Information handling in selected academic libraries of the Caribbean

Int. Libr. ReL’. (1988) 20, 29-43

Information Handling in Selected Academic Libraries of the Caribbean KETTY RODRIGUEZ*

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

The idea of organizing the material contained in the written word, using some form of catalogs, has its roots in the distant past. Over the ages the methods and even the purpose of the catalog has undergone modification. Changes in the format have sometimes modified the ori- ginal objectives of the catalog. The objectives of the catalog must be kept in mind as Caribbean libraries move rapidly toward card catalog automation. Library automation is recognized as an essential step through which scarce regional resources might be shared as well as a necessary condition for enabling Caribbean libraries to keep pace, and maintain contact, with information centers in Europe and America.

Although there are several international and regional organizations’ which have stimulated cooperation among the Caribbean libraries and encouraged prior identification of conditions enabling the automation process, UNESCO, through its General Information Program (PGI/ UNESCO) has been the most active and successful.* The publication of guidelines, appointment of consultation missions, organization of workshops, seminars, training courses, etc. are some of the ways that this program has contributed to improving the climate for the flow of information across national boundaries.

General policy guidelines for Caribbean information systems were identified at the highest regional level at a UNESCO conference in Kingston, Jamaica in 1980.3 An evaluation of the existing level of professional resources within selected countries was carried out by a

* I,ihrarian. “‘Josk M. Lbzaro” I.ihrary, University of Puerto Rico.

’ Some of these organizations are: the International Federation ofLibraries (IFLA), the Organ- ization of American States (OAS), and the Latin American Center for Economic and Social Documentation (CLADES). Others are mentioned in the text. Concerning CLADES see: Ximena Feliu (1981). CLADES: A contribution to action in Latin America and the Caribbean in the field of information for development. UJISLAA 3(2), 101-109.

“I’he best sources of information on this program are the Journal of information Science, Librariansh$ and Archives Administration (UJISLAA) and the UNISIST newsletter. See also: Ursula Albertus (1981). The role of UNESCO/PGI in Latin America and the Caribbean. UJLSLAA 3(2), 74-80.

sConsultation on the Coordinated Development of National Information Sjstems in the Caribbean Region ( 1980). Paris: UNESCO. 32 pp.

00X&7837/88/01 0029 + 15 003.00/O 0 1988 Academic Press Limited

30 K. RODRIGUEZ

UNESCO consultation mission in 198 1.’ In 1982’ and 1983” two related teams of experts worked on identifying the hardware, software, and professional training requirements for computerized information systems within the region. In 1982 a conference4 sponsored by UNESCO among other entities, attempted to identify National Referral Centers and in 1984 a report5 was prepared on the linking up of these centers for a Caribbean Network.

Without detracting in any way from the very constructive aspects of this important chain of events, it is understandable that within a region so markedly varied, both politically and culturally, that many sub- divisions of the Caribbean region have not participated in the process. For example, most of the UNESCO activities in the region have been confined to the English speaking territories (the Dominican Republic, although not excluded, has not been notably active in the process) and other important entities, such as the English speaking Virgin Islands, have not participated because they are faced with political barriers. A similar situation is also confronted by the Spanish speaking Com- monwealth of Puerto Rico.

Thus the time seemed right for taking stock, across the cultural and political spectrum, of the progress of card catalog automation of Caribbean academic libraries. Partly with this in mind, the Association of Caribbean Universities and Research Institutes (UNICA) and the Association of Caribbean University, Research, and Institute Libraries (ACURIL) jointly sponsored a three-day seminar in San Juan, Puerto Rico in October 1986, to examine the automation of academic libraries and to exchange information on existing plans and programs for library mechanization with the objective of exploring possible regional link- ages.

Although completely independent of the above activity, this paper draws heavily upon the discussion and expertise brought together at that seminar. It looks at the process ofautomation within the Caribbean and attempts to detail as far as possible the existing conditions, the steps in progress, and the plans to be undertaken by academic libraries in six countries of the Caribbean.

’ The Report on the Latin American Information I~frastructure,for Ileuelopment alith ,Special Reference to the Caribbean (1981). Santiago: CLADES. 91 pp.

