1. Polytechnic University of the Philippines, Philippines.

*             Correspondence:mavicsilva@gmail.com

Keywords: QCPL, Canada, workshops, Public Library, framework, library, librarians, problem-solving

1.INTRODUCTION

The essential elements of every library are books, even while libraries have evolved throughout time, particularly with the advent of technology, users still prefer actual books [1]. In Canada, printed books accounted for 71% of all library loans in 2022, compared to only 21% for eBooks and 8% for audiobooks According to a separate survey by [2] students in various Turkish schools still prefer to read printed books; just 54 of the 258 students are reading eBooks, with the remaining pupils preferring the physical version. The majority of e-book users still choose conventional print books, according to a local research by [3] on e-book usage among University of the Philippines School of Library and Information Studies students. These studies demonstrate that library patrons continue to choose books in their physical form over those in digital format. Accurate cataloging and categorization of the collection are essential since a library’s collection must be well-organized for convenient access and retrieval.  One of the most crucial responsibilities in the library is cataloguing.  It becomes increasingly important as the collection grows since even librarians find it difficult to find the contents [4]. The fundamental purpose of cataloguing and classifying library items is to impose order on chaos. Librarians must possess strong cataloging abilities in order to appropriately organize and categorize the library’s holdings.  In some institutions, the pre-employment screening process for librarians includes a cataloging skills exam.  The purpose of this procedure is to make sure the librarian is capable of organizing the library [5]. Two parts, comprising six (6) units, make up Cataloging and Classification or Organizing Information Resources in the Library and Information Science curriculum at all institutions throughout the country. About 20% of the librarian licensing test (one of six topics), concerns the Quezon City Public Library (QCPL). Founded in 1948, QCPL has served the community for 75 years and now has 26 branches across Quezon City’s six districts. Initially, its approximately 100 print volumes were for library use only due to librarian accountability []. However, in 2021, the City Administrator requested that QCitizens be allowed to borrow books. Consequently, in 2022, QCPL began lending donated books, while purchased books remained in-house. This lending policy, along with responsibility for materials, posed a challenge to collection growth. To address this, QCPL launched a book donation campaign targeting businesses, the public, and individuals []. This initiative received an overwhelming response, yielding a large number of books. Despite many donations not meeting selection criteria, the Collection Development Librarian reviewed them, and a significant number were still added. QCPL employs centralized cataloging, with the Technical Services Division’s Cataloging Section located in the Main Library at the Diliman City Hall Compound. This section processes all library resources before distribution. Currently, two librarians (Librarian I and Librarian III) staff the Cataloging Section []. The binding and preservation librarian also assists when available. The Librarian III also manages the integrated library system and ensures catalog quality []. Since the start of the donation campaign in 2021 until May 2023, the Cataloging Section accumulated a backlog of over 10,000 volumes, which continues to grow due to ongoing donations. A call for volunteer catalogers from other library sections yielded only five out of 38 respondents, and the two-month effort proved inefficient due to the need for extensive revision of the volunteer cataloging and the volunteers’ primary responsibilities []. The study assessed the cataloging and classification skills of librarians at the Quezon City Public Library (QCPL) and develop a training program to enhance their expertise in using MARC21 and RDA guidelines. Guided by the core competence theory and informed by the ALCTS’ Core Competencies for Cataloging and Metadata Professional Librarians, the study evaluates the knowledge, skills, and behavioral competencies of QCPL librarians. The findings would beneficial for library patrons by expediting processing and improving access to learning materials, librarians by enhancing their skills, management by informing decisions on training and support, and scholars by providing a foundation for future research. By developing a training program, the study seeks to address gaps in librarians’ expertise and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of library services. Ultimately, the study’s results will contribute to better cataloging and classification practices, enabling library users to access resources more quickly and easily. The study’s focus on librarians’ competencies will also inform decisions on training and support, ensuring that QCPL librarians have the necessary skills and knowledge to provide high-quality services.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study instrument the data collecting process, the statistical analysis of the data, the population, sample size, and sampling strategy, as well as a description of the respondents, are all covered in this chapter. The descriptive survey approach was utilized in this research to assess the librarians at QCPL’s proficiency in cataloging and categorization. In order to comprehend a phenomenon, this approach relies on gathering quantitative data and making generalizations across different populations [9] Additionally, it provides information on questions about the frequency of a phenomena or its effects on the population being studied [10] Descriptive study gathers data on the state of a phenomena at the moment. According to [11], it explains and analyzes obvious situations or connections, prevalent behaviors, held beliefs or attitudes, continuing processes, experienced impacts, and rising trends. The quantitative goal of descriptive research is to gather quantifiable information for statistical analysis of a sample population. Because it makes it possible to gather and display demographic data, it is often used in market research [12]. This method places more emphasis on explaining the “what” of the study topic than it does on exploring the “why.” Based on the survey findings, the researcher thought that this method was the most successful in evaluating the cataloging proficiency of QCPL librarians since it gave a thorough and accurate report. Population, Sampling Method, and Sample Size Thirty-eight (38) registered librarians from five (5) Quezon City Public Library divisions participated in this study as respondents. This study used the total enumeration approach, which includes the entire population of QCPL librarians, rather than a sampling technique. In order to obtain a comprehensive and precise representation of the population, the researcher opted for total enumeration. The Quezon City Public Library’s registered librarians served as the study’s participants. Based on their subjective assessments, they assessed their own proficiency in cataloging and categorization. A questionnaire that was modified from the ALCTS’ Core Competencies for Cataloging and Metadata Professional Librarians served as the main tool for gathering data for the study. The survey was divided into two parts i.e. the first part collected respondent profiles, and the second part included cataloging and classifying skill indicators that were used to score themselves using a Likert scale.

