Comments for Freeing Dewey

Comment on We Are Now Dewey Free by Fuzz

Fuzz — Tue, 01 May 2012 11:24:39 +0000

It’s amazing to see thought and applied knowledge to die, of all places, in a library.

Comment on We Are Now Dewey Free by Jake

Jake — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:35:44 +0000

That weeding method is CREW: Continuous Review, Evaluation, and Weeding. I am in acronym hell.

Comment on We Are Now Dewey Free by Jake

Jake — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:29:53 +0000

It was easier to dumb down the library, and, hence, the patrons, than it was for you to study materials so that you could provide reference services. It is a condescending change.

The sole argument in favor of lumping books together would be the incredibly limited catalog search methods via computer, since the demise of the card catalog.

When one looked through a card catalog, it was a process of discovery. One found books and information that might otherwise have missed the patron’s attention. No longer.

This move also means that all the hyper-technology training offered by library schools over the past years is utterly worthless. Will they, then, return to training librarians in research, and care of books?

Then again, the books that are being deaccessioned are being chosen without our knowledge, and without our vote. Most of the books being tossed are books that have not met the requirements of the new selection STAR? selection program. Shakespeare’s towns doesn’t cut it. Out.

You are, and passive patrons are, fully embracing ignorance and knowledge that is dictated by only a handful of people – often the wrong people.

Comment on BISAC by Janice G

Janice G — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:15:40 +0000

Congratulations on your Movers & Shakers awards.

I am a cataloguing librarian. I do see the value of the Dewey-free system.

Janice

Comment on Signs & Layout Map by Melissa

Melissa — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:03:17 +0000

Hello Fred,

The color schemes are intended as a tool to help differentiate the subject collections within an aisle. The signage is white font on a dark background. Knowing which color matches a specific subject is not necessary to finding the collection you are looking for. Like the rest of our library, we wanted to incorporate some color into the Adult Collection shelving units to make them more vibrant to our users.

Melissa

Comment on Signs & Layout Map by Fred

Fred — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:09 +0000

How is this color-coding scheme supposed to “assist and empower” the 7 to 10% of your male patrons who are colorblind?

Comment on Signs & Layout Map by Steve and Jodie

Steve and Jodie — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:22:44 +0000

The signs are very clean and clear. We like the color schemes and layout.

Comment on We Are Now Dewey Free by Steve and Jodie

Steve and Jodie — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:08:23 +0000

Congratulations! Looking forward to your ILA presentation in October. We start our own Dewey-free project on Monday. Exciting and scary at the same time!

Comment on Freeing Dewey by Margaret Tassione

Margaret Tassione — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:38:28 +0000

I think it’s a wonderful concept. Many patrons are sometimes hesitant to ask and like the pleasure of browsing the stacks. Kudos to you.

Comment on Jo’s and Mel’s Thoughts by Renee K

Renee K — Fri, 08 May 2009 20:42:41 +0000

Yes, SLIS. There will certainly be some situations like that, but those same issues exist in Dewey.
Take the subject of Egypt, for example.
Maybe you need books on the current country of Egypt (962) or books on travel in Egypt (916). But what if you need books on Ancient Egypt (932) or books on Mummies (393) or Egyptian Mythology (299.3113).
I have trouble finding books in a bookstore sometimes. It’s hard to know if the book I want will be shelved in fiction or in fantasy, for example. However, based on the number of people who frequent bookstores, people seem to be able to figure it out.
The other benefit to a library is that we have a catalog to help users looking for a specific book. No one at the Frankfort library (or any other library, I would imagine) is saying we should get rid of the catalog. The problem is that many times, the library catalog doesn’t use language that patrons understand? What patron looking for cookbooks knows to look up “Cookery,” the LCSH for cookbooks?
You have constructed your argument based on a premise that is common in the library world: If we simply educate the users better, our systems will work.
Patrons like bookstores. They know how to use them. They like to use them. They will sometimes spend *hours* hanging out and browsing with their latte and their laptop. When was the last time someone did that at a library?
I’m not saying that libraries need to become bookstores. We serve different purposes. However, we need to stop trying to fit patrons into our library world. Instead of constantly explaining to people why they can’t download Oprah’s KFC coupon, why not fix our computer system so it allows patrons to download programs that they need, then resets the computer settings after a restart. Instead of educating people on how to use the crappy OPAC, why not redesign the OPAC so it works more like Google. And instead of putting up more cutesy hand-made signs showing people that Dinosaurs=567, why not take a look at how are libraries are organized and see if there is a better system out there.
I don’t work for the Frankfort Public Library, and I’ve never been there to visit. I don’t know how the dewey-less library will work. But I do know that if this is a system that will work for our users, we had better pay attention. Remember that companies, for example: newspapers, who are unwilling or unable to adapt in a new marketplace become obsolete. Libraries like Frankfort are working to make sure that doesn’t happen.