinger" <crissinger.5@OSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Serials Shelving Schemes

Amen Kathleen!

Also having been there with both systems as a librarian and as a student,
I much prefer the LC system over alphabet soup. I am constantly amazed at
how many alphabets we operate from in a library. The comments about all
the "extra" words that may or may not be part of the title are so true.
Journals of Gerontology almost invariably get shelved with the singular
"journal," and the acronyms - UGH! My routine took me to something like 4
places for one of the major medical journals because each shelver had
their own logical place for it. And, no, a master shelving list was not
effective.

Patrons use call numbers for everything else, seems logical to use them
with periodicals too. But I also realize some folks do the alphabet
better. It's impossible to please everyone, so decide who you want to
please and go from there. I found very quickly that interfiling bound
volumes was no problem, but LC order for current issues really raised a
stink. Then I discovered that alphabetizing the currents gave patrons
another means of gaining access to the bound ones (call numbers written on
loose issues told patrons immediately where to go).

What ever choice you make, don't fret over what could have been. Both
systems have their strengths and shortcomings. Neither is necessarily the
best or the worst, just different. Just pick one and stay with it.

At 02:43 PM 4/28/99 -0400, you wrote:
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 10:25:05 -0500
>From: kathleen <kathleen@sjsuvm1.sjsu.edu>
>Subject: Re: Serials Shelving Schemes (Peter Washkevich)
>
>We have had our periodicals shelved in LC call number order since about
>1980, and it really does work....

**************************
                             *
JOHN D. CRISSINGER       *
NEWARK CAMPUS LIBRARY    *              Tele: 740-366-9306
OSU-N/COTC                   *          Fax:  740-366-9264
1179 UNIVERSITY DR.          *          email: crissinger.5@osu.edu
NEWARK, OH 43055         *
                         *
**************************

                "Optimism: a cheerful frame of mind
                that enables a tea kettle to sing
                though in hot water up to its nose!"
                (with thanks to a fortune cookie)

----------(3)
>From BECQC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU Thu Apr 29 08:52:07 1999
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 21:03:05 EDT
From: Belinda Chiang <BECQC@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject: Re: Serials Shelving Schemes (Marilyn Haskell)

Our faculty requested over ten years ago to change periodicals
arrangement from alphabetical to call no. order.  This is
very convenient for the user for gathering titles on the same
subject together.  Further, it is also good in case of change
titles comparing to alphabetical shelving.

While it is beneficial to the user, periodicals check in staff
must produce labels with call no. either by printer or by
hand.  Unless you have a system which also prints title with
call no. on the labels, you must find a way to match printed
labels with titles.  We devised a way of inputting brief title
in Notis item record so that we can match each label correctly
with the periodical after checking in a large amount of titles.