No. 45: Visual Materials Cataloging

31 July - 4 August 1995

Aimed at librarians and archivists who catalog published or unpublished visual materials. The emphasis will be on c19 and c20 prints and photographs being cataloged either as single items or as part of archival collections. Topics include: descriptive and subject cataloging; form and genre access; special problems in authority work and physical description; comparison of AMC and VIM cataloging; the relationship between physical processing and cataloging; and establishing institutional priorities.

1. How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Extremely useful to start the thinking process and get everyone on equal footing. 2: They were excellent -- and will be even better during the second, post-course reading. 3: I think they were helpful since practically focussed. It was a long list, but you could tell which were critical and which were less so. 4: Very useful (in fact, necessary). 5: Very useful in general to start one thinking about the subject, although only a couple of them came up directly during the course. They will be valuable references in the future, though. 6: The readings were very useful and covered the range of topics discussed in the course. 7: I found them very useful, getting me to consider some issues before coming and providing me with a foundation for understanding issues presented in class. 8: The pre-course readings were extremely helpful and informative, just the right balance of generalities and specifics. I will continue to refer to them well into the future. 9: Excellent. They provided very good context for the class discussions. 10: Very useful readings -- they prepared me for what we did in class. They also brought everyone in on the same level, so the instructor didn't have to paraphrase them. 11: The readings were helpful in giving me a more in-depth knowledge of the inherent problems in cataloging visual materials -- at least they enabled me to start off with a reasonable understanding. 12: Very useful. The required reading list was quite long -- but helpful. 14: Interesting in a tangential way -- but too many.

2. Did your instructor prepare sufficiently to teach THIS course? Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful?

1: Yes. Yes. 2: Yes -- very well prepared, especially considering this was the first year. 3: Yes and yes. JD is never unprepared, so there is nothing else to say there [:-)]. Our syllabus is full of some very good record examples which is its own -- in a minor way -- ``Compendium of Practice.'' 4: The instructor was very well prepared and the materials were on target and excellent. I especially appreciated use of original materials in class. 5: Great preparation for a first time course. The syllabus is great and will provide much meat for future thought. 6: The instructor clearly put considerable time and effort into preparing the course. The syllabus was useful in class and should serve as a good reference tool in the future. 7: She was extraordinarily well prepared. 8: Absolutely. Our instructor had an amazing breadth of knowledge concerning the subject and she was exhaustively prepared with examples and handouts. The syllabus will be a vital reference tool for me as I tackle these issues back at my institution. 9: Yes. 10: JD brought handouts and a course syllabus (``Kinko's package'') that provided examples which we not only used in class, but can refer to at work. 11: Yes, the syllabus, with its many examples, will be very useful. 12: The syllabus and notebook distributed in class were very useful. 13: Yes. Very. 14: Yes. Yes.

3. Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?

1: Yes. 2: Very good -- although not everyone had the MARC tags memorized. 3: Yes. Catalogersare nuts-and-bolts types and we did that, but also certainly embraced the intellectual whys and wherefores of following a practice (pros and cons, &c.). A lot of talk about practice in the context of policy provided reality for us all. 4-6: Yes. 7: I found it quite challenging (the way I like it). 8: Yes, though I felt at sea quite a bit. There definitely was a need for a basic level of expertise/experience with visual materials cataloging in order for one not to be completely overwhelmed by the wonderful world of MARC. 9: Yes. 10: Despite the mix of experience, expertise, and institutions, everyone seemed to function intellectually on the same level -- none too far behind, dragging the class down, and none in the stratosphere. The course content matched our level of grasp. 11-14: Yes.

4. If your course had field trips, were they effective?

1: Yes. It is very helpful to see concepts discussed in action. 2: The LC trip was very helpful and practical. The driving time was a good chance for the class members to talk about cataloging issues and to network. 3: Yes. Both for the Special Collections visits and the LC day trip. It is always great to see how others do things when you do the same sort of work. Especially refreshing to see LC on a human level with the same sorts of problems/issues as the rest of us. 4: Yes -- seeing cataloging practices in a real context was highly useful. 5: Yes, absolutely. The preparation for our visit to LC by the staff of LC's Prints & Photographs Division was most impressive and made for a great day. One of the definite highlights of the course. 6: Yes. The staff in Special Collections and at LC's P & P were well prepared for our visits. 7: We had several visits to Special Collections and to LC's P & P. All field trips were very informational. I found the trip to LC inspiring. 8: In my estimation, the LC field trip was the highlight of the course. It was perfectly placed on Thursday so that we went there with a good deal of instruction under our belts. The cataloging exercises at LC were invaluable and I was very interested to see how the P & P Division is run. The field trips to Alderman's Special Collections should have been condensed into one rather than three. 9: Yes. 10: We visited Special Collections twice and LC for one entire day. All the field trips provided useful information, particularly contrasting how LC and UVa handle photo collections. The trip to LC, with the hands-on practicum, was especially valuable when we compared our version of a MARC record with what they had done for the same collection. 11: We visited P & P at LC -- the tour was interesting. Most helpful was the hands-on experience with LC catalogers. 12: Trips to Special Collections were very instructive. The field trip to Washington was too long and tiring; consequently I did not get as much out of our trip as I might have. 13: Yes, especially the visit to LC. 14: The visit to LC was probably one of the most useful aspects of the course in that we went to the top and worked/spent time with professionals who are articulating the issues for the nation. Good practicum.

5. Did the actual course content correspond to its RBS brochure description and Expanded Course Description? Did the course in general meet your expectations?

