Running Head: THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 1

The Dewey Decimal Classification Dylan Kuhlman, Stephanie Whitehead LI804XI Emporia State University

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 2

Define: The Dewey Decimal Classification is an information organizational system. It attempts to organize any given collection of written materials. The system groups all knowledge into 10 categories numbered 000 through 900, then subdivides further for each subject, moving from general to specific (McCoppin, 2011). According to the Online Computer Library Center, The DDC is built on sound principles that make it ideal as a general knowledge organization tool: meaningful notation in universally recognized Arabic numerals, well-defined categories, welldeveloped hierarchies, and a rich network of relationships among topics (OCLC, 2003, p.4). The OCLC also notes that DDC has a hierarchical nature. This hierarchy expresses itself through structure and notation, and means that each subtopic is a part of the topic above it (OCLC, 2003). While the Dewey decimal classification, or DDC, has been around for many years and continues in use, it is currently experiencing some changes. History: For many years each library had a scheme for the classification of books on its own shelves (Warren and Simpson, 1901, p.618). This created disorganization between libraries, and no standard for classification. In the 1870s, a new type of classification that sought to fight this problem arose: the Dewey decimal classification. The Dewey decimal classification was created by a man named Melvil Dewey while working at Amherst College. As a student, Dewey was frustrated with the disorganization he saw in libraries. He found that, there was no uniform or consistent system for organizing books, sometimes not even within a single library. Each library simply assigned a spot on a shelf for each book, and recorded in its catalog where the

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 3

book was (The Straight Dope, 2006). Dewey valued efficiency, and the current disarray he saw around him was anything but. In 1873 Dewey conceived his decimal classification system and started implementing it. The system was developed when he combined different styles of organization he saw around him at the time, to create what he felt was the most efficient and useful classification system. The influences for his system included The New York Mercantile Library, which used a card system where each title was assigned a card with its shelf location. He was also influenced by Charles Cutters classification system, and Nathaniel Shurtleffs decimal arrangement theory (The Straight Dope, 2006). His system used decimal numbers for organization, but these were related to the books themselves, instead of the location of the book on the shelf. It was also organized by the subject matter of the book. As a librarian at Amherst, Dewey was able to implement his system locally and perfect it before moving on to publishing it for use in other libraries. Dewey then published his classification system in 1876, and the DDC is still being published today. DDC was not only revolutionary for its time, but it changed the organization of the library. Its benefits were numerous and, the main innovation and advantage of DDC is that it's an indirect, rather than a direct, reference to a book's location (The straight dope, 2006). This allows the library to integrate new material into the organization of its collection, and to not have to renumber everything when that new material comes in. It also means that an entire collection could be moved to a new library and stay classified exactly the same way.
!

From its inception in 1873 until the 1950s, the Dewey decimal classification was unchanging and the standard of the industry. However, this did not mean its users were happy about it, they just had to accept it, warts and all (Downing, 1976, p.1). Because it was

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 4

unchanging, it didnt necessarily encompass the entirety of knowledge, but more of a small window of it. For example, one tenth of the classification was and is given over to religion, and nine-tenths of that to Christianity. Moreover, the editors had failed to keep up with scientific and technological developments (Downing, 1976, p.1). As revisions were eventually made to the classification, by 1976 when the then new edition was released, it was found that with 45 percent of its sales in countries other than the United States, DDC [was] doing all it can to correct the impression that it represent[ed] a limited range of North American attitudes (Downing, 1976, p. 4). Even today however, allegations of predisposition still surround DDC. According to assertions, there is still a bias in DDC because it is still based on a nineteenthcentury North American academic environment and shows a bias no longer acceptable for libraries in the twenty-first century (Miksa, 2004, p. 8). Application The Dewey decimal classification is still in use today worldwide. According to the OCLC, The DDC is the most widely used classification system in the world. Libraries in more than 135 countries use the DDC to organize and provide access to their collections, and DDC numbers are features in the national bibliographies of more than 60 countries (OCLC, 2003, p. 1). DDC is used in all types of American libraries, but some favor its usage more than others. As of 2006, Somewhere around 95% of all school libraries and public libraries in the U.S. use DDC25% of colleges and universities use DDC, and around 20% of specialized libraries do (The straight dope, 2006). Academic libraries have a tendency to favor the Library of Congress classification system instead of DDC. In the 1960s and early 1970s, reclassification of library

