Resources

What resources did we consult? (include a descriptive and evaluative annotation, focusing primarily on the critical evaluation)
Ronda's articles:

Everhart examines the types of problems encountered by children using the online catalogue as a tool to seek curriculum-related materials: framing searches using Boolean logic; and the constraints of controlled vocabulary. Hatcher’s study revealed that standardized subject headings may use vocabulary beyond the level of the children using the catalogue; thus, subject headings that reflect the vocabulary used in school are needed. This article cautions presuming that subject headings which come through pre-processed materials will fit the needs of the users, and suggests school librarians add more “user-friendly” terms into the subject curriculum field of the MARC record.
 * Everhart, N. & Hatcher, A. M. (2005). How relevant are standardized subject headings to school curricula? //Knowledge Quest//. 33 (4), 37-39.** **doi: 852029641**

School library automation has evolved to produce sophisticated systems which allow the user to access a variety of media types held in the school library: the local area network (LAN), the wide area network (WAN), and WWW, from any place at anytime. Anderson discusses other innovations which appear capable of enhancing school library network interconnectivity and capabilities. The article predicts the now current capabilities of library automation systems, including the ability to enhance bibliographic records in OPAC with tables of contents, book jackets, etc. It stresses how emerging technology increases the quality and customization of service.
 * Anderson, E. (2000). The future of library automation for schools. //School Libraries in Canada.// 20 (1), 37-38. doi: 55527423**


 * Lexi's Articles:**

Harris states that “OPACs suck” because they are tools that are not meeting user needs. He feels that unless the user is a librarian, catalog users do not need to see MARC records, nor the standard display of information. Harris advocates for an open-source library portal, called Fish4Info that uses a simple format to highlight a book’s summary, cover image, etc. With this software, users are involved in the catalog. This article is relevant as it challenges whether or not what is typical and standard in catalogs is best for users. Harris presents alternative features to consider.
 * Harris, C. (2008). Fishing for information: the next-generation OPAC. //School Library// //Journal,// 2008(1). Retrieved from[| http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6515264.html?q=fishing+for+information]**

Casey opens with comments from the catalog user’s perspective – someone who doesn’t care what goes into creating the perfect catalog because he has different needs from the catalog than the librarian does. He discusses the impact of the emergence of the world wide web on searching; for example, its features made the library catalog appear antiquated, obstructionist, unidirectional, and without a sense of community. Casey describes eighteen attributes that “Catalog 2.0” should offer. This article is relevant as it provides a more progressive view of catalogs. If offers suggestions for a modern catalog design.
 * Casey, M. (2007). Looking toward catalog 2.0. In N. Courtney (Ed//.), Library 2.0 and// //beyond: Innovative technologies and tomorrows users// (p. 15-23). Westport. CT: Libraries Unlimited.**


 * Andrea's Articles:**

The above article outlines an in depth study of a random selection of MARC records to conclude which MARC fields are most commonly used. In summary, fields that are essential for retrieval and identification of the item are most commonly used. Such fields include, the 1XX (personal author main entry), 245 (title proper and other title information), 260 (publication, distribution), 6XX (subject added entries), and fields used for the call number. In my opinion, I would support the heavy use of the 1XX and 245 fields to support the elementary school users. **Connell, T. H. (1991). Techniques to Improve Subject Retrieval in Online Catalogs: Flexible Access to Elements in the Bibliographic Record.** **Information Technology and Libraries,** //**10**//**(2), 87. Retrieved** ** February 20, 2008 ****, from ProQuest Education Journals database. (Document ID: 7051842). ** This brief article simply summarized the effectiveness of searching when a keyword search is performed and matches the personal name and corporate name subject fields. This information is important to our work as it supports the use of these fields if our users are performing keyword searches. What I know about elementary school library users is they most typically search by keyword but rather subject (i.e. dinosaurs) or by series name (i.e. Geronimo Stilton, Goosebumps).
 * Carlyle, A., Timmons, T.E.. (2002). Default record displays in Web-based catalogs.** **The Library Quarterly,** //**72**//**(2), 179-204. Retrieved** **February 20, 2008****, from ProQuest Education Journals database. (Document ID: 119906780).**

A Focus Group Study. Retrieved February, 2008, from http://www.fis.utoronto.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=733&Itemid=379**
 * Luk, A. T. (1996). Evaluating Bibliographic Displays from the Users’ Point of View:

Ms. Annie Luk worked with English and Cantonese focus groups to identify the most important and desired components of an online catalogue. Her study concluded that title, author, subject and summary are the most useful elements in a bibliographic record and that the ISBN is rarely required. Different typefaces are appreciated by most users yet identations are not.


 *  Jillian's articles **


 * Breeding, M. (2007, April). Thinking about your next OPAC. //Computers in Libraries//, //27//****(27), 28-31. Retrieved March 2, 2008, from http://www.librarytechnology.org/ltg-displaytext.pl?RC=12575**

In this article, Marshall Breeding identifies five characteristics that he believes today's generation of library interfaces must have in order to compete with interfaces on the Web: relevance ranking, faceted navigation, search result clustering, breadcrumb trails, and a faster, more comprehensive search environment. If libraries can appeal to tech savvy library users with new and improved interfaces that are both attractive and effective, then Breeding believes that users will have more incentive to use them. This article is informative as well as descriptive and would be useful for those involved in library interface design and those who are looking to purchase a new library interface.

Retrieved March 3, 2008, from http://www.techsource.ala.org/blog/2006/04/how-opacs-suck-part-2-the-checklist-of-shame.html**
 * Schneider, K. (2006). //How OPACs suck, part 2: The checklist of shame//.

As a sequel to her initial article which looks at OPACs' failure to meet the needs of library patrons, Schneider compiles a checklist of necessary features which would make OPACs more effective and efficient. Ironically, all of the features she lists are already available in search engines like Google and Ask.com. Schneider believes that if OPACs are to appeal to catalogue users, they must mimic the features that Google, Ask.com, and others like them have because users have experience using them. If users can transfer the search skills they learn in Google to the library catalogue, then OPACs will be much more effective. Although Schneider's checklist is useful, it is also lengthy so readers will have to sift through the information to develop their own checklist.


 * Minkel, W. (2003, November). A smarter system: Automation software is better than ever--and it even encourages sharing. //School Library Journal//. Retrieved March 2, 2008, from http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA332667.html**

In this article, Walter Minkel celebrates the that fact that school library automation systems have changed significantly over the past ten years. He believes that systems which allow for integration and sharing, web and database searches, centralized cataloguing services, and the generation of specialized reports, provide better service to library patrons. Minkel also realizes that although these features are beneficial, they also come at a price and that additional features means additional costs. In an attempt to look at which automation service provides the best product for the most reasonable amount of money, Minkel provides a chart which looks at various automation software companies, their products and major features, and the price tags that go along with them. The fact that he concludes the article with a list of "Savvy Shopping Tips," allows purchasers to make a knowledge-based decision about the system that will work best for the libraries in their district or school system


 * Schrock, K. (2004, February). //Library automation: A buying guide//. techLEARNING. Retrieved March 2, 2008, from http://www.techlearning.com/showArticle.php?articleID=17602661**

Kathy Schrock's article provides a list of fourteen questions that purchasers should consider before deciding on a new automation system for the libraries in their district or school division. This comprehensive and to-the-point buyer's guide allows purchasers to make an educated choice based on Schrock's fourteen questions, and if followed closely, guarantees that purchasers will choose the system that is a good fit for the libraries in their school divisions or districts.