Instructor: Elin Jacob
Office: 017 SLIS
Office phone: 812-855-4671
Office fax: 812-855-6166
Office hours: Monday 1:00-3:00pm or by appointment
The representation and organization of information resources is a primary focus of the information profession. Organizational and representational structures such as classification schemes, indexes, and catalogs have been devised to provide access to information. The recent explosive growth in both the number and variety of information resources underscores the continuing need for application of effective methods of representation and organization.
Practical and effective information systems depend upon a comprehensive understanding not only of formal systems of organization and representation but also of human cognition itself. Accordingly, this course will investigate the basic principles and theoretical foundations of traditional representational and organizational schemes and review research in information science, cognitive science, semiotics, and computer science -- research that has contributed to an understanding of how people obtain, store, retrieve and use information. It will examine how this research can inform current practices of representation and organization in the design of more effective and more efficient information retrieval systems.
By the end of the course, participants will
1. Be aware of a broad range of representational models drawn from the fields of communication, semiotics, philosophy, cognitive psychology, and the computer and information sciences.
2. Understand the principles and functions of metadata structures such as classification schemes, precoordinate and postcoordinate indexing systems, and thesauri as well as the related process of abstracting and representation.
The structure of each class session will center around lectures by the instructor, class discussions of assigned readings and in-class activities designed to illustrate principles and theories presented in readings and lectures. Students may also be asked to work in small groups and to report to the class on the results of small-group discussions At each class session, lecture/discussion will cover the topic indicated on the syllabus. Students are encouraged to participate actively in all lectures and discussions since participation in class activities and listserv discussions will constitute 20% of each student's final grade.
It is important that all students actively participate in class discussions. The readings have been selected to facilitate participation in class discussions, in listserv discussions and in the group activities in which students will frequently engage. Accordingly, each student will be required to record in his/her journal an entry discussing some aspect of each of the required readings assigned for each class session. These entries and the listserv discussions are intended to encourage the student to think about the assigned materials; they will not be graded based upon "correctness" of content. Failure to keep up with the assigned readings and/or to record a journal entry for each reading will negatively impact both the class participation grade and the journal grade.
All readings, both assigned and recommended, will be available online, either on the Web or as part of SLIS's electronic reserves. The Schedule of LECTURES and READINGS (pp. 8-18) lists both required and recommended readings, as well as journal assignments, when applicable, for each class session. Please note that assigned readings are subject to amendment by the instructor.
The Schedule of LECTURES and READINGS (pp. 8-18) identifies required and recommended readings for each class session. Copies of required and recommended readings that are not available on electronic reserve will be available in the SLIS library. The url for electronic reserves for this course is:
The password necessary to access the list of readings will be provided in class.
The student's final course grade will be computed on the basis of letter grades assigned for the journal, final exam, course project and class participation. Satisfactory fulfillment of the minimum course requirements as outlined in the syllabus is considered "Good work" and will constitute a grade of B (see "GRADING SCALE", p. 6). A grade of A for work demonstrating "Outstanding achievement" or a grade of A- for "Excellent achievement" reflecting "thorough knowledge of the course materials" will be assigned only when both the intellectual quality and the originality and/or creativity of the student's work far surpass expectations reflected in the minimum course requirements.
Final exam 25%
Class participation 20%
In fairness to students who turn in assignments on time, late papers will be penalized. The earned grade will be lowered one grade level (e.g., from A- to B+; from B to B-) for each day that the assignment is late.
Each student is expected to complete all coursework by the end of the term. A grade of incomplete [ I ] will be assigned only when exceptional circumstances warrant.
Listserv : firstname.lastname@example.org
Each student will be subscribed to the class listserv. The listserv will be used for online discussions as well asfor distribution of lecture notes and other, course-related materials.
Class participation will constitute 20% of the final grade. It will be a composite grade computed on the basis of
1) participation in discussions and activities during class sessions; and
2) participation on the class listserv.
Assigned readings, class discussions and small group activities are intended to create a learning community and to promote critical literacy skills among all students -- skills of reading, writing, listening, speaking and thinking. The success of these activities will require substantive and meaningful contributions from all students. Each student's class participation grade will be assessed on the following criteria:
2. Regular and voluntary contributions to class discussions.
3. Ability to tie observations to the ideas developed in the readings, to the contributions of other discussants and/or to ideas presented in other classes.
4. Contribution of observations or ideas that are original or diverge from commonly accepted notions.
5. Continuous demonstration of respect for the ideas, opinions and feelings of all members of the class.
Each student will be expected to participate regularly in discussions on the class listserv. Listserv discussions should focus on (but need not be limited to) the central topic(s) of readings assigned for each class session. Prior to each class session, each student will be expected to provide at least two commentaries on the ideas expressed in readings assigned for that session. This commentaries should demonstrate familiarity with the articles in question and may consist of discussion of a pertinent point raised in one or more of the articles; a specific question regarding the intent of a particular passage or reading; or a thoughtful response to the comment(s) and/or question(s) of another student. Please note, however, that the simple expression of agreement with either the author of an article or with the comments of another student without elaboration will not constitute fulfillment of the requirement.
The listserv will be set up immediately following the first class session. Because it may take several days for the listserv to become fully operational, class members will not be expected to meet this requirement until they have received notification from the instructor.