‘Nick Moore (1982). Survey of Library and Irzformation Manpower Needs in the Caribbean. Paris: UNESCO. 22 pp. Harold Dierickx (1982). A Proposed Format,for rxisting and prqjected Computerized Informutm System [in the Caribbean]. Paris: UNESCO. 78 pp.

‘Kathleen 7‘. Bivans Nocrr and Peter I,. Noerr ( 1983). Computerized Re~@mal I+mntion Sjvtemr. Paris: UNESCO. 50 pp.

‘G. Ember (1983). National R&ral Center.r in the Caribbean. Paris: UNESCO. 15 pp. ‘C. Ember (1984). Caribb enn Network OJ Nationnl Referral Centerr. Paris: UNESCO. 50 pp. SW

also Natcha Marqucz (1983). A cooperative network for information on higher education in Latin rlmrrica and the Caribbran. l~,/ISLAA 5(Z), 95-99.

CARIBBEAN LIBRARY INFORMATION HANDLING 31

DESCRIPTION OF THE RESEARCH PHASE

A. Scope ‘I’he focus of the study is on academic libraries in 10 four-year colleges or universities, both public and private, in six countries of the Carib- bean. The study does not attempt to cover the entire Caribbean. Many important areas have been omitted, such as the Dutch and French speaking areas where one might expect variations in the application of standards.

In the Dominican Republic the following universities were included in the survey: Universidad National “Pedro Henriquez Urefia” (UNPHU), Universidad Cat6lica “Madre y Maestra” (UCMM), Universidad Central de1 Este (UCE), and the Instituto Tecnol6gico de Santo Domingo (INTEC). All of the libraries of these universities are members of the Association of Dominican University Libraries (ABUD).

In the English speaking West Indies, two universities were included: one a regional university with campuses on the islands of Jamaica, Barbados and Trinidad and the other in the United States Virgin Islands with campuses on the islands of St. Thomas and St. Croix. The IJniversity of the West Indies (UWI) is currently undergoing a radical re-organization which will eventually establish three autonomous campuses located in Mona, Jamaica, (:avr Hill, Barbados and St. Augustine, Trinidad.

In Puerto Rico the academic libraries included are located in the following universities: the Universidad de Puerto Rico (UPR), the Universidad Interamericana, the Universidad Sagrado Corazcin and the Universidad Cat6lica ofPonce, Puerto Rico. Some information fi-om these universities comes from a recent unpublished survey presented at the‘ UNICA ACURIL seminar previously mcntioncd.

B. Sumple and Method Since poor communications and the lack of financial support for this research prevented coverage of all sectors of‘the Caribbean, those institutions selected were arbitrarily picked as the most prominent ones with economic resources capable of sustaining sizable information centers. ?‘he exclusion of Cuba is to be regretted but communication is not rtrlial)le. Some smaller universities in the Dutch and French areas were also regrettably not included. In all 13 1 b i raries in 10 institutions in six countries received questionnaires.

ANAJ.YSIS OF THE 'I'ABLES

As stated in the introduction the purpose of this research paper is to discover the degree of consistency in the cataloging practices employed in the academic libraries of six countries in the Caribbean. Ques-

32 K. RODRIGUEZ

tionnaires were distributed to librarians of some 13 libraries in the region. Follow-up phone calls and in some cases even visits secured most of the information requested. Some questions, particularly those pertaining to automation, were not answered. The reason for this is not clear, but doubtful financing of expensive operations may have entered into the decision to avoid answering some questions.

The UWI is in the process of carrying out an extensive administrative re-organization which is expected, in the long run, to establish three autonomous campuses. At the moment the University consists of three campuses on the islands of Jamaica, Barbados and Trinidad. Antici- pating the eventual creation ofautonomous centers ofhigher learning, it seemed justified to request information from the three campus libraries.

A completely different case is presented by the multicampus UPR. In 1981 a blue panel task force, headed by the deputy director of the Library of Congress, recommended’ a more effective integration of the diverse library facilities of the UPR into a library system. This system would not only incorporate the libraries of the many regional campuses of the university but also integrate the many departmental libraries of the main campus, the library of the School of Medicine and the Schools of Engineering and Agriculture, located on the campus at the west end of the island in Mayaguez. Since this integration is still being carried out, the two main divisions of the UPR are included separately.

The other multi-campus university in Puerto Rico, a private institution known as Inter American University (IAU), is fairly well cen- tralized in the administration of its several libraries and can be dealt with as a unit.

