Purpose: This paper explores the longstanding disconnect between Knowledge Organization (KO) and Information Retrieval (IR), advocating for their integration to improve subject access in humanities and cultural heritage (CH) collections, including newer types of collections, such as those of research data.

Design/methodology/approach: Through a critical synthesis of literature, standards and recent advances in both KO and IR, the paper identifies key advantages and challenges and proposes a collaborative research agenda to address them.

Findings: While KO Systems (KOS) provide semantic depth and contextual accuracy, and IR systems offer scalability, their independent development has limited the effectiveness of search systems for humanities and CH collections. Today’s operational search systems lack the capacity to support nuanced, exploratory search due to this disconnect. In addition, both KO and IR fields come with challenges which might be addressed via a complementary approach. The purposeful integration of KO and IR is necessary to address challenges such as opaque IR algorithms, underused or outdated KOS, and the need for context-aware, transparent and inclusive discovery environments.

Practical implications: Integrated KO-IR systems can support more accurate and inclusive discovery interfaces for libraries, museums and archives, as well as any search system, enhancing the visibility and usability of their resources.

Originality/value: The paper brings together perspectives from traditionally separate communities and calls for a de-siloed approach to designing subject access systems. It introduces key research questions and strategies for aligning KOS with advanced IR techniques.

 PurposeMany end users turn to Google Books and social tagging services to identify books of interest. How successful they are will depend on subject indexing applied in these services (among other factors). The study aimed to determine: (1) to what degree are Queerlit books identified as LGBTQ+ books in widely used information services, in particular Google Books, LibraryThing and Goodreads; and, (2) whether metadata in these information services could be considered of value for the Queerlit database and complement its highly extensive and highly specific indexing.

Design/methodology/approachThe study compared keywords (subject index terms, tags) assigned to works of Swedish LGBTQ+ fiction across three commercial services: Google Books, Goodreads and LibraryThing, against the curated database, Queerlit.

FindingsOf the 1320 LGBTQ+ works in Queerlit, only a small portion was found in the three web services: 8.26% on Google Books (n = 109), 13.26% on Goodreads (n = 175), while about half on LibraryThing (55.3%, n = 730). This underrepresentation of Swedish LGBTQ+ works in the three international commercial information services makes them hardly of value to the readers. This is exacerbated by the fact that only a minority of Queerlit books found in the three services are categorised as LGBTQ+. The Queerlit database might benefit from consulting social tagging services when indexing both LGBTQ+ specific and general themes.

Originality/valueNo earlier study compared in a systematic manner four different information retrieval systems and identified challenges as well as potential benefits in relation to finding LGBTQ+ fiction.

To ensure the systematic, coherent and rational description of objects in and across collections, metadata standards for subject indexing have therefore been established. These metadata standards have evolved over time to accommodate changing needs, growing and diversifying collections, and emerging digital affordances. Yet, for numerous reasons, subject metadata are neither fully nor rigorously implemented in many of today’s catalogues – whether in the backend indices or the front-end end-user interfaces – to the detriment of users. Online public library catalogues, discovery services, journal article databases, university repositories and museum catalogues all demonstrate shortcomings in how subject metadata are integrated, consolidated and leveraged (Golub 2016; Golub 2018; Golub et al. 2020; Golub, Ziolkowski and Zlodi 2022). Properly incorporated, subject metadata could greatly improve the discovery of objects within collections and (because collections are increasingly connected online) the reconciliation of descriptive information across different collections for better cross-database searching. On the other hand, digital technologies could make standardised subject access finally realise the potential always envisioned for it. To make this argument, we explore subject access and associated metadata standards in library and museum cataloguing. 

This entry is organized into several sections, each exploring significant facets of the iSchool Movement and its influence on LIS education. We commence by tracing the origins and evolution of the iSchool Movement, followed by an examination of the evolving landscape of iSchool membership. Subsequently, we delve into the profound impact of the iSchool Movement on LIS Education, highlighting its transformative effects. The discussion then shifts to the collaborative efforts of iSchools with other disciplines, underscoring the interdisciplinary nature of contemporary information science education. Further, we discuss the repercussions of the iSchool Movement on the job market, elucidating the changing dynamics and emerging opportunities. Addressing a pertinent issue, we explore the evolving identity and research culture within iSchools, reflecting on challenges and prospects. To offer diverse perspectives, we invited authors from various regions to reflect on the global impact of iSchools. The content of this entry draws primarily from interviews with key figures deeply involved in the US iSchool movement. Supplementary insights from select current deans enrich the narrative, all compiled by the main author.

This paper reports on the first phase of the research of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) Working Group on subject access metadata in library discovery systems. The survey aimed to discover how research libraries provide subject searching support to users. Many libraries use Knowledge Organizing Systems (KOSs) such as general subject headings and classification systems, subject-specific thesauri, and other controlled vocabularies. However, there is a concern that many discovery systems in libraries do not provide easy and seamless access to this enriched metadata to facilitate searching. This investigation aimed to identify the subject searching features offered to users and to explore the barriers to their use. The second part of the investigation will consult providers of discovery systems to find out how these features could be made more accessible. A final phase of the investigation will consult users and their representatives about what kind of support and interface features and functionalities would be appropriate for them. A survey of 116 academic and research libraries in 34 countries revealed a strong emphasis on the use of discovery systems, although many libraries still rely on OPACs as the primary user interface for subject searching. A variety of library management systems incorporating discovery systems included suppliers such as Ex-Libris, Sirsi-Dynix, Aleph, EBSCO, Koha, and OCLC. Most of the libraries surveyed provide some level of training and support, although this varies from one-on-one support, to formal courses, online courses, or as part of orientation sessions for new users. General KOSs such as Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) and the Chinese Library Classification were frequently mentioned. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) was the most frequently-mentioned domain-specific system. Librarians reported the following barriers to the use of KOSs as: lack of familiarity with a KOS, complexity and lack of natural language access in case of classification, language barriers, and searching interface issues. The ultimate goal of this research will be to develop a set of guidelines for research and academic libraries about providing easy and seamless access to enriched subject metadata via library discovery systems.

Linnaeus University (Linnéuniversitetet, LNU) is an international public university in the province of Småland, Sweden. LNU was founded in 2010 by a merger of the former Växjö University and Kalmar University, and currently has approximately 44,000 enrolled students. The university is currently Sweden’s sixth largest in terms of student numbers. It has 600 partner universities in more than 80 countries around the world.

Over the past decade, there has been a distinct emphasis on the Digital Humanities at LNU through a variety of initiatives, all focused on fostering interdisciplinary expertise in the Humanities, data analysis, cultural heritage, and ICTs. Best described as a decentralized collaborative culture, DH at LNU includes knowledge environments (e.g. Digital Transformations), centers of excellence (e.g. the Centre for Data Intensive Sciences and Applications), and the iInstitute (the local center for the international iSchools consortium). LNU was the first Swedish university to join DARIAH and is now leading the bid for national membership. In 2016, Linnaeus established a Digital Humanities Hub to focus on data-intensive digital humanities, leading to the implementation of digital humanities as a research and teaching subject at the Faculty of Arts and Humanities, and to the Digital Humanities MA programme. This programme is being offered in English to international students, who benefit from being able to take advantage of the worldwide iSchools agreement for virtual student and faculty exchange. As part of the work of the DH Hub and the iInstitute, LNU was recently granted funding for a national PhD school in digital humanities, an initiative between four Swedish universities. In this presentation we will outline the original vision for fostering DH at Linnaeus University, reflect on the challenges and successes of the past few years and present general ideas on how to facilitate DH at the intersection of multiple disciplines.