Dorothy Lambert observes that a journal is not only a record kept for one's self, but a record of one's self. It is, she says, "a place to fail. That is, a place to try, experiment, test one's wings. For the moment, judgment, criticism, evaluation are suspended; what matters is the attempt, not the success of the attempt. In a journal one practices the lines before going onstage [sic]" (quoted in Ken Macrorie, Writing to be read, 2nd ed. Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden, 1976, p. 151).
Journals are to be organized chronologically by date of entry. Although students are encouraged to keep the journal in a spiral notebook or a bound composition book, it is acceptable to keep it as a series of computer files. Each entry is to be dated and should carry a short heading that indicates the type of entry (summary of assigned reading; summary of outside reading; abstract; class commentary; class notes; small group notes; essay; etc.). Some students have used marginal notes or symbols to indicate different types of entry, while others have used magic markers to create a color-coded identification scheme.
Because journals are personal and therefore unique, the content of each journal will vary and will reflect the intellectual effort put forth by the individual student. For this reason, journals will not be graded on the "correctness" of the ideas or thoughts recorded therein. Instead, each journal will be evaluated on the basis of completeness and the intellectual effort it reflects.
Required journal entries
There is a minimum set of entries that must be included to receive a grade of B. The following entries are required of all journals:
• An informative abstract, discussion or summary of each assigned reading. Each entry for an assigned reading must include full citation information.
• Assignments as indicated in the syllabus.
• Commentary on the major points and/or ideas presented in lectures and in-class discussions for each class session.
• Commentary on small group activities.
Optional journal entries
To earn a grade of A or A-, a student's journal must contain evidence of “extraordinary effort” consisting of additional, optional entries beyond the required entries. Examples of optional materials may include, but are not necessarily limited to:
• Extended discussion of or commentary on an assigned reading, which may include elaboration of or substantive challenges to the argument presented in the reading.
• Abstracts of outside readings that are relevant to but are not part of course assignments. An abstract, discussion or summary of any of the articles listed under "Recommended readings" will be treated as an outside reading.
• Discussion of related out-of-class observations or activities drawn from the student's personal life or work experiences.
Note on journal entries
While a student may find it convenient to keep class notes in the same notebook with his/her journal, class notes will not be counted as an additional entry.
Grading of journals
Journals will be turned in for review and evaluation at three points during the semester: an initial review following Session 4 that will identify any areas of misunderstanding or miscommunication regarding journal format or contents; an intermediate review following Session 10 to verify that the student is on track; and a final review conducted at the time that the course project is turned in. At each review, a letter grade will be assigned based on the criteria provided below. The final journal grade (30% of the course grade) will be computed as an average of the three review grades. Each journal will be evaluated on the following criteria:
1. Completeness (inclusion of all required materials).
2. Evidence of active intellectual involvement with the subject content of the course.
3. Evidence of additional effort (inclusion of optional contents other than required materials and class notes).
The final exam, which accounts for 25% of the student's final course grade, will be a take-home exam consisting of not more than six (6) essay questions. The exam will be distributed via the listserv on Monday, 1 December 2003 and are to be turned in at the start of class on Tuesday, 9 December 2003.
Creation of a portfolio is intended to demonstrate the student's understanding of the basic principles of organization as they apply to the management of access to data / information / knowledge. The portfolio, which accounts for 25% of the student's final course grade, will serve as a record of the student's intellectual development across the semester and should therefore be designed to demonstrate increasing proficiency with and understanding of the concepts of categorization and classification and how they impact organizational structure. Portfolios are to be submitted for evaluation no later than 5:00 p.m. on Friday, 12 December 2003.
Content of the portfolio
Intellectual development is relative and has meaning only within a prescribed context. The demonstration of intellectual development will therefore require the student to include not only the completed product(s) that indicate his/her final achievement, but also first attempts, rough drafts, revisions, etc., that track the student's progress across the semester. Because each student's previous experiences, personal interests and intellectual expectations will be unique, he/she will select those assignments, journal entries, abstracts, and/or essays that best convey his/her own sense of intellectual development.
Each portfolio will include, at a minimum, the following materials:
1. A title page.
2. A critical self-evaluation of the student's personal, intellectual and practical development across the semester.
3. An introductory essay outlining the structure of the portfolio, the criteria employed to select materials and the principles according to which the content was organized.
4. A cover sheet and a brief introductory essay for each entry in the portfolio. The essay will describe both the relevance of the entry in demonstrating the student's development and its relation to other materials included in the portfolio.
5. One set of entries that indicates the student's increasing proficiency at writing abstracts.
6. One set of entries that indicates the student's understanding of the function of categorization/classification in the organization and/or communication of information, either at the individual cognitive level or within a social, cultural or domain-related realm.
7. A summary essay reflecting on the role of representational systems in facilitating access to resources in the electronic environment.
8. An index to the conceptual content of the portfolio, including appropriate lead-in vocabulary and syndetic references.
