Classification Schemes 1

Running Head: BRIEF OVERVIEW OF CLASSIFICATION AND INDIGENOUS

PEOPLES

Brief Overview of Classification Schemes

And Indigenous Peoples

Monique Lloyd

Emporia State University

 Classification Schemes 2

Abstract

This paper will provide a brief overview of how cataloging classification schemes

address the histories and contemporary realities of Native American people, how access

can be improved, as well as a brief overview of who is identifying developing

alternatives.
 Classification Schemes 3

The American Library Association website states that

Librarians have a professional obligation to ensure that all library users have
free and equal access to the entire range of library services, materials, and
programs. (ALA, 2008).

However, current classification and subject headings reflect the dominant culture and as a

result those groups which are outside that culture are marginalized resulting in difficulties

for users to access and retrieve information. It can also result in reinforcing negative

stereotypes. Native Americans are one such group.

An article by Hope Olson, a professor at the School of Information Studies

University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee whose research interests include classification

theory and, in particular, classification and culture, provides an excellent theoretical

framework regarding the application of classification systems and how, because they are

bounded systems, they result in the marginalization of some groups. She lists three

assumptions: that classification is constructed by the dominant culture, that there are

limits that result in exclusions, and that classification defines what is accepted as

knowledge. While she states in her conclusion that “(a)ll systems will exclude and

marginalize in some way” (Olson, 1998), she advocates for allowing classification

systems to become unstable and permeable so that they can be deconstructed and then

reconstructed, allowing silenced voices to be heard.

A practical application of one way that process can happen is detailed in a project

describing the revising of an internal subject headings list by creating a supplemental

thesaurus to the Library of Congress Subject Headings (Martens, 2006). The project was
 Classification Schemes 4

begun because of a need for specialized subject headings in the National Indian Law

Library collection of federal Indian and tribal law. While the hope was that this would

help increase user access to materials, that has not been the result because the thesaurus is

so complex . Consideration is now being given to constructing a user-based version

which may be more useful to researchers of Native American Law.

The American Library Association Subject Access and Classification Committee

has developed a wiki to identify ways to improve subject headings and part of their work

includes suggesting subject headings to the Library of Congress to be included in the

Library of Congress Subject Authority File. They have also examined a variety of

different classification schemes and provided a list of useful thesauri including the First

Nations Names Authority List.

There has also been a proposal to reconsider the collective headings “Indians of

North America” and “Native Peoples” with the names of specific aboriginal groups or

nations. This topic is still being discussed with some preferring the term Native

American instead of Indian. Others wish to see the term American Indian used. Even

within those who favor the use of specific nation names, there is discussion as to whether

it should be what is commonly used or the people’s own names for themselves such as

Hodenausonee instead of Iroquois or Tsalagi instead of Cherokee. There have some

changes in the past decades including changing Chippewa Indians to Ojbiwe Indians and

Huron Indians to Wyandot Indians, but who will chose which term to use and how will

this affect user’s abilities to access materials?

A classification system developed by Brian Deer, one of the first Native MLS
 Classification Schemes 5

librarians in Canada, has been used as a model for other Native systems. He included

systems which were relevant to Canadian First Nations libraries focusing on the realities

of the communities’ needs. The design was intentionally simple as he understood the

limited resources available in most Native libraries. The system is constantly changing,

with new topics constantly being added into the existing scheme. This lack of clear

guidelines leads to inconsistencies and that, as well as the focus remaining local

are its main weaknesses although it is useful for small Native collections, as it simple for

catalogers to apply and for users to understand.

Classification systems such as Library of Congress Classification system are

inherently biased and this bias marginalizes Native American library materials. This then

makes access to Native American materials more difficult , promoting stereotypes and

alienating Native American users. Another concern is that these classifications systems

are not designed with how Native Americans organize ideas and see the world.

A potential solution to this problem is to modify LCC classification at the local

library level. Two libraries that have done this are the American Indian Resource Center

and the UC Berkeley Native American Studies Library. A more difficult solution would

be to encourage LCC to modify their systems. A third solution would be to use a Native

American classification system, such as the one designed by Brian Deer.

It is encouraging that the Native American library community has begun

discussing classification. The hope is that this discussion will help educate non-Native

librarians become aware of these issues and their effects on both Native and non-Native

users.
 Classification Schemes 6

References

American Indian Library Association Subject Access and Classification Committee

Retrieved June 30, 2008 from http://ailasacc.pbwiki.com/Subject%20Headings

American Library Association (2008). Access to library resources and services A

interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights. Retrieved June 29, 2008 from

http://ala.org/alaorg/oif/acc_gend.html

Berman, S. (1995). When the subject is Indians. Libraries Newsletter, 18 (2),

Retrieved June 29, 2008 from

http://www.nativeculturelinks.com/ailanewsW95_LCindians.html

Brian Deer Classification website. Retrieved July 2, 2008 from

http://www.slais.ubc.ca/COURSES/libr517/02-03-wt2/projects/deer/index.htm

Library of Congress. Headings for Indian Tribes Recognized by the U.S. Government.

Retrieved July 1, 2008 from http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/tribes.html

Martens, M.. (2006). Creating a supplemental thesaurus to the LCSH for a specialized

collection: The experience of the National Indian Law Library. Law Library

Journal 98, (2), 287-297).

MacDonell, P. Tagami, R. & Washington. P. Brian Deer Classification System.

Retrieved June 30, 2008 from

http://www.slais.ubc.ca/PEOPLE/students/student-

projects/R_Tagami/517/index.htm

Olson, H/ A. 1998. Mapping beyond Dewey's boundaries: Constructing classificatory

space for marginalized knowledge domains. Library Trends 47 (2), 233-255.