1: Yes, yes. 2: Exceeded my expectations. 3: Yes. I made a lot of notes to myself for things to check/review, reconsider, bring up and squabble with my colleagues about. I definitely feel surer about my graphics cataloging and that I have better direction than I had before. 4: Absolutely. One of the more focussed and useful courses I have attended. 5: Yes. Exactly what I hoped for and what I needed! 6: Yes. 7: The course exceeded my expectations. 8-9: Yes. 10: The descriptions fit perfectly and met my expectations exactly. I feel confident that I can begin cataloging visual materials as my next project at work. 11: Yes. I am not returning to work as an expert visual materials cataloger, but will be in a much better position to evaluate the materials to be cataloged and will build on what I have learned here. 12-13: Yes. 14: Yes, well satisfied.

6. What did you like best about the course?

1: Very well organized -- with discussion of concepts followed by practical exercises. 2: The exercises in cataloging and meeting the LC catalogers. 3: Although I was shy about presenting results, I thought all the hands-on things (exercises) were best. 4: The use of actual collection materials in the class. Being paired with another class member to work on exercises. The in-class cataloging exercises themselves. And lastly, that JD kept our discussions focussed and moving along. 5: The practical exercises, the professional give-and-take, the knowledge and tact of the instructor, and the field trip. 6: The hands-on cataloging practice that served nicely to supplement the general discussions in class. Also, the varied experiences and institutional backgrounds of the students provided varied and interesting perspectives on the issues discussed. 7: I liked the absence of doctrinaire ``my way or no way'' cataloging instruction. The visit to LC was a more specific highlight. I also liked the discussion of institutional policy decisions, because that is where my institution is now. 8: Hands-on cataloging exercises. Careful reading together of CM rules -- could have spent more time on this, in fact. The instructor -- yeah, a cataloger with a sense of humor and a common sense, no nonsense, approach. The readings (once I forced myself to do them). Nice blend of rules and hands-on assignments. 9: The enthusiasm and expertise of the instructor and the active contributions and thought-provoking questions of the participants. 10: The hands-on practice cataloging real items/collections; the field trip to LC to see how they catalog their prints and photographs and the practicum there. 11: Exercises and seeing what everyone else did with their items (not presenting my own). The comparison of thesaurus terms was especially beneficial. 12: The cataloging exercises. Trips to Special Collections. Pairing the class up into a buddy system was very useful and created a congenial class atmosphere. 13: In many ways, hearing about the practices and solutions of other institutions as represented by my classmates was one of the best things about this course. I came away with much practical information. 14: The LC trip and cataloging exercises.

7. How could the course have been improved?

1: More precision given to tagging -- eg, not glossing over it but just using it in examples. Hard to know how to squeeze more exercises in -- but more exercises and perhaps some examples of pre-coordinated AAT headings just to give an idea of how it works. Perhaps trying to duplicate some LCTGM headings already in examples. 2: Cataloging worksheets with the MARC numbers and explanation of fields. More cataloging from photographs rather than prints (or the choice to choose the processes best relating to your own collection). 3: Maybe the exercises could be done differently. It's just my personality bias, but maybe more individual efforts at things. 4: By my having gotten more sleep during my stay. In all seriousness, however, I cannot think of any significant way it could have been improved. 5: I'm sure some of the small details could be worked over (such as providing work sheets for the exercises, as one person suggested), but it's hard for me to see how the course could be bettered. For a first-time offering, this one was a real winner! 7: More of everything! 8: Fewer visits to Special Collections. Please mix and match buddies throughout the week. I longed to be partnered with others in the class for a different frame of reference, level of expertise when it came to cataloging exercises. 10: Sample blank MARC-VIM forms to take as examples. 11: I believe it would have been helpful in some or all of the exercises to see at the end completed catalog records for the items we had attempted to describe. 12: It might have been better to start the week going through the sample records in the syllabus rather than going through them at the end of the week. 14: The use of work sheets.

8. Any final thoughts?

1: Wonderful opportunity to learn about a long neglected area so important to providing access to important research tools (ie, visual images in a visual age). Hope the course will be offered again to get more institutions cataloging these materials. 2: Bring samples of our own collection guides, MARC records, catalog cards, cataloging worksheets, &c., to share with the class and tohave the instructor critique. 4: Do all the readings -- be prepared! Do bring a light if staying on the Lawn -- the overhead lighting is harsh and unflattering. Don't be afraid to speak up in class, but don't bog things down with your own local issues. Don't bother to bring any other reading material with you -- you won't have time! 5: I hope that the visual material cataloging course will be offered again. I would advise prospective students to be sure to do the readings. And I would urge as many people as possible to take it. 6: I would highly recommend the course. 7: Could you ask your van drivers to remember that Rt.29 is not the Indianapolis Speedway? Thank you very much for a wonderful course! 8: Make sure you have a good grounding in MARC before signing up. 9: A wonderful opportunity to focus on issues related to visual materials with persons who work with these materials. 10: Read as much as possible about visual materials terminology if your background is cataloging and read about MARC tagging if you background is visual materials. 14: I think the course offered something for everyone, regardless of the level of experience of the type of institution he/she represented. An open mind and a willingness to participate and share ideas and suggestions in the convivial atmosphere JD created allowed for a very positive experience. Some grounding in MARC coding and experience handling groups of diverse material would help prospective students. Thank you, JD. The idea of assigning partners was a gem.

Number of respondents: 14

Percentages

There were six archivist/manuscript librarians (43%), four rare book librarians (29%), and a cataloger (pictorial collections), a general librarian with unspecified rare book duties, a photograph curator, and a visual materials curator (7% each).