Evaluation of the portfolio
Portfolios will be evaluated according to the following criteria:
1. Inclusion of required elements and minimum entries.
2. Inclusion of additional entries.
3. Presentation (neatness and appearance of packaging, labeling, etc.).
2. Criteria employed in the selection of materials to be included.
3. Organization of materials.
4. Evidence of individual intellectual development.
5. Depth and/or breadth of materials selected.
6. Justification for each item or set of items included in the portfolio.
7. Critical self-evaluation.
8. Quality of the index, including the use of lead-in vocabulary and syndetic references.
Schedule of Assignments
Journal Review I September 23 (Session 4)
Journal Review I November 4 (Session 10)
Journal Review III December 12
Take-home exam December 9
Portfolio December 12
As Dr. Alice Robbin observes, there is more to avoiding plagiarism than simply citing a reference. To aid students both in recognizing plagiarism and in avoiding the appearance of plagiarism, Indiana University's Writing Tutorial Services has prepared a short guide entitled "Plagiarism: what it is and how to recognize and avoid it". This guide is available at:
It provides explicit examples of plagiarism and offers strategies for avoiding it. Each student should be familiar with this document and use it as a guide when completing assignments.
Dr. Robbin offers tips on avoiding inadvertent plagiarism that she gleaned from Ralph Brower, a colleague at Florida State University:
1. Whenever you "borrow" material, from any resource whatsoever, for inclusion in a document you are writing, you must provide a footnote, endnote or parenthetical reference (and bibliographic citation) identifying the original resource. If you have any questions about how to do this, review the guidelines set out in the APA Style Manual.
2. Any time that you quote any resource verbatim, you must enclose the text in quotation marks and identify the original resource, as indicated in (1).
3. Ideas that you paraphrase must also be attributed, as indicated in (1), even if you do not quote the original source verbatim.
Policies on academic dishonesty have been established by Indiana University and the School of Library and Information Science. These policies, which have been set out in the Code of Student Ethics, will be adhered to in this class. Any assignment that contains plagiarized material or indicates any other form of academic dishonesty will receive, at a minimum, a grade of F. A second instance will result in an automatic grade of F for the course. Penalties may be harsher depending upon the severity of the offense.
If you are a student with a special need, please feel free to discuss it with your lab instructor or with either of the lecturers.
All grades will be assigned according to the SLIS Grading Policy for Master's and Specialist Level Students. This policy was defined by student and faculty members of SLIS's Curriculum Steering Committee and was adopted by the Faculty of the School of Library and Information Science, Indiana University, on November 11, 1996, as an aid in evaluation of student performance:
|A||4.0||Outstanding achievement. Student performance demonstrates full command of the course materials and evinces a high level or originality and/or creativity that far surpasses expectations|
|A-||3.7||Excellent achievement. Student performance demonstrates thorough knowledge of the course materials and exceed course expectations by completing all requirements in a superior manner|
|B+||3.3||Very good work. Student performance demonstrates above-average comprehension of the course materials and exceeds course expectations on all tasks as defined in the course syllabus|
|B||3.0||Good work. Student performance meets designated course expectations, demonstrates understanding of the course materials and performs at an acceptable level.|
|B-||2.7||Marginal work. Student performance demonstrates incomplete understanding of course materials.|
|Unsatisfactory work. Student performance demonstrates incomplete and inadequate understanding of course materials.|
|Unacceptable work. Coursework performed at this level will not count toward the MLS or MIS degree. For the course to count toward the degree, the student must repeat the course with a passing grade.|
|F||0.0||Failing. Student may continue in program only with permission of the Dean.|
NOTE: For each class session, the following schedule includes a topic statement, a list of required readings and a description of the assignment (if any) that is to be included in the student's journal. Required readings are listed in the order in which they should be read. The journal assignment and all required readings are to be completed before the scheduled class session. Recommended readings are grouped loosely by general topic; and, within each topic, individual readings are listed alphabetically. Recommended readings may be read in any order at any point across the semester.
Hunter, E. J. (2002). Classification made simple, 2nd ed. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Zerubavel, E. (1991) The fine line: making distinctions in everyday life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Session 1 -- September 2
Topic: Introduction to organization.
Jacob, E.K., & Albrechtsen, H. (1999). When essence becomes function: post-structuralist implications for an ecological theory of organisational classification systems. In T.D. Wilson & D.K. Allen (Eds.), Exploring the contexts of information behaviour. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, 13-15 August 1998, Sheffield, UK (pp. 519-534). London: Taylor Graham.
Macrorie, K. (1976). Chapter 16: Keeping a journal. Writing to be read, 2nd ed. (p. 147-158). Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden.
Session 2 -- September 9
Required readings for Session 2:
Borko, H., & Bernier, C. L. (1975). Characteristics and types of abstracts. In Abstracting concepts and methods (p. 3-24). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Journal assignment for Session 2:
Review the class handout on writing abstracts. Read the three "Articles for abstracting" (below). In your journal, write both an indicative and an informative abstract for each article. Bring a copy of your abstracts to class.
Articles for abstracting:
David, C., et al. (1995). Indexing as problem solving: a cognitive approach to consistency. In T. Kinney (Ed.), Forging New Partnerships in Information: Converging Technologies: Proceedings of the 58th ASIS Annual Meeting (p. 49-55). Medford, NJ: Information Today for the American Society for Information Science.
Tibbo, H, R. 1992. Abstracting across the disciplines: a content analysis of abstracts from the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities with implications for abstracting standards and online information retrieval. Library & Information Science Research, 14, 31-56.
Randi, J. (1996). Investigating miracles, Italian-style. Scientific American (February 1996), 136.