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 5

collections from the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) to the Library of Congress (LC) Classification was a major trend in academic libraries, primarily for the economic reason of improving efficiency in cataloging and reducing processing costs (Shorten, Seikel & Ahrberg, p. 123). While reclassification as a popular trend faded, it may still be happening today. A 2004 study found that, at a time when new technology and Internet influence library trends, this study shows that a past library trend by DDC academic libraries to convert to LC has not completely run its course (Shorten, Seikel & Ahrberg, p. 132). As we see academic usage of DDC fading, the majority of its usage in this country comes from public and school libraries. For the libraries using Dewey in America, there is a push to adapt it for the new user of today. The BISAC system, which is used by bookstores, has been put in a mash-up with DDC. According to DDC editors, We have a mapping under way between BISAC and Dewey to support the association of Dewey numbers with metadata early in the publication stream (Fister, 2009, p. 25). The reason many libraries are using this mash-up is to incorporate easier patron use. As the head of the Darien Library, in Darien, CT stated, We wanted to retain the findability of Dewey while encouraging and enabling browsing. We clumped similar areas of Dewey together in eight broad categories, which we call glades (Fister, 2009, p. 24). However, as Joan Mitchell, editor of the DDC stated, Dewey can sort large collections into more specific groups than BISAC cana system that is entirely based on English words might inadvertently send the message that the public library is for English speakers only. A web site is under development that willprovide linked DDC summaries in nine languages (Fister, 2009, p. 3). Easier patron use is a large motivator in repurposing Dewey, and comes as a symptom of the type of users the library sees. For school libraries especially, and public libraries with large young adult and childrens

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 6

populations there is a change in expectation. As Christine Allen stated, Do we still Dewey? Well, yes, we do, but technology has changed so much of everything else we do in todays school libraryWhat has really changedand will never go backis the ability to access all kinds of information in all kinds of ways. Our students are accustomed to this; we still may be adjusting (Allen, 2008, p. 14). As technology changes, so too do the patrons using these libraries. If DDC can adapt to these changes, it will stay relevant; if not, it will be phased out for more appropriate classification systems. Future The future of the Dewey Decimal Classification and its subsequent effectiveness is a complicated topic. Research shows that DDC has many strengths and weaknesses. Some of these weaknesses have brought into question the effectiveness of the DDC. The DDC is affected by other classification systems which in turn alter it and its future. To understand the future of the DDC and what changes are being made to it, one must first understand its strengths and weaknesses. It can be asked that if librarians are trying to change the Dewey classification, what was wrong with it in the first place. And yet concurrently, if librarians are at the same time defending it, what are its strengths? Sources show that the strengths of the DDC center on its long use in the library, effectiveness within large collections, and abilities for finding specific titles in the library. While describing a shift away from the DDC, Sarah Hopkins cites the drawbacks of creating new collections based off of something other than the Dewey classification. New systems have made cataloguing and work flow more complex, and in the new system it is easier to incorrectly label or catalogue something. In turn, this references DDCs long standing use in the library

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 7

community. DDC is time tested and has a standard established of working effectively in a library setting (Hopkins, 2007). Michael Casey and Michael Stephens state that larger collections of 100,000 volumes or more are better suited for keeping the DDC system in place. They also state that Dewey is the best system for locating a precise item in a collection, or in other words, to posses the attribute of findability (Casey & Stephens, 2009). A news article by Robert McCoppin points to the precise locating power of DDC. He mentions that it may be hard to find a specific book that doesnt fit into an obvious category in a new system. He also reports that critics are worried that getting away from the DDC will dumb down the libraries and will create a lack of standardization between those libraries that do still use DDC (McCoppin, 2011). Barbara Fister shows that the power of using DDC with larger collections is that it can sort these large collections into more specific groups than the new BISAC system can. Another noted strength of DDC mentioned by Fister is that it is not an all English system; DDC also includes multi-lingual summaries. Dewey has a level of granulation in subject areas and topics that other systems cannot recreate. The DDC is also in constant change; it is updated and is continually being altered to stay relevant within the development of knowledge. Fister references how widespread the DDC is; it is the most used classification system in the world with 138 countries and 200,000 libraries using it, which supports the knowledge that the DDC is widespread and a public library standard (Fister, 2009). Suzanne M. Stauffers article titled Dewey or Dont We Classify is a big supporter of DDC, and highlights many of its strengths. The DDC is designed to organize material based on a precise subject in an arrangement from general to specific. This makes DDC good at locating

