Jimmie Lundgren wrote : "I wanted to mention that in our Marston Science Library studies have been done using the ILS to record usage of items that had to be re-shelved but were not checked out. "
Which is an important bit of information, seems to me. Which was the only point I was making in my remark. (Well, that and I'm tired of leaders mouthing platitudes.) As Tim and Kyle have pointed out as well, the distinction between use and circulation of materials is important. (Although why Tim needs an MLS to validate this observation escapes me.)
Jimmie also wrote: "I also wanted to highlight the importance of fully cataloging storage collections . . . Our pre-1976 documents are now the target of a major cataloging project . . . "
Wow, that's nice to read about. I've often wondered about circ statistics for unused older materials and wondered how much better cataloging would affect the circulation or use of those materials. Back in the old days, we, as a profession, used to routinely under-describe and under-analyze materials. Some of the reason was probably philosophical, but I think a lot it was based on the physical limitations of card or book catalogs. As Jimmie wrote, Hooray and Happy Friday.
Daniel
-------------
Daniel CannCasciato
Head of Cataloging
Central Washington University Library
400 E. University Way
Ellensburg, WA 98926-7548
dcc_at_cwu.edu
Received on Fri Oct 01 2010 - 11:55:33 EDT