Scale	Code of Competency Level	Interpretation
5	Highly Competent	Displays expertise and has shown breadth and depth in the application function
4	Competent	Has extensive experience in the application function
3	Moderately Competent	Knows the function but is not an expert nor has the extensive experience
2	Less Competent	Less experience
1	No Competency	Not showing the necessary skill to do something

Three (3) master’s degree-holding registered librarians validated the questionnaire. According to one of the validators, the term “incompetent” is harsh and humiliating to the responders, hence the original phrase was changed to “no competency” on a scale of 1 for the Code of Competency Level. The purpose of the questionnaire’s pilot testing was to assess its overall efficacy in gathering the required data from participants as well as its comprehensiveness and clarity. The event took place between December 18 and December 22, 2023, and thirty-three (33) librarians from various universities took part. The instrument’s dependability was evaluated using the data from the pilot test. The findings showed that the survey instrument is dependable, with all competence indicators having a Cronbach’s alpha larger than 0.70. After the survey instrument was validated and pilot tested, the researcher formally requested authorization from the Quezon City Public Library’s City Librarian to distribute the survey questionnaire to possible study participants. The study applied for Ethics Clearance from the University Research Ethics Center once the data-gathering request was approved. The questionnaire was then distributed to the intended participants. The data collection period lasted from February 28, 2024, to February 29, 2024. Before being sent to the institutional statistician for analysis, the completed survey questionnaires were methodically sorted, tabulated, and organized. Data Treatment Using Statistics The fraction that reflects the percentage value is obtained by dividing the total population number by the frequency of participation [14].

The percentage formula:

                                P=(f/n) * 100

Where:

                                P is the desired percentage

                                f is the frequency of the particular category

                                n is the total number of cases involved

Median. This tool was used to determine the typical value among the competency level in the assessment of knowledge, skills and abilities, and behavioral competencies of the respondents.

                Where:

                                                n is the number of observations

3. RESULT & DISCUSSION

The study presented, analyzed, and interpreted data gathered through the instrument used to assess the cataloging and classification competency of QCPL librarians. Tables and textual interpretation are used to present the data gathered.