Within the Dominican Republic there is only one university with multi-campuses and that is the Catholic University “Madre y Maestra” (UCMM) with its central campus located in Santiago and a branch campus located in the capital of Santo Domingo. This university is also treated as a unit since the library services are integrated.

The University of the Virgin Islands has a campus on the island of St. Thomas and a smaller campus on the island of St. Croix. However, library services are well integrated between the two centers.

Table I A minor problem was encountered in interpreting information requested for the number of titles processed in the libraries. Some

’ [Report on the University of Puerto Rico Library System] written by Mrs Dorothy Pallet Gray, Educational Liaison Officer, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.; no date but must be December 1981. Members ofthe task force: Dr. James Aagaard, Northwestern University Library; MS Patricia Battin, Columbia University Libraries; Mr. Richard Dougherty, University ofMichi- gan Director of Libraries; Mr. William J. Welsh, Deputy Librarian of Congress; and Mr. James F. Williams, Wayne (Michigan) State University (1981). Typewritten.


replies distinguished between titles and volumes processed. Other libraries included in the tabulation serials listed separately and other types of material such as microforms.

For the sake of statistical consistency, the recording of the data is of the number of titles processed. Where the data provided is identified as volumes these are indicated in the table. Ifan institution provided a number for volumes and another number for titles of serials these two figures were not added together since the result might have been inaccurate (something like adding apples to pears). The higher of the two figures was noted and identified as volumes or, if not so identified, assumed to be titles.

There is a second variation of this problem. When the institution clearly identified its data as titles ofserials, giving titles ofother materials separately, and also provided the corresponding number of volumes for each type of material, then all numbers of titles were added together but not the number of volumes.

‘I’hus the holdings, more broadly defined, of some of the libraries may be greater than the figures indicate. Seven of the 10 institutions replied in figures rounded out to the nearest thousand, indicating pos- sibly “guestimates”. Only three replied with totals which implied exact tabulations.

Clearly holdings of academic libraries might be put in proper per- spective using perhaps the Clapp and <Jordan formula. Furthermore, within thr Caribbean it is also relevant to know the percentage of holdings in Spanish and English, respectively. However, the purpose of this paper is not to evaluate the academic libraries but rather merely to indicate the total number of titles processed in relation to the cataloging process.

Close analysis of the data in Table I provides at least three interesting cases which require careful reflection to resolve apparent contradictions or lo avoid erroneous conclusions.

In the first case, ofthe four institutions which use OCLC, two indicate a high percentage of copy cataloging and two do not. Three of the four are divisions of the UWI. The fourth is the Mayaguez campus of the UPR. ‘I’his apparent contrast within the data suplied by OCLC users would seem to offer a contradiction which needs to be clarified in some way.

One possible explanation is that the School of Agriculture of Puerto Rico is located on the Mayaguez campus. The School of Agriculture of the UWI is located on the St. Augustine campus. Tentatively, and lacking any other obvious explanation, this correlation might allow one to conclude that agricultural material may be the reason for the high percentage of copy cataloging. This conclusion is enforced by recog-

TABL

E I

Cat

alog

ing

Title

s Pr

oces

sed

1100

00

246

090*

27

8 85

0*

Back

log

~__ 23

00

1900

97

06

“/, O

rigina

l Y;

:, COP

Y AA

CR2

Bibli

ogra

phy

Cata

log

Cata

log

Year

Ut

ility

85

15

1980

12

88

19

81

80

20

1981

36 0

00

80

20

70

70

1980

OCLC

OC

LC

BNA

OCLC

LC

CDS

7:

NUC

w 10

00

1900

0 30

30

19

80

1980

OC

LC

NUC

: ?a

BNA

L,

MW

LS

2 NU

C m

N

AB

PR

NUC

Unive

rsitie

s --_

_~

UWI,

Cave

Hill,

Ba

rbad

os

UWI,

St.

Augu

stin

e,

T. &

T.

UWI,

Mon

a,

Jam

aica

UPR,

Ri

o Pi

edra

s. P.

R.

1000

ooo

*

435

000

550

000

UPR,

M

ayag

uez,

P.

R IA

U,

San

Juan

, P.

R.

Sacr

ed

Hear

t Un

ivers

ity,

Sant

urce

, P.

R.