Fidel, R. (1986). Writing abstracts for free-text searching. Journal of Documentation, 42(1), 11-21.
Lancaster, F. W. (1998). Abstracts: types and functions (p. 94-106). Writing the abstract (p. 107-126). In Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice, 2nd ed. . Champaign, IL: Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois.
Session 3 -- September 16
Topic: Data, information and knowledge.
Required readings for Session 3:
Shannon, C.E. & Weaver, W. (1963/1949). The mathematical theory of communication (pp. 31-35 only). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Buckland, M. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42, 351-360. Available at: http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~buckland/thing.html
Reddy, M.J. (1979). The conduit metaphor -- a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (p. 284-297 only). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphorical systematicity: highlighting and hiding. In Metaphors we live by (pp. 10-13). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Agre, P.E. (1995). Institutional circuitry: thinking about the forms and uses of information. Information technology and libraries, 14(4). 225-230. Available at: http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/circuitry.html
Brown, J.S. & Duguid, P. (2000). Introduction (pp. 1-9). Chapter 1: Limits to information (pp. 11-33). In The social life of information. Boston: Harvard University Press.
Buckland, M. (1998). What is a “Document”?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(9), 804-809. Preprint available at: http://sims.berkeley.edu/~buckland/whatdoc.html
Day, R.E. (2000). The "conduit metaphor" and the nature and politics of information studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(9), 805-811.
Session 4 -- September 23
First journal review
Topic: Augmentation. Representation.
Required readings for Session 4:
Engelbart, D. C. (1963). A conceptual framework for the augmentation of man's intellect. In P. W. Howerton (Ed.), Vistas in information handling (p. 1-29). Washington, D.C.: Spartan Books.
Barsalou, L. W. (1992). Representation. In Cognitive Psychology: an overview for cognitive scientists (p. 52-56 only). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCloud, S. (1994). Understanding comics: the invisible art (p. 26-41). New York: HarperCollins.
Schank, R., and Kass, A. (1988). Knowledge representation in people and machines. In U. Eco, M. Santambrogio and P. Violi (Eds.), Meaning and mental representation (p. 181-200). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Goode, E. (2000). How culture molds habits of thought. NYTimes.com, 8 August 2000.
Jacob, E.K. (2001). The everyday world of work: two approaches to the investigation of classification in context. Journal of Documentation 57(1), 76-99.
Roszak, T. (1998). Evolution and the transcendence of mind. Perspectives 1(2). Available at: http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=274 [Originally published in Network, May 15, 1996.]
Solomon, P. (2000). Exploring structuration in knowledge organization: implications for managing the tension between stability and dynamism. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 254-260). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.
Arnheim, R. (1969). Words in their place. In Visual thinking (p. 226-253). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Brown, R. (1958). How shall a thing be called? Psychological Review 65, 14-21.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought (p. 3-36). New York: Basic Books.
Session 5 -- September 30
Topic: Cognitive Organization of Information. Part I.
Mental models. Scripts, schemas and frames
Required readings for Session 5:
Rumelhart, D. E. (1984). Schemata and the cognitive system. In Wyer and Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition, vol. 1 (p. 161-188). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner and A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (p. 7-14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wurman, R. S. (1989). The understanding business. In Information anxiety: what to do when information doesn't tell you what you need to know (p. 51-82). New York: Doubleday. 1989.
Peat, F. D. (1993). Science as story. In C. Simpkinson and A. Simpkinson (Eds.), Sacred stories (p. 53-62). San Francisco: Harper.
Journal assignment for Session 5:
Visit any local grocery store and then create a script for "a trip to the grocery store”. What problems, if any, do you face when attempting to construct a single script that will account for all aspects of the grocery store experience? Bring your grocery store script to class.
Bower, B. (1996). Fighting stereotype stigma. ScinceNewsOnline (June 29, 1996). Available at: http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arch/6_29_96/bob1.htm
DeCandido, G. A. (1999). Bibliographic good vs. evil in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. American Libraries (September), 44-47.
Engle, M. (1998). Remythologizing work: the role of archetypal images in the humanization of librarianship. Available at: http://urislib.library.cornell.edu/archetype.html
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63, 81-87.
Session 6 -- October 7
Topic: Cognitive Organization of Information. Part II.
Required readings for Session 6:
Zerubavel, E. (1991) The fine line: making distinctions in everyday life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hammond, T.H. (1993). Toward a general theory of hierarchy: books, bureaucrats, basketball tournaments and the administrative structure of the nation-state. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 3(1), 120-145.
Jacob, E. K. (1991). Classification and categorization: drawing the line. In B. H. Kwasnik and R. Fidel (Eds.), Advances in classification research, vol. 2 (p. 67-83). Washington D.C.: American Society for Information Science.
Journal assignment for Session 6:
Return to the local grocery store that you visited for Assignment 5. In your journal, write an analysis of the store's organization that focuses on: (1) the explicit and/or implicit categories indicated by the organization of merchandise; (2) why you think this particular organizational structure was adopted; and (3) how this organizational scheme accords with a typical shopper's mental model of a grocery store. Bring your analysis of the store's organization to class.
Jacob, E.K. (2000). The legacy of pragmatism: implications for knowledge organization in a pluralistic universe. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 16-22). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.