Table 1:  Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Terms of Age

Age	Frequency	Percentage (%)
25 and below years old	2	5.26
26 – 35 years old	12	31.58
36 – 45 years old	8	21.05
46 – 55 years old	11	28.95
56 and above years old	5	13.16
Total	38	100.00

Table 1 shows age distribution of respondents, with the majority aged 26-35 (31.58%), followed by 46-55 (20.95%), 36-45 (21.05%), 56 and above (13.16%), and 25 and below (5.26%).

Table 2:  Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Terms of Sex

Sex	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Male	10	26.32
Female	28	73.68
Total	38	100.00

Table 2 presents the distribution of the respondents in terms of sex. Most respondents were female, with a frequency of twenty-eight (28) or 73.68%. Male has a frequency of ten (10) or 26.32%.

Table 3:  Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Terms of Civil Status

Civil Status	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Single	21	55.26
Married	17	44.74
Others	0	0
Total	38	100.00

Table 3 presents the distribution of the respondents in terms of civil status. Twenty-one (21) or 55.26% of the respondents were single and seventeen (17) or 44.74% were married. While no respondents answered others.

Table 4:  Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Terms of Educational Attainment

Educational Attainment	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Bachelor’s Degree	24	63.16
Post Graduate (Master in Library and Information Science)	8	21.05
Post Graduate (Master in other programs)	6	15.79
Post Graduate (Doctoral)	0	0
Others	0	0
Total	38	100.00

Table 4 presents the distribution of the respondents in terms of educational attainment. Twenty-four (24) or 63.16% of the respondents have a bachelor’s degree. Post graduate with master in library and information science have a frequency of eight (8) or 21.05% while post graduate with master in other programs have a frequency of six (6) or 15.79%. No respondents answered post graduate doctoral degree and others.

Table 5:  Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Terms of Division Assigned

Division Assigned	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Administrative Services	3	7.89
District Libraries	18	47.37
Library Extension Services	5	13.16
Readers’ Services	7	18.42
Technical Services	5	13.16
Total	38	100.00

Table 5 shows respondents’ distribution in divisions, with District Libraries being the most frequent (47.37%), followed by Reader’s Services (18.42%), Library Extension Services (13.16%), and Administrative Services (7.89%).

Table 6:  Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Terms of Length of Service in QCPL

Length of Service in QCPL	Frequency	Percentage (%)
less than 1 year	5	13.16
1 – 5 years	16	42.11
6 – 10 years	4	10.53
10 – 15 years	4	10.53
16 – above years	9	23.68
Total	38	100.00

Table 6 presents the distribution of the respondents in terms of length of service in QCPL. The majority of the respondents have 1-5 years of service with a frequency of sixteen (16) or 42.11%. Nine (9) respondents have a length of 16 years and above. Five (5) or 13.16% have less than 1 year of stay in QCPL while four (4) or 10.53% have 6-10 years and 10-15 years of service.

Table 7:  Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in                                                                               Terms of Knowledge Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent		Competent		Moderately Competent			Less Competent		No Competency		Median		Verbal Interpretation
	5		4		3			2		1
	Frequency
1. Knowledge of foundational cataloging and metadata principles
1.1. Understands historical context for current metadata principles	6 (15.79%)		18 (47.37%)		11 (28.95%)			3 (7.89%)		0 (0%)		4		Competent
1.2. Understands principles of identity management and authority control	4 (10.53%)		17 (44.74%)		15 (39.47%)			2 (5.26%)		0 (0%)		4		Competent
1.3. Understands principles behind controlled vocabularies, including syndetic structure and the benefits and drawbacks of pre- and post-coordinated terms, and can identify the vocabularies in current use	3 (7.89%)		12 (31.58%)		18 (47.37%)			5 (13.16%)		0 (0%)		3		Moderately Competent
1.4. Understands various classification structures and can identify the classification schemes in current use	7 (18.42%)		14 (36.74%)		15 (39.47%)			2 (5.26%)		0 (0%)		4		Competent
1.5. Understands data standardization		3 (7.89%)		18 (47.37%)		16 (42.11%)	1 (2.63%)		0 (0%)		4		Competent
1.6. Understands conceptual models for library data		1 (2.63%)		19 (50%)		14 (36.84%)	3 (7.89%)		1 (2.63%)		4		Competent