Cath

olic

Unive

rsity

, Po

ncr;

P.R.

UC

MM

UN

PHU

UCE,

Sa

n Pe

dro

Mac

oris

INTE

C Un

ivers

ity

of t

he V

irgin

Isla

nds

St. T

hom

as,

V.I.

75 0

00

138

929*

200

500

36

64

1980

40

60

1978

45 0

00

20 0

00

98

2 19

80

NUC

75 0

00

0 4

96

1979

NU

C

* Vo

lumes

.


nizing that OCLC includes material of the National Library of Agri- culture.

If this conclusion is valid then the Catholic University “Madre y Maestra” which has a school of agriculture, in Santiago, Dominican Republic, might consider using OCLC as one of its bibliographic util- ites.

In the second case, the data in Table I seem to support the conclusion that copy cataloging increases with the greater number of bibliographic utilities used. However, there is obviously a point ofdiminishing returns. For example, the economic stringency of the Catholic University in Ponce, Puerto Rico does not allow the library to use more than one bibliographic utility from which they extract maximum benefit. In contrast, the affluence of Sacred Heart University in Santurce, Puerto Rico allows their library to enjoy the luxury of the use of three bibliographic utilities. Catholic University reports 60% copy cataloging; Sacred Heart University reports 64% copy cataloging. This comparison is even more impressive when it is realized that, with the exception of a Law School at Catholic University in Ponce, both institutions offer academic programs which are very similar.

In the third case, it would again appear that Table I contains contradictory data. Both the National University “Pedro Henriquez Urena” and the University of the Virgin Islands use NUC as their only bibliographic utility. The contrast of the effectiveness when comparing the data supplied from both institutions is certainly marked and demands an explanation. Assuming that correct data has been supplied from both libraries, one possible explanation may be found in the cultural contrast of the two institutions. The University of the Virgin Islands is closely tied to the educational environment of the United States. Its programs, staff and cultural orientation is markedly US oriented. On the other hand, the National University “Pedro Hen- riquez Urefia” of the Dominican Republic is an almost exclusively Spanish speaking institution with a program and staff oriented towards Latin America.

While it is true that NUC contains non-English language material, it is also certain that this material has low priority in contrast to material in English which is naturally in high demand and priority for the Library of Congress, Thus one might conclude that this particular bibliographic utility will not provide rapid cataloging facilities for Spanish speaking universities, although in the long run it may be of some service. In contrast, it would not be surprising to see that over 900,,, of the material entering the library of the University of the Virgin Islands has been processed immediately by the Library of Congress and can be found in the National Union Catalog.

36 K. RODRIGUEZ

Finally, it should be noted that all institutions surveyed use AACR2. Although not all began at the same time, by 1981 or 1982 almost all libraries had adopted these rules. The earlier a library has started to use AACR2, the easier it will be lo automate since there will be less records to up-date in the process of retrospective conversion to MARC. At the UNICA-ACURIL seminar on Library Telecommunication Networking for the Caribbean region, it was learned that only two libraries in the whole region do not as yet use AACR2. One is the library at the Regional College of the University of Puerto Rico located in Cayey, Puerto Rico, and the other is the public library of the small island of St. Eustatia in the Dutch West Indies.

Table II The two classification schemes utilized in the region are the Dewey Decimal Classification and the Library of Congress Classification. Of the 13 institutions surveyed, seven used the Dewey Decimal Classi- fication System, 19 edition, and seven used the Library of Congress Classification System, (A--Z), latest editions as published, updated by the Cumulations of Additions and Changes on alternate years of publication. The one institution using both is the main campus library of the UPR.

Those libraries serving primarily an English speaking clientele used the Library of Congress classification while those serving primarily a Spanish speaking community used the Dewey Decimal System. The UPR uses both since its collection, more than any other in the Carib- bean, covers the two main cultural orientations of the region.

The only other classification scheme used is the United Nations Document Classification scheme at the Cave Hill, Barbados campus of the UWI.

It might be noted in passing that in the Caribbean, a region com- prised of third world countries, in contrast to the observation of Robert Holley, the 13 libraries surveyed used up to date sources for processing their material. Holley has written:

any decision to continue USC [in ‘Third World countries] of older editions of subject headings or classification schemes will be harder to justify as more and more of the records from foreign cataloging agency reflect substantive changes.’