Jacob, E.K., & Albrechtsen, H. (1997). Constructing reality: the role of dialogue in the development of classificatory structures. In I. C. McIlwaine (Ed.), Knowledge organization for information retrieval: Proceedings of the 6th International Study Conference on Classification Research, 14-16 June 1997, London (pp. 42-50). The Hague, Netherlands: International Federation for Documentation.
Parsons, J., and Wand, Y. (1997). Choosing classes in conceptual modeling. Communications of the ACM 40 (6), 63-69.
Tesar, P. (1991). The other side of types. In G. Rockcastle (Ed.) Midgård Monographs of Architectural Theory and Criticism, Number 2 (p. 165-175).
Thompson, B., and Thompson, B. (1991). Overturning the category bucket. Byte, 16 (1), 249-255.
Ward, T.B. (1993). Processing biases, knowledge and context in category formation. In G.V. Nakamura, D.L. Medin & R. Taraban (Eds.), Categorization by humans and Machines. Psychology of learning and motivation vol. 29, (pp. 257-281). San Diego: Academic Press.
Session 7 -- October 14
Topic: Systematic Organization. Part I.
Required readings for Session 7:
Buckland, M. (1999) Vocabulary as a central concept in library and information science. In T. Arpanac et al. (Eds.), Digital libraries: interdisciplinary concepts, challenges, and opportunities. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science [CoLIS3] 23-26 May 1999, Dubrovnik, Croatia, (p 3-12. Zagreb: Lokve. Available at: http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~buckland/colisvoc.htm
Wellisch, H.H. (1995). Indexing languages: natural and controlled (p. 214-217). Indexing from A to Z, 2nd ed. New York: H.W. Wilson.
Soergel, D. (1985). Chapter 12: Terminological control (p. 213-222). Chapter 13: Index language functions (p. 225-249). Organizing information , San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Journal assignment for Session 7:
1) Read the following selection from Lancaster:
Lancaster, F. W. (1998). Natural language versus controlled vocabulary: some general considerations. In Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice, 2nd ed. (p. 227-232). Champaign, IL: Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois.
2) Compare the advantages and disadvantages of natural language and controlled vocabulary.
Ambroziak, J., and Woods, W.A. (1988). Natural language technology in precision content retrieval. Palo Alto, CA: Sun Microsystems Laboratories, Available at: http://www.sun.com/research/techrep/1998/smli_tr-98-69.pdf
Bowker, L. (2000). A corpus-based investigation of variation in the organization of medical terms. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 71-76). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.
Broughton, V. (2000). Structural, linguistic and mathematical elements in indexing languages and search engines: implications for the use of index languages in electronic and non-LIS environments. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 206-212). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.
Fabris, P. (1999). You think tomaytoes, I think tomahtoes. CIO WebBusiness (August 1, 1999). Available at: http://www.cio.com/archive/webbusiness/040199_nort_content.html
Green, R. (1992). Insights into classification from the cognitive sciences: Ramifications for index languages. In N. J. Williamson and M. Hudson (Eds.), Classification research for knowledge representation and organization (p. 215-222). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Huber, J. and Gillaspy, M.L. (2000). An examination of the discourse of homosexuality as reflected in medical vocabularies, classificatory structures, and information resources. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 219-223). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.
Session 8 -- October 21
Topic: Systematic Organization. Part II.
Introduction to Classification
Required readings for Session 8:
Shera, J. H. (1965/1957). Pattern, structure, and conceptualization in classification for information retrieval. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (p. 112-128). Hamden, CT: Archon.
Bliss, H. E. (1934). The problem of classification for libraries (p. 1-20). The principles of classification for libraries (p. 21-46). In The Organization of knowledge in libraries and the subject approach to books . New York: H. W. Wilson.
Jacob, E. K. (1994). Classification and crossdisciplinary communication: breaching the boundaries imposed by classificatory structure. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (p. 101-108). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.
Williamson, N. (1998). An interdisciplinary world and discipline based classification. In W. M. el Hadi, J. Maniez, & S. A. Pollitt (eds.), Structures and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Fifth International ISKO Conference, 25-29 August 1998, Lille, France (p. 116-124). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag
Journal assignment for Session 8:
Analyze the organizational structure of Yahoo! Then. using the search facility on Yahoo!, do a search for the term "classification". Where does “classification” occur in the hierarchy of classes/categories? How does the organization of Yahoo! facilitate or impede your search? Could you have found relevant classes/categories by browsing? Why? Why not?
Hunter, E. (2000). Do we still need classification. In R. Marcella and A. Maltby (Eds.), The future of classification (p. 1-18). Aldershot: Gower.
Shera, J. H. (1965/1950). Classification as the basis of bibliographic organization. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (p. 77-96). Hamden, CT: Archon.
Shera, J. H. (1965/1961). The dignity and advancement of Bacon. In Libraries and the organization of knowledge (p. 143-150). Hamden, CT: Archon.
Studer, P.A. (1977). Classification as a general systems construct. In B.M. Fry & C.A. Shepherd (Comp.), Information management in the 1980's: Proceedings of the[40th] ASIS Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, September 26-October 1, 1977 (pp. 67, G6-G14, A1-A9). White Plains, NY: Knowledge Industry for American Society for Information Science.
Session 9 -- October 28
Topic: Systematic Organization. Part III.