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 8

specific titles, but also for browsing. The DDC system will be the same in different libraries, while bookstore models or BISAC can vary from library to library. Stauffer also points out a flaw in different systems that some see as a strength. While proponents of a shift away from Dewey state that new systems will facilitate user independence and self sufficiency, Stauffer points out that DDC actually encourages interaction with the staff, and this in turn allows them a chance to suggest more items to buy and thereby turn a profit. She also provides a reply to the suggestions that DDC is too complex, and that a new system would be simpler to use and understand. Her stance is that DDC is taught to children, and that children in the fourth grade have the necessary skills to use DDC independently; counting to 999 and using decimals, putting information into categories with divisions, and spatial reasoning. If the DDC is still too complicated for library patrons, there is also an abridged DDC version that libraries can implement that uses broader categories and shorter numbers. The DDC has the benefit of being arranged according to traditional Western academic disciplines. This means it is easy to apply and use in Western curriculums. Learning this structure will be helpful as it will be the structure used in the rest of these students academic and professional careers (Stauffer, 2008). Finally, Gretchen Caserotti restates the power of DDC among individuals looking for a specific title (Hill, 2010). The weaknesses of the Dewey Decimal classification point towards a future moving away from its use however. This change is a shift among libraries from a strictly traditional DDC only system, and is usually to something like the BISAC system, or a classification more resembling a bookstore model. The BISAC system is maintained by the Book Industry Study Group and is organized into fifty-two broad categories, with the category for a specific book being determined by the publisher (Fister, 2009). Any mention of weaknesses of DDC usually center on the lack

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 9

of browsing, how confusing or intimidating the DDC is, and how rigid the structure of the DDC is. It is because of these weaknesses that people call for a shift to a newer system. In Hopkins article, she points out that the DDC does not promote browsing among nonfiction collections. The DDC is also not always compatible with the vision of the author or publisher, allowing books to get lost among a librarys collection. Books may appeal to a reader based on more than just subject, setting, or plot; mood, pace, and use of language can also be taken into account. Because of this there are works that DDCs subjects and numbers fail to accurately convey. The DDC calls for a strict numerical arrangement that does not always suit patrons or the available space for storage and display of the collection. Hopkins also states that the DDC uses too much coded information for patrons to coherently understand (Hopkins, 2007). Librarians Melissa Rice and Joanna Kolendo affirm that their patrons felt confused or intimidated by Deweys comprehensive but old-school classifications (Rice & Kolendo, 2010). Casey & Stephens state that the DDC is not suited for a popular collection that is intended for browsing only and not research (Casey & Stephens, 2009). Fister relays the story of a patron who felt the DDC system was intimidating. This patron felt that the old system was daunting and that its use required patrons to have the same knowledge librarians had in order to use it. According to Rice and Kolendo, their experience reiterates how intimidating the DDC is, mentioning that their nonprofessional patrons have had problems with it in the past. They also avow the problem of lack of freedom within their collection. The DDC has made them follow a strict numerical order for classification; shifting away from it has allowed them the liberty to redesign their collection layout (Rice & Kolendo, 2009). Nanci Milone Hill argues that the DDC is not good for patrons that want to browse without a specific title in mind. She asserts that

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 10

seventy-five percent of patrons at the Perry Branch Library in Maricopa County Arizona felt that the DDC did not meet their needs and was unfriendly and unfamiliar. Gretchen Caserotti restates this problem when she mentions that DDC is terrible for browsing a collection. Susan M. Flannery brings a more specific problem to Dewey discussions. This is that within certain collections the DDC system makes unwanted obstacles; this was the case for the poetry collection at the Main Cambridge Library. Within the DDC, works of poetry were spread out among different areas, but once they were reorganized into a poetry section by authors last name, the circulation of the first ten weeks matched the numbers of the previous six months (Hill, 2010). Major change is the future for the Dewey Decimal Classification. It is clear from reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of the system that there is a trend of shifting away from a classic DDC system in American public libraries. DDC is the most wide spread classification system in public libraries, so it will probably be used at least in some part for a long time, simply for the sake of ease. Christopher Harris states that after the first national case of a library shifting away from Dewey, hundreds have now started to opt out of the DDC (Harris, 2009). Libraries are staring to change, alter, improve, and in some rare cases get rid of the DDC altogether.. The main trend is keeping some form of DDC in place. Libraries are not abandoning DDC; they are just merging it together with other classification systems to make their libraries more effective for patron use. The main classification use that is rising in public libraries is the BISAC model currently used by bookstores. There are many reasons for this shift.