It would appear from the results of this survey that this is not a problem in the third world countries of the Caribbean.

Some institutions used more than one Subject Heading List. Eight used the Library of Congress Subject Heading List as the primary

I Robert P. Halley (1985). The consequences of’ new technologies in classification and subject cataloguing in Third World countries: thr technological gap. ZNSPEL 19(3), 146.

CARIBBEAN LIBRARY INFORMATION HANDLING

TABLE II

Class$cation systems

37

Universities

IJWI, Cave Hill. Barbados UWI, St. Augustine, T. & ‘r. UWI, Mona, Jamaica L?PR, Rio Piedras, P.R.

UPR, Mayaguez, P.R. 1.4U, San Juan, P.R.

Sacred Heart University, Santurce, P.R.

Catholic University, Ponce, P.R.

1’CMM

I iNPHlJ

IJCE, San Pedro de Macoris

IN’I’EC

University of Virgin Islands, St. ‘Thomas, V.I.

DDC I,C(: Other

x UN DOC. x x

x x

x x

x

x

Subject Headings

LCSH LCSH* LCSH LCSH MESH ROVIRA LCSH LCSH LCSH

BILINX ROVIRA ROVIRA BILINX ROVIRA BILINX MESH ROVIRA BILINX ROVIRA BILINX LCSH

* LCSH, latest edition referred to occasionally but no list is used regularly. Subject heading trrms are takrn from the classification scheme and the items being classified since the library uses a subject index to a classified catalogue.

source. As indicated in the footnote to Table II the St. Augustine campus of the UWI uses the LCSH occasionally. In the Dominican Republic the subject heading lists used most frequently were those which were available in the Spanish language such as the Rovira list in the first instance and as a supplement, BILINDEX. The institutions with medical schools in both Spanish and English communities used MESH.

There is a danger in the use of more than one subject heading list. Here perhaps more than elsewhere, there should be a concern for a degree of consistency. Concerning consistency Wilfrid Lancaster and Linda Smith have observed:

it is much more difficult to achie\rc consistency in deciding what sub.jects a

38 K. RODRIGUEZ

publication deals with and in the selection of terms to represent this subject matter.’

To cite again Robert Holley who deals with the same topic:

. subject analysis and classification have the aim of organizing all human knowledge in a consistent fashion whether through language as in the case of verbal subject headings or through a notational device such as in the case of classifiction, the cataloguer attempts to place the subject content of a new document in its proper place in the existing framework. Given the unity of knowledge and human endeavor, the whole structure is interconnected. Thus any change requires modification of past decisions if the integrity of the bibliographic tool is to be preserved. Because of this different systems ofsubject analysis and classification do not easily coexist within the same file without creating confusion.’

Thus, where Table II indicates that more than one subject heading list may be in use, or in the one case where there does not even seem to be any one single subject heading list in use, exceptional care should be exercised to take into consideration the points raised by Lancaster and Holley.

Table III In the area of automation, the survey found that none of the institutions had completed the process of automation. In fact most of them were either only beginning the process or studying the actions to be taken. It is evident that automation of the library functions has awakened a great deal of interest throughout the region but, it is also evident, that some steps are being taken without adequate study, planning and preparation. For example, in one institution decisions concerning automation were taken by regional divisions before any institutional-wide plan was agreed upon or even discussed.3

From the data gathered by the survey it appears that six of the 13 institutions are either planning or implementing the automation process. A part of the UNICA-ACURIL seminar on telecommunication networking, mentioned above, focused on the question of compatibility in hardware and software. This timely orientation served to stress the importance of adequate study and planning before launching into costly acquisition of elaborate systems.

Three of the instituions surveyed have planned for a system of automation by function or application. With this type of system the areas to be automated such as cataloging, acquisitions and/or circulation, are treated separately and hence there may be a duplication of effort, or, tasks such as loading information into the computer may have to

I Wilfrid Lancaster and Linda C. Smith ( I98 1) Compalibilily Issues Affecting Information Systems and Services, p. 3. Paris: UNESCO.

*Robert P. Holley, op. cit., p. 143. 3Lider. Description of the R.U.M. Library Automated System. (No date.) Mayaguez. 35 pp. Type-

written.

TABL

E III

Auto

mat

ion

Unive

rsitie

s

UWI,

Cave

Hill,

Ba

rbad

os

UWI,

St. A

ugus

tine,

T.