Enumerative Classification Schemes
Required readings for Session 9:
Hunter, E. J. (2002). Classification made simple, 2nd ed. (pp. 40-58, 70-81, 86-88). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Olson, H. (1994). Universal models: a history of the organization of knowledge. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (p. 72-80). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.
Dewey, M. (1972/1927). Decimal classification and relativ [sic] index. In A. F. Painter (Ed.), Reader in classification and descriptive cataloging (p. 81-86). NCR Microcard Editions.
Pietris, M. K. (1990). Library of Congress classification. In B. G. Bengtson and J. S. Hill (Eds.), Classification of library materials: current and future potential for providing access (p. 60-80). New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.
Buchanan, B. (1979). Theory of library classification. (p. 7-44). London: Clive Bingley.
Chan, L.M. and Hodges, T.L. (2000). The Library of Congress Classification. In R. Marcella and A. Maltby (Eds.), The future of classification (p. 105-128). Aldershot: Gower.
Dewey, M. (1972/1876). Catalogs and cataloging. In A. F. Painter (Ed.), Reader in classification and descriptive cataloging (p. 7-14). NCR Microcard Editions.
Donovan, J. M. (1991). Patron expectations about collocation: measuring the difference between the psychologically real and the really real. Cataloging and classification quarterly, 13 (2), 23-41.
Frohmann, B. (1994). The social construction of knowledge organization: the case of Melvil Dewey. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Knowledge organization and quality management: Advances in knowledge organization, vol. 4 (p. 109-117). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.
Mann, T. (Accessed 2000.01.06). Height shelving threat to the nation’s libraries. Available at: http://www.lisnews.com/misc/Height_Shelving_Threat.html [Public comments available at: http://www.lisnews.com/article.php3?sid=20000815200405 ]
Session 10 -- November 4
Second journal review
Topic: Systematic Organization. Part IV.
Faceted Classification Schemes.
Required readings for Session 10:
Hunter, E. J. (2002). Classification made simple, 2nd ed. (pp. 4-39, 59-69, 82-85). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Music Library Association. Working Group on Faceted Access to Music. (1994). Discussion paper: Faceted access to music: possibilities and ramifications. Available at: http://www.music.indiana.edu/tech_s/mla/wgfam.dis
Sanders, G. L. (1995). Introduction to data modeling concepts. In Data modeling (p. 16-38). Danvers, Mass.: Boyd Frasier.
Bearman, D., and Peterson, T. (1991). Retrieval requirements of faceted thesauri in interactive information systems. In S. M. Humphrey and B. H. Kwasnik (Eds.), Advances in classification research, vol. 1 (p. 9-23). Medford, NJ: Learned Information.
Foskett, A.C. (2000). The future of faceted classification. In R. Marcella and A. Maltby (Eds.), The future of classification (p. 69-80). Aldershot: Gower.
Jacob, E.K., & Priss, U. (In press). Non-traditional indexing structures for the management of electronic resources. In H. Albrechtsen and J.-E. Mai (Eds.), Advances in classification research, vol. 10. Medford, NJ: Information Today for the American Society for Information Science.
Maniez, J. (1991). Are classifications still relevant in databases? In G. Negrini, T. Farnesi and D. Benediktsson (Eds.), Documentary languages and databases (pp. 120-129). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.
Priss, U. (2000). Comparing classification systems using facets. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 170-175). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.
Priss, U., and Jacob, E.K. (1999). Utilizing faceted structures for information systems design. In L. Woods (Ed.), Knowledge, Creation, Organization and Use: Proceedings of the 62nd ASIS Annual Meeting (pp. 203-212). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
Ranganathan, S. R. (1962). Canons of classification. In Elements of library classification (p. 45-70). Bombay: Asia Publishing House.
Soergel, D. (1985). Chapter 14: Index language structure I: conceptual. In Organizing information (pp. 251-287). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Vickery, B. C. (1966). Introduction to faceted classification (pp. 9-18). Faceted classification schemes. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers School of Library Service.
Williamson, N., and McIlwaine, I. C. (1994). A feasibility study on the restructuring of the Universal Decimal Classification into a fully faceted classification system. In H. Albrechtsen and S. Oernager (Eds.), Advances in Knowledge Organization, vol. 4 (pp. 406-413). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.
Session 11 -- November 11
Topic: Systematic Organization. Part V.
Precoordinate Indexing Systems and Subject Headings
Required readings for Session 11:
Foskett, A.C. (1996). Chapter 8: Alphabetical subject headings: Cutter to Austin (pp. 123-146); Chapter 23: Library of Congress Subject Headings (pp. 336-347). The subject approach to information, 5th ed. London: Library Association Publishing.
Taylor, A. G. (1995). On the subject of subjects. Journal of Academic Librarianship 21(6), 484-491.
Drabenstott, K.M., Simcox, S., & Fenton, E.G. (1999). End-user understandings of subject headings in library catalogs. Library Resources & Technical Services 43(3), 140-160.
Dykstra, M. (1988). LC subject headings disguised as a thesaurus. Library Journal 113(4), 42-46.
Dykstra, M. (1988). Can subject headings be saved? Library Journal, 113, 55-58.