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 11

Hopkins points to research showing that patrons are starting to have less tolerance towards obstacles in their way that keep them from the item they want. Patrons think that changing the classification system will help lessen the obstacles in the library (Hopkins, 2007). Francine Fialkoff states that the idea of simplifying or changing DDC is to benefit the users. The type of classification system doesnt matter; its about making the most sense for the user and getting them to where they want in the library (Fialkoff, 2009). The most overwhelming evidences for changes within the DDC in the future are the documented examples of the libraries already changing now. The Bayside Library mentioned by Hopkins altered the DDC by creating collections that Dewey would have previously separated. This library created new popular-nonfiction collections, separated the most popular adult fiction into sub-collections (romance, family saga, science fiction, fantasy), and kept the entire junior collection in the childrens part of the library (Hopkins, 2007). Casey and Stephens state that the West Palm Beach Public Library is currently mixing bookstore categories and DDC together for their collection. The Rangeview Library District uses a tool called WordThink, which allows their staff the freedom to create collocation relationships that the DDC cant (Casey & Stephens, 2009). McCoppin states that the Rakow Library uses a mash-up technique where books are put into new categories or collections; but within these collections they are organized by the Dewey Decimal classification (McCoppin, 2011). Additionally, Fister gives an example of a library that uses a bookstore/DDC mash-up; the Darien Library organized their books into eight broad categories called glades, where every book has a glade number and a call number. The biggest change to this library was the childrens section. They based their organization off of the childs age and reading interest, so that now that particular section of the library is organized by color

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 12

coded categories like nature, colors, and transportation. Fister lists other libraries that have also changed from the classic DDC; they include Topeka and Shawnee County Public Library, Anna Porter Public Library, and San Jose Public Library (Fister, 2009). The Perry Branch Library was one of the first libraries to shift away from the DDC and it is also the rare case where they completely abandoned Dewey altogether. They organized their collection into U-shaped alcoves called neighborhoods that are completely based on the BISAC system (Hill, 2010). Current examples and trends point to a shifting future for the DDC, but it wont disappear completely. Patrons and librarians alike may ask why the DDC must change; the answer can be found by realizing that libraries are focusing on innovation and creative thinking to create a user focused service. (Casey & Stephens, 2009) Libraries should now be making decisions based on the needs of their patrons (Fister, 2009). Librarians are encouraged to evaluate whether or not their library should or shouldnt make changes to stay relevant to their community, to make the best decisions with our patrons in mind (Rice & Kolendo, 2009). People are changing and libraries will certainly change with them. While the Dewey decimal classification system will remain in use worldwide, it is going to undergo drastic domestic adaptations, merging, and mutations so that it may no long resemble its original form.

THE DEWEY DECIMAL CLASSIFICATION 13

References Allen, C. (2008). Do We Still Dewey?. Young Adult Library Services, 6(2), 14. Casey, Michael & Stephens, Micheal. (2009). The Transparent Library Its Fine to Drop Dewey. Library Journal, 19. DOWNING, J. C., & Downing, J. C. (1976). DDC. Wilson Library Bulletin, 50797-800. Fialkoff, Francine. (2009). Its Not About Dewey. Library Journal. 8. Fister, Barbara. (2009). The Dewey Dilemma. Library Journal. 22-25. Harris, Christopher. (2009). For Libraries, the Future is Now. School Library Journal. 16. Hill, Nanci Milone. (2010). Dewey or Dont We. Public Libraries. 14-20. Hopkins, Sarah. (2007). Decimating Dewey: Introducing a Bookshop Arrangement for Shelving the Nonfiction Collection. APLIS. 20 (1), 8-13. McCoppin, Robert. (2011). Whos Killing the Dewey Decimal System? Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from http://articles.chicagotribune.com. Miksa, S. D. (2007). The Challenges of Change: A Review of Cataloging and Classification Literature, 2003-2004. Library Resources & Technical Services, 51(1), 51-68. OCLC Online Computer Library Center. (2003). Introduction to dewey decimal classification. Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/dewey/versions/ddc22print/intro.pdf Rice, Melissa & Kolendo, Joanna. (2009). Transition & Reflection: Frankfort Public Library Districts Decision to Go Dewey Free. ILA Reporter.12-15. Rice, Melissa & Kolendo, Joanna. (2010). Dewey Free. Library Journal. 52. Shorten, J., Seikel, M., & Ahrberg, J. H. (2005). Why Do You Still Use Dewey? Academic Libraries That Continue with Dewey Decimal Classification. Library Resources & Technical Services, 49(2), 123-136. Stauffer, Suzanne M. (2008). Dewey or Dont We Classify. Children and Libraries. Summer/Fall, 49-51. The Straight Dope. (2006). What's so great about the Dewey decimal system?. Retrieved from http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2238/whats-so-great-about-the-deweydecimal-system Warren, I., & Simpson, F. (1901). The organization of a library. The Course of Study, 1(7), 618. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/992206