Table 7 shows the self-assessment level of QCPL librarians regarding their Knowledge Competencies. The results show that 15.79% of librarians considered themselves highly competent in understanding historical context for current metadata principles, while 47.37% were competent in identity management and authority control. 7.89% were highly competent in understanding the principles behind controlled vocabularies, while 18.42% were highly competent in various classification structures. 7.89% were highly competent in data standardization, and only 2.63% understood conceptual models for library data. These results confirm [15] notion that cataloging knowledge should include the utilization of digital object standards and comprehension of Metadata Authority Description Standards (MADS) and Metadata Object Description Standards (MODS).

Table 8:  Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in Terms of Knowledge Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
2. Knowledge of systems and technology
2.1. Understands indexing and database	0 (0%)	10 (26.32%)	22 (57.89%)	5 (13.16%)	1 (2.63%)	3	Moderately Competent
2.2. Understands library services platforms/library management systems and/or institutional repository and digital library management systems	2 (5.26%)	11 (28.95%)	19 (50%)	5 (13.16%)	1 (2.63%)	3	Moderately Competent
2.3. Understands the nature and function of cooperative bibliographic databases	4 (10.53%)	13 (34.21%)	17 (44.74%)	4 (10.53%)	0 (0%)	3	Moderately Competent
2.4 Understands methods and approaches for metadata creation, editing, analysis, and transformation	2 (5.26%)	2 (5.26%)	21 (55.26%)	11 (28.95%)	2 (5.26%)	3	Moderately Competent

Table 8 shows the self-assessment level of QCPL librarians regarding their knowledge of systems and technology. Out of 38 librarians, none considered themselves highly competent in indexing and database knowledge, while 26.32% were competent. 22.95% were highly competent in library services platforms, 28.95% in library management systems, 50% in cooperative bibliographic databases, and 5.26% in metadata creation, editing, analysis, and transformation. These results support [16] view that integrating technology in the library and information science field presents challenges to librarians.

Table 9: Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in Terms of Knowledge Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
3. Knowledge of trends in cataloging and metadata profession
3.1. Understands how cataloging fits within the broader library and cultural heritage context (“Big Picture” Knowledge)	3 (7.89%)	9 (23.68%)	18 (47.37%)	7 (18.42%)	1 (2.63%)	3	Moderately Competent
3.2. Has awareness of major trends/organizations in the cataloging profession	1 (2.63%)	3 (7.89%)	24 (63.16%)	6 (15.79%)	4 (10.53%)	3	Moderately Competent

Table 9 shows the QCPL librarians’ self-assessment level regarding Knowledge Competencies. Under Item 3. Knowledge of trends in cataloging and metadata profession, in Item 3.1. Understands how cataloging fits within the broader library and cultural heritage context (“Big Picture” Knowledge), among 38 librarians, 3 or 7.89% evaluated themselves as Highly Competent; 9 or 23.68% are Competent; 18 or 47.37% are Moderately Competent; 7 or 18.42% are Less Competent; and 1 or 2.63% has No Competency with a median of 3 or verbal interpretation of Moderately Competent. Lastly, Item 3.2. Has awareness of major trends/organizations in the cataloging profession showed that only 1 or 2.63% is Highly Competent; 3 or 7.89% are Competent; 24 or 63.16% are Moderately Competent; 6 or 15.79% are Less Competent; and 4 or 10.53% have No Competency with a median of 3 or verbal interpretation of Moderately Competent. These findings support [17]) statement that catalogers must enhance their abilities in response to the trends in library digitalization and the expansion of e-resource collections.