Journal assignment for Session 11:
• Read the following article: Bush, V. (1996/1945). As we may think. Interactions, 3(2), 35-46. Originally published in Atlantic Monthly, 176 (1), 101-108. Available at: http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/computer/bushf.htm
• Write indicative and informative abstracts for the Bush article.
• Assuming that Bush's article is a monograph, use the print format of Library of Congress Subject Headings (also known as LCSH or "the red books") to identify three or more subject headings that represent the intellectual content of this work. Which of these subject headings would lead to the single "most appropriate" representation of Bush's work?
• Using electronic summaries of DDC (available at http://www.tnrdlib.bc.ca/dewey.html or at http://www.oclc.org/dewey/about/ddc_21_summaries.htm ) and LCC (available at: http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/lcco/lcco.html), identify the one class in each system that best accords with your "most appropriate" subject heading.
Holmes, N. (2001). The KWIC and the dead: a lesson in computing history. Computer 34(1), 144, 142-143.
Kilgour, F. G. (1998). Origins of coordinate searching. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(4), 340-348.
Svenonius, E., et al. (1992). Automation of chain indexing. In N. J. Williamson and M. Hudon (Eds.), Classification research for knowledge representation and organization (p. 351-364). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Session 12 -- November 18
Topic: Systematic Organization. Part VI.
Postcoordinate Indexing Systems and Thesauri
Required readings for Session 12:
Hunter, E. J. (2002). Classification made simple, 2nd ed. (pp. 89-136). Aldershot: Gower.
Spiteri, L.F. (1999). The essential elements of faceted thesauri. Cataloguing and Classification Quarterly 28(4), 31-47.
Batty, D. (1998). WWW -- Wealth, Weariness or Waste: Controlled vocabulary and thesauri in support of online information access. D-Lib Magazine, November 1998. Available at: http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/edoc/aw/d-lib/dlib/november98/11batty.html
Williamson, N.J. (2000). Thesauri in the digital age: stability and dynamism in their development and use. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 268-274). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.
Journal assignment for Session 12:
For the article by Vannevar Bush (see Session 11 for details):
• Provide two sets of terms that could be used to index the Bush article:
1) indexing by extraction -- generate a set of key words taken from the text and/or the abstract;
2) indexing by assignment -- using the ASIS thesaurus, identify a set of postcoordinate descriptors. The electronic version of the ASIS thesaurus is available at
• Bring to class your two sets of index terms as well as the abstracts, list of subject heading(s) and DDC and LCC class numbers from your journal assignment for Session 11.
Session 13 -- November 25
Topic: Systematic Organization. Part VI.
Readings for Session 13:
Aitchison, J., and Gilchrist, A. (1987). Planning and design of thesauri (p. 3-10). Vocabulary control (p. 12-22). Structure: basic relationships and classification (p. 34-60). In Thesaurus construction: a practical manual, 2nd ed. London: Aslib.
Eddison, B., and Batty, D. (1988). Database design: words, words, words -- descriptors, subject headings, index terms. Database 11 (6), 109-113. [This is the first of two related articles and serves as an introduction to the following article by David Batty.]
Batty, D. (1989). Thesaurus construction and maintenance: a survival kit. Database 12 (1), 13-20.
Journal assignment for Session 13:
Examine three different access tools: LC Subject Headings (the Library of Congress subject heading list in print format, also known as LCSH or "the red books"), the ERIC Thesaurus (both in print format and online) and The Reader's Guide (periodical index in print format). Compare and contrast the three tools, paying particular attention to characteristics of the indexing language. Using the guidelines provided via the listserv, analyze the strengths and weaknesses of each access system. Your analysis should be in table format. Bring a copy of your analysis to class.
Calzolari, N. (1988). The dictionary and the thesaurus can be combined. In M. W. Evans (Ed.), Relational models of the lexicon (p. 75-95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson, E. H. (1995). A hypertext interface for a searcher's thesaurus. Available at: http://csdl.tamu.edu/DL95/papers/johncoch/johncoch.html
Riesthuis, G.J.A. (2000). Multilingual subject access and the Guidelines for the extablishment and development of multilingual thesauri. In C. Beghtol, L.C. Howarth and N.J. Williamson, Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: proceedings of the Sixth International ISKO Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada (pp. 131-135). Würzburg, Germany: Ergon Verlag.
Access to online thesauri:
American Society of Indexers. Available at:
Queensland University of Technology. Homepage available at:
Ramsey, M., Chen, H., and Zhu, B. (2001). A collection of visual thesauri for browsing large collections of geographic images. Available at: http://ai.bpa.arizona.edu/~mramsey/papers/visualThesaurus/visualThesaurus.html
December 1 Take-home exam distributed
Session 14 -- December 2
Topic: Representation of Nontextual Materials.
Readings for Session 14:
Chen, H., & Rasmussen, E. (1999). Intellectual access to images. Library Trends 48(2), 291-303.
Krause, M. G. (1988). Intellectual problems of indexing picture collections. Audiovisual Librarian, 14, 73-81.
Layne, S. S. (1994). Some issues in the indexing of images. JASIS, 45(8), 583-588.
Jack, C. (1999). State of the arts: current applications for indexing images. Available at: http://www.slis.ualberta.ca/599/cjack/599.htm
Austin, D. L. (1994). An image is not an object: but it can help. In A. H. Helal and J. W. Weiss (Eds.), Resource sharing: new technologies as a must for universal availability of information, (p. 277-294). Essen: Universitätsbibliothek Essen.