& ‘

1’.

UWI,

Mon

a,

Jam

aica

UP

R,

Rio

Pied

ras,

P.R.

UP

R,

May

ague

z,

P.R.

IA

U,

San

Juan

, P.

R.

Plan

ned

X

X

X

X

X

Sacr

ed

Hear

t Un

ivers

ity,

Sant

urce

, P.

R.

Cath

olic

Unive

rsity

, Po

nce,

P.

R.

UCM

M

UNPH

U UC

E,

San

Pedr

o M

acor

is IN

TEC

Unive

rsity

of

the

Virg

in Is

land

s,

St.

Thom

as,

V.I.

X

Initia

ted

Com

plet

ed

X

GA

X x X

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Syst

em

char

acte

ristic

s

by f

unct

ions

by

fun

ctio

ns

integ

rate

d int

egra

ted

integ

rate

d

Syst

em

sele

cted

ocLc

* oc

Lc*

ATLA

S DO

BIS

LEUV

EN

by f

unct

ions

* Au

toma

tion

used

for

ac

cess

ing

Dialo

g.

40 K. RODRIGUEZ

be repeated. However, any resulting errors would affect only that application and not the whole system as would be the case in an integrated type of automation. With the function approach to automation there is only a minimum of information sharing among the areas.

The additional advantage for institutions in Third World countries is that the initial capital outlay for the functional approach is less than for a completely integrated system and can be spaced out over a longer period of time as new applications or functions are automated. However, unless careful planning is undertaken this approach can prove costly if early decisions have to be revised to allow for later changes in the automation processes.

Two institutions surveyed have opted for an integrated automated system. With this approach each function or application is divided into smaller units called modules. A module may apply to a particular application or they may be common to two or more applications. Since there are many repetitive tasks in the library operation an integrated system speeds up the processing of material and eliminates duplication. There is greater control and efficiency throughout the whole area of library service. Usually changes in one are automatically carried out in other areas. Such systems are usually open-ended so that additional functions may be added. All of this tends to require a substantial outlay of capital which in Third World communities in the Caribbean cannot be justified. The two integrated library systems selected by the two institutions surveyed are: (1) ATLAS from Data Research Associates which runs on Digital Equipment; and (2) Dobis Leuven of IBM. Both of these institutions are located in Puerto Rico. If at a later date the academic libraries in Puerto Rico wish to share or pool their resources further expense will be necessary to allow integration of incompatible equipment.

Three libraries surveyed have selected the functional approach. The system selected is OCLC which is used for supporting cataloging and for accessing Dialog Information Services.

In the Caribbean countries technical services are scarce, expensive when available, and tend to have disappeared when needed. Vendors who soon go out of business, often after unloading out-dated equipment, must be guarded against. Long term technical support by the vendor to the library is essential.

As observed above, the response to this part of the survey was limited (only five out of 13 libraries supplying the information requested). Undoubtedly, other libraries are in the process of planning automation and it cannot be over-emphasized that this is the critical stage. Regional experience should be shared among the institutions as well as keeping in mind cooperation in future operations.


Automation in one form or another will come to most of the libraries of the Caribbean academic community. Careful planning, including the preparation of the human factor to accept automation before ini- tiating the process, can save money, reduce frustration and diminish the number of problems.

CONCLIJSIONS

i 1) There is a high degree of consistency in the processing of material in the area of descriptive cataloging in the six countries that answered the questionnaire. All countries studied reported using AACR2 since 1980. Thus serious consideration might be given to the eventual creation of an on-line union catalog for the region. Frederick G. Kilgour, refer- ring to experience elsewhere, has pointed to such a possibility when he described OCLC and UTLAS’s experience in merging disparate records.’ r The utilization of UNIMARC would provide machine read- able records for, in the first instance, authors and, in the second instance, title elements in different languages; all could be merged into an international catalog containing the holdings of the academic libraries of the Caribbean countries.

(2) In the area of subject analysis, where one could expect less consistency, the results of the survey reflect some divergence. As others have observed, libraries tend to use subject heading lists which best reflect their needs in terms of headings, language, etc., and this is certainly true in the Caribbean. The wide divergence is a matter for concern if’ the libraries intend to automate their operations with the objective of sharing their resources. In addition to the use of multiple subject heading lists, there is the problem of the language used for the subject headings, compounding the possibility of confusion. Multiple language usage will dislocate the filing structure.