Table 10: Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in Terms of Skills and Ability Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
4. Application of conceptual frameworks, standards, and principles within a bibliographic system
4.1. Formulates consistent data	1 (2.63%)	11 (28.95%)	16 (42.11%)	8 (21.05%)	2 (5.26%)	3	Moderately Competent
4.2. Disambiguates creators, contributors, titles/series	0 (0%)	5 (13.16%)	21 (55.26%)	8 (21.05%)	4 (10.53%)	3	Moderately Competent
4.3. Analyzes and classifies resources	1 (2.63%)	9 (23.68%)	21 (55.26%)	5 (13.16%)	2 (5.26%)	3	Moderately Competent
4.4. Encodes machine-actionable data	0 (0%)	6 (15.79%)	20 (52.63%)	9 (23.68%)	3 (7.89%)	3	Moderately Competent
4.5. Asserts relationships between creators, works, etc.	0 (0%)	6 (15.79%)	21 (55.26%)	9 (23.68%)	2 (5.26%)	3	Moderately Competent

Table 10 reveals the self-assessment level of QCPL librarians regarding their skills and ability competencies. The results show that 2.63% of librarians consider themselves highly competent in formulating consistent data, while 28.95% are competent in disambiguating creators, contributors, titles/series, analyzing and classifying resources, and 23.68% in encoding machine-actionable data. The results also indicate that no librarians are highly competent in establishing relationships between creators and works. These findings support [17] emphasizing the importance of catalogers understanding the conceptual frameworks behind standards and the organization of fundamental cataloging tools and data format specifications.

Table 11: Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in Terms of Skills and Ability Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
5. Application of universal standards within a local context
5.1. Assesses or seeks to understand local user needs for library metadata	1 (2.63%)	10 (26.32%)	18 (47.37%)	7 (18.42%)	2 (5.26%)	3	Moderately Competent
5.2. Sets (or advises on) local metadata practice, including selecting appropriate standards for local use	0 (0%)	8 (21.05%)	20 (52.63%)	7 (18.42%)	3 (7.89%)	3	Moderately Competent
5.3. Documents local decisions and practices	0 (0%)	9 (23.68%)	19 (50%)	5 (13.16%)	5 (13.16%)	3	Moderately Competent
5.4. Designs and modifies cataloging and metadata workflow processes	0 (0%)	6 (15.79%)	19 (50%)	8 (21.05%)	5 (13.16%)	3	Moderately Competent

 

Table 11 shows the self-assessment level of QCPL librarians regarding their skills and ability competencies. Among 38 librarians, only 2.63% are highly competent in understanding local user needs for library metadata. No librarians rated themselves as highly competent in setting local metadata practice, documenting local decisions and practices, or designing and modifying cataloging and metadata workflow processes. These results support [18] notion that catalogers should have a thorough understanding of changes in cataloging procedures to meet changing information requirements of library patrons.

Table 12: Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification                              Competency in Terms of Skills and Ability Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
6. Integration, mapping, and transformation of metadata within a bibliographic system
6.1. Converts or crosswalks a record/document from one metadata standard to another	1 (2.63%)	2 (5.26%)	20 (52.63%)	8 (21.05%)	7 (18.42%)	3	Moderately Competent
6.2. Employs standards to normalize metadata	1 (2.63%)	5 (13.16%)	19 (50%)	7 (18.42%)	6 (15.79%)	3	Moderately Competent
6.3. Documents input and mapping decisions	0 (0%)	7 (18.42%)	16 (42.11%)	7 (18.42%)	8 (21.05%)	3	Moderately Competent

Table 12 reveals the self-assessment level of QCPL librarians regarding their skills and ability competencies. It shows that 1 out of 38 librarians are highly competent in converting or crosswalking records between metadata standards, and 1 out of 38 are proficient in using standards to normalize metadata. The results also indicate that cataloging is a rare skill among professional librarians, with no librarian rated highly competent in document input and mapping decisions.

