|
Loading
|
Course: Cataloging and Classification
This course covers (from syllabus):
"Theory and practice of bibliographic control including the study of representative cataloging using Anglo-American Cataloging Rules and Resource Description and Access, machine-based representation using the MARC 21 formats and other standards, and subject analysis and classification using Library of Congress Subject Headings, Dewey Decimal Classification, and Library of Congress Classification, with principle focus on monographs, major media, and electronic resources." Textbooks: Hall-Ellis, Sylvia D. with J. Ann Jerabek and Merrie W. Valliant. Contemporary Cataloging: A Handbook for Practitioners and Students. Oliver, Chris. Introducing RDA: A Guide to the Basics. Chicago, Ill.: American Library Association, 2010. Chan, Lois Mai. Cataloging and Classification: An Introduction. 3rd ed. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 2007. Describing Archives: A Content Standard. 2nd ed. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2007. |
Course# LIS 4070 Instructor: Karen L. Neville, MLIS Department: Library and Information Science |
Improving SEO on Digital Collections
This paper is an article critique of:
Arlitsch, K. and O’Brien, P.S. (2012). Invisible institutional repositories: addressing the low indexing ratios of IRs in Google. Library Hi Tech, 30(1), 60–81. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07378831211213210 Implications for libraries/patrons/technical services If institutional repositories (IRs) adopt one of the publishing industry schemas that Google Scholar (GS) recommends, then indexing ratios will increase substantially. This is critical because more and more academic institutions are developing IRs, digital collections and digital libraries with the ultimate goal of making content widely available. Libraries invest funding, labor, and energy into planning, building, and maintaining their IRs long-term. It is critical for libraries to know how to fully maximize the visibility of their holdings to GS crawlers in order to get the highest academic return on their investment. For example, the authors discuss the effect of citation rates on university rankings. Decreased visibility to GS will severely limit the potential for IRs to contribute to citation rates and positively affect university rankings. 
|
|||