If an international union catalog were to be created, the next step would be to devise a subject access to that catalog. It is clear that a classification scheme applies itself more adequately to a multi-lingual working environment than the application or use of verbal language subject heading lists. DDC is the classification scheme most commonly used by the institutions surveyed. Pauline Cochrane and Karen Markey have described an OCLC research project, currently underway, which is preparing the DDC’s relative index as an on-line searchers tool for snb.jrxct access in an on-line catalog.* If this pro,ject proves feasible, a

’ Frederick C. Kilgour (1984). Merging catalog entries fiiom various countries into an on-lint union catalog. Electronic Library 2, 175-18 1.

.’ Paulin? Cochrane and Karen Markcy (1985). Preparing for the use of’ classification in on-linr cataloging systrms and in on-line cxtalogs. INT,4L 4, 91 --I I I.

42 K. RODRIGUEZ

user might be able to use a classification number for on-line catalog search for subjects. Such a search with DDC relative index on-line would produce all items under that classification number. In addition it would allow the user to do post-coordinated subject searches on-line.

Resource sharing, the ultimate objective, may be hindered by the present lack of consistency in the use of subject heading lists if steps are not taken to address the problem. Alternatives leading toward consistency should take into consideration the unique needs and diver- sity of the libraries of the region.

Since the Caribbean Third World countries would profit by sharing their library resources, a central entity which should be more formally structured than the existing regional association of professional librarians is needed. Such an entity might be created by ACURIL but it would need to be sustained by some dependable financial support. This entity could suggest and identify an information policy for the region. Lacking any power or authority, this entity would be limited to recommendation of policy and provide essential orientation for librarians. It would provide for the region a greater awareness of international norms and standards essential to the exchange of resources within the region. Such a regional entity would naturally be in direct touch with existing and operating international agencies. This entity could prepare and circulate procedure manuals, directories ofprotocols, and descriptive reference manuals on norms and practices. Such an organization would contribute substantially to greater consistencies in Caribbean library operations.

(3) There is a great deal of interest in all the countries surveyed in the automation of the library functions. However, such enthusiasm needs to be controlled and channelled. Careful planning for institutional automation should also be related to a planning process for the region. An awareness of this aspect of the process of change would perhaps prevent a proliferation of variety in equipment creating compatibility problems, not only in the micro-environment of the institutional system, but also in the macro-environment of the Caribbean region. Of course, much incompatibility may be overcome but often at increased costs and the sacrifice of operational efficiency.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

J. Thomas Galvin (1985). Trends and issues in the International Library and Infor- mation Communities. In The Bowker Annual of Library and Book Trade Information, 30th Ed., pp. 69-75. New York: Bowker.

Sally H. McCallum (1986). Information standards in 1985. In The Bowker Annual oj Library and Book Trade Information, 31st Ed., pp. 67-73. New York: Bowker.


Maria E. Saucedo Lugo (1983). U mversity Libraries in Latin America. UJISLAA . 5(2), 10~-102.

UNESCO (1979). Estudio de Las lnterrelaciones Existcntes en un Sistema National de Infor- macion. Informe preparado para el gobierno de Venezuela por la Organization de las Naciones Unidas para la Education, la Ciencia, y la Cultura (UNESCO). Paris: UNESCO. 49 pp.

UNESCO (1981). First UNISIST Mee&ing on Regional Cooperation in Information Policy and Planning for Development in Latin America and the Caribbean. Final Report and Recommendations. Paris: UNESCO. 12 pp.

UNESCO (1982)). Report of the Second Meeting: KINISIST Working Groufi on Techno& ofSystems Interconnection. Paris: UNESCO.

I). Van Bergeijk (1981). Overcoming the language barrier in information transfer: the role of the International Translation Center. UJISLAA 3(3), 1733177.

Venezuela, Consejo National de Universidades (1979). Informe sobre 10s antecedentesg el trabajo de la Comisidn Permanente de Bibliotecas Universitarias de1 Consejo National de Liniversidades (mimeograph). Caracas: Secretaria Prrmanente. 13 pp.

Information handling in selected academic libraries of the Caribbean

Documents

Transcript of Information handling in selected academic libraries of the Caribbean