Table 13: Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in                                                                     Terms of Behavioral Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
7. Interpersonal communication
7.1. Collaborates effectively	7 (18.42%)	26 (68.42%)	5 (13.16%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
7.2. Demonstrates strong oral and written communication skills	4 (10.53%)	22 (57.89%)	12 (31.58%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
7.3. Builds and maintains collegial relationships	7 (18.42%)	28 (73.68%)	3 (7.89%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
7.4. Listens with genuine interest and an open mind	13 (34.21%)	23 (60.53%)	2 (5.26%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent

 

Table 13 shows the QCPL librarians’ self-assessment level regarding Behavioral Competencies. Under Item 7. Interpersonal communication, in item 7.1. Collaborates effectively, 7 out of 38 librarians or 18.42% considered themselves as Highly Competent; 26 or 68.42% are Competent; 5 or 13.16% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. For Item 7.2. Demonstrates strong oral and written communication skills showed that 4 or 10.53% are Highly Competent; 22 or 57.89% are Competent; 12 or 31.58% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. In Item 7.3. Builds and maintains collegial relationships, 7 or 18.42% rated themselves as Highly Competent; 28 or 73.68% are Competent; 3 or 7.89% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. Item 7.4. Listens with genuine interest and an open mind showed that 13 or 60.53% are Highly Competent; 23 or 60.53% are Competent; 2 are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. These results support the idea of [19] that besides proficiency in technology, catalogers should also demonstrate range skills of interpersonal skills and leadership abilities.

Table 14: Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in                                                                    Terms of Behavioral Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
8. Public service orientation
8.1. Recognizes multiple cultures and diverse populations	15 (39.47%)	17 (44.74%)	5 (13.16%)	1 (2.63%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
8.2. Prioritizes user needs	20 (52.63%)	17 (44.74%)	1 (2.63%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5	Highly Competent
8.3. Values diverse viewpoints and ways of doing things	16 (42.11%)	21 (55.26%)	1 (2.63%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent

 

Table 14 shows the QCPL librarians’ self-assessment level regarding Behavioral Competencies. Under Item 8. Public service orientation, in Item 8.1. Recognizes multiple cultures and diverse populations revealed that among 38 librarians, 15 or 39.47% are considered themselves as Highly Competent; 17 or 44.74% are Competent; 5 or 13.16% are Moderately Competent; 1 or 2.63% is Less Competent; while none answered No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. For Item 8.2. Prioritizes user needs, there are 20 librarians or 52.63% answered that they are Highly Competent; 17 or 44.74% are Competent; 1 or 2.63% is Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 5 or verbal interpretation of Highly Competent. Item 8.3. Values diverse viewpoints and ways of doing things showed that 16 or 42.11% are Highly Competent; 21 or 55.26% are Competent; 1 or 2.63% is Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. These findings uphold the view presented by the [20] that proficiency in multiple languages is particularly beneficial in a public library setting, as it allows staff to better serve patrons from diverse cultural backgrounds.

Table 15: Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in                                                                                      Terms of Behavioral Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
9. Initiative & adaptability
9.1. Demonstrates creativity	12 (31.58%)	19 (50%)	7 (18.42%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
9.2. Demonstrates flexibility	15 (39.47%)	19 (50%)	4 (10.53%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
9.3. Demonstrates comfort with ambiguity	9 (23.68%)	22 (57.89%)	6 (15.79%)	1 (2.63%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
9.4. Demonstrates independence	11 (28.95%)	22 (57.89%)	5 (13.16%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
9.5. Demonstrates a commitment to lifelong learning	21 (55.26%)	14 (36.84%)	3 (7.89%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	5	Highly Competent

 