Berinstein, P. (1999). The big picture - Do you see what I see? Image indexing principles for the rest of us. Online 23(2), 85-86, 88.
Gazan, R. (2000). Whose truth? Context and meaning in digital image collections. Available at: http://skipper.gseis.ucla.edu/students/is287a/html/All/Final/rgazan.html
Gombrich, E. H. (1992). The visual image. Scientific American, 221, 86-96.
Grund, A. (1993). ICONCLASS: On subject analysis of iconographic representations of works of art. Knowledge organization, 20, 20-29.
ICONCLASS Home Page. (1999). Available at: http://www.iconclass.nl/
O'Connor, B. C. (1996). Pictures, aboutness, and user-generated descriptors. Available at: http://www.asis.org/SIG/SIGVIS/b_oconnor.html
Session 15 -- December 9
Take-home exam due
Topic: Organizing Digital Collections.
Hypertext. Metadata. The Semantic Web.
Readings for Session 15:
Organizing Digital Collections
Coffman, S. (1999). Building earth's largest library: driving into the future. Searcher, 7(3). Available at: http://www.infotoday.com/searcher/mar99/coffman.htm
Levy, D. M. (1995). Cataloguing in the digital order: Paper regarding the future of cataloguing, from the Digital Libraries 95 conference. Available at: http://csdl.tamu.edu/DL95/papers/levy/levy.html
Dillon, A. (1996). Myths, misconceptions, and an alternative perspective on information usage and the electronic medium. In J.-F. Rouet et al. (Eds.), Hypertext and cognition (p.25-42). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Milstead, J., & Feldman, S. (1999). Metadata: cataloging by any other name …. Online (January 1999). Available at: http://www.onlinemag.net/OL1999/milstead1.html
Milstead, J., & Feldman, S. (1999). Metadata projects and standards. Online (January 1999). Available at: http://www.onlinemag.net/OL1999/milstead1.html#projects
Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J. & Lassila, O. (2001). The Semantic Web. Scientific American (May 2001).
Organizing Digital Collections
Buchanan, L. (1999). The smartest little company in America. Inc. (January 1999), 48 ff.
Chan, L. M. (1990). Subject analysis tools online: The challenge ahead. Information Technology and Libraries 9(3), 258-262.
Denenberg, R. (1996). Structuring and indexing the Internet. Available at: http://lcweb.loc.gov/z3950/agency/papers/italy.html
Filman, R. E., & Pant, S. (1998). Searching the Internet. IEEE Internet Computing (Aug.). Abstract with access to html and pdf verions of this document are available at: http://www.computer.org/internet/ic1998/w4021abs.htm
Frank, D.G., et al. (1999). The changing nature of reference and information services: predictions and realities. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 39(2), 151-157.
Keller, L. (November 28, 2000). Looking it up: not an endangered career. CNN.com. Available at: http://www.cnn.com/2000/CAREER/trends/11/28/librarians/index.html
Libicki, M., et al. (2000). Knowledge organization and digital libraries. Appendix C in Scaffolding the new Web: standards and standards policy for the digital economy (p. 75-90). Rand. Available at: http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1215/
Simpson, R., et al. (1996). 50 years after "As we may think": The Brown/MIT Vannevar Bush Symposium. Interactions, 3(2), 47-67.
Nelson, T. H. (1994). Xanadu: document interconnection enabling re-use with automatic author credit and royalty accounting. Information Services & Use, 14, 255-265.
Project Xanadu. Available at: http://www.xanadu.coml
Rheingold, H. (1996). Life in cyberspace: the road to Xanadu has been a slow go. Newsday (11-17-1996), A66.
Saletan, W. (1998). Searching for Xanadu. Swarthmore College Bulletin, 96(3), 16-19.
Baca, Murtha (Ed.). (1998). Introduction to metadata: pathways to digital information. Table of contents available at: http://www.getty.edu/gri/standard/intrometadata/toc.htm Also available at: http://www.getty.edu/research/institute/standards/intrometadata/index.html [This book is available in its entirety online. It includes: Defining metadata by Anne J. Gilliland-Swetland; Metadata and the World Wide Web by Tony Gill; Crosswalks, metadata, mapping and interoperability by Willy Cromwell-Kessler; and A crosswalk of metadata standards. This book also contains a section entitled Acronyms with selected web addresses that provides links to various metadata resources. You may also want to take at look at the Glossary.]
Berners-Lee, T. (1996). The world wide web: past, present and future. Available at: http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/1996/ppf.html
Buckland, M., & et al. (1999). Mapping entry vocabulary to unfamiliar metadata vocabularies. D-Lib Magazine 5(1). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january99/buckland/01buckland.html
Lagoze, C. (1997). From static to dynamic surrogates: resource discovery in the digital age. D-Lib Magazine (June 1997). Available at: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/june97/06lagoze.html
Lassila, O. (1998). Web metadata: a matter of semantics. IEEE Internet Computing, 2(4), 30-37.
Vellucci, S.L. (1997). Options for organizing electronic resources: the coexistence of metadata. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, 24(1). Available at: http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Oct-97/vellucci.htm
December 12 -- 5:00 pm
Third journal review