Table 15 shows the QCPL librarians’ self-assessment level regarding Behavioral Competencies. Under Item 9. Initiative & adaptability, in Item 9.1. Demonstrates creativity showed that out of 38 librarians, 12 or 31.58% considered themselves as Highly Competent; 19 or 50% are Competent; 7 or 18.42% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. For Item 9.2. Demonstrates flexibility, 15 or 39.47% are Highly Competent; 19 or 50% are Competent; 4 or 10.53% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. Item 9.3. Demonstrates comfort with ambiguity, 9 or 23.68% answered that they are Highly Competent; 22 or 57.89% are Competent; 6 or 15.79% are Moderately Competent; 1 or 2.63% is Less Competent; while none answered No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. Item 9.4. Demonstrates independence showed that 11 or 28.95% are Highly Competent; 22 or 57.89% are Competent; 5 or 13.16% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. In Item 9.5. Demonstrates a commitment to lifelong learning, 21 or 55.26% considered themselves as Highly Competent; 14 or 36.84% are Competent; 3 or 7.89% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 5 or verbal interpretation of Highly Competent. These results validate Xu’s (2015) statement that librarians must adapt and be flexible to offer more effective services to library users.

 

Table 16: Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in

Terms of Behavioral Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
10. Professional curiosity
10.1. Maintains awareness of professional literature and research	10 (26.32%)	21 (55.26%)	7 (18.42%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
10.2. Seeks involvement with professional organizations	9 (23.68%)	23 (60.53%)	6 (15.79%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
10.3. Advocates for the profession	14 (36.84%)	16 (42.11%)	8 (21.05%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent

 

Table 16 shows the QCPL librarians’ self-assessment level regarding Behavioral Competencies. Under Item 10. Professional curiosity, in Item 10.1. Maintains awareness of professional literature and research, among 38 librarians, 10 or 26.32% rated themselves as Highly Competent; 21 or 55.26% are Competent; 7 or 18.42% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. For Item 10.2. Seeks involvement with professional organizations, showed that 9 or 23.68% are Highly Competent; 23 or 60.53% are Competent; 6 or 15.79% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. Item 10.3. Advocates for the profession showed that 14 or 36.84% are Highly Competent; 16 or 42.11% are Competent; 8 or 21.05% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. These findings support [21] argument that collaboration is a fundamental skill for catalogers.

Table 17: Frequency and Median Distribution of Cataloging and Classification Competency in Terms of Behavioral Competencies

Competencies	Highly Competent	Competent	Moderately Competent	Less Competent	No Competency	Median	Verbal Interpretation
	5	4	3	2	1
	Frequency
11. Problem solving
11.1. Ability to manage projects	9 (23.68%)	23 (60.53%)	6 (15.79%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
11.2. Ability to manage workflows	11 (28.95%)	20 (52.63%)	7 (18.42%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
11.3. Ability to think critically	9 (23.68%)	22 (57.89%)	7 (18.42%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
11.4. Ability to sustain attention to detail	8 (21.05%)	23 (60.53%)	7 (18.42%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
11.5. Ability to conduct assessments and evaluations	12 (31.58%)	19 (50%)	7 (18.42%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent
11.6. Ability to contribute to holistic visioning and strategic planning efforts	8 (21.05%)	22 (57.89%)	8 (21.05%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	4	Competent

Table 17 shows the QCPL librarians’ self-assessment level regarding Behavioral Competencies. Under Item 11. Problem solving, in Item 11.1. Ability to manage projects, 9 out of 38 librarians or 23.68% rated themselves as Highly Competent; 23 or 60.53% are Competent; 6 or 15.79% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. For Item 11.2. Ability to manage workflows, showed that 11 or 28.95% are Highly Competent; 20 or 52.63% are Competent; 7 or 18.42% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. Item 11.3. Ability to think critically revealed that 9 or 23.68% are Highly Competent; 22 or 57.89% are Competent, 7 or 18.42% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. In Item 11.4. Ability to sustain attention to detail, 8 or 21.05% considered themselves Highly Competent; 23 or 60.53% are Competent; 7 or 18.42% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. For Item 11.5. Ability to conduct assessments and evaluations, 12 or 31.58% are Highly Competent; 19 or 50% are Competent; 7 or 18.42% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. Lastly, Item 11.6. Ability to contribute to holistic visioning and strategic planning efforts showed that 8 or 21.05% rated themselves as Highly Competent; 22 or 57.89% are Competent; 8 or 21.05% are Moderately Competent; while none answered Less Competent and No Competency with a median of 4 or verbal interpretation of Competent. These results support the notion of [22] that decision-making and analytical reasoning are considered as essential skills to achieve success.

4.CONCLUSION

The study aimed to develop a cataloging and classification training program for librarians at the Quezon City Public Library. To achieve this goal, a descriptive survey method was employed, where a questionnaire based on the ALCTS’ Core Competencies for Cataloging and Metadata Professional Librarians was distributed to 38 librarians. The questionnaire sought to assess the librarians’ knowledge, skills, and competencies in cataloging and classification. The study’s findings revealed that the majority of respondents were between 26-35 years old, with 31.58% falling within this age range. The respondents were predominantly female, accounting for 73.68% of the total, while males comprised 26.32%. In terms of civil status, most respondents were single, making up 55.26% of the total. The study used statistical computation procedures such as frequency distribution, percentage, and median to process the data collected. The results of the study will inform the development of a training program tailored to the needs of the librarians, focusing on areas where they require improvement. By enhancing the cataloging and classification skills of librarians, the study aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of library services, ultimately benefiting library patrons. The development of a training program will address gaps in librarians’ expertise, ensuring that they have the necessary skills and knowledge to provide high-quality services. The study’s findings will also contribute to better cataloging and classification practices, enabling library users to access resources more quickly and easily. By investing in the professional development of librarians, the Quezon City Public Library can enhance its services and better serve the needs of its community. Overall, the study’s results will have a positive impact on the library’s operations and services, highlighting the importance of ongoing training and professional development for librarians. By prioritizing the development of librarians’ skills and competencies, the library can ensure that it remains a valuable resource for the community it serves.

References

1. Tinipunan, M. P. A. (2021). The University of Santo Tomas Bachelor of Library and Information Science Program. Philippine Journal of Librarianship and Information Studies, 41(1), 63-69.
2. Dorado, D. A. (2024). Exploring the landscape of librarianship in the Philippines: Establishing the profession’s population parameter estimates. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 09610006241240485.
3. Estrullo-Suaga, E., Miaque-Crucero, M. J., & Superio, D. L. (2023). Undervalued, understaffed, underdeveloped, and underutilized? The status of public libraries in the eleven municipalities of rural Iloilo Province, Philippines. Information development, 39(3), 659-676.
4. TUBOG, P. V. (2022). USERS’AWARENESS, PREFERENCES AND ATTITUDES TOWARDS REFERENCE SERVICES. NEUROQUANTOLOGY, 20(6), 100049-100070.
5. Asid, B. A. (2024). Employment Status of Library and Information Science Graduates: Basis for Curriculum Enhancement and Development of Lis Program Offerings. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 1864-1873.
6. Sacramento, S. P., Colarina, A., & Lagustan, D. A. (2023). A Scoping Review of Health Sciences Librarianship Research in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Librarianship and Information Studies, 43(2), 5-16.
7. Schijf, C. M. (2023). Senior High School (SHS) Information Literacy (IL) Skills Assessment Using the Tool for Real-time Assessment of Information Literacy Skills (TRAILS). Philippine Journal of Media and Information Literacy, 1(1), 77-102.
8. Sulaiman, M., Untari, D., & Subagyo, H. (2021, November). Research data librarians as research support systems for COVID-19 during and Post-Pandemic: a case study of the Indonesian Institutes of Sciences. In 7th International Conference of Asian Special Libraries(p. 223).
9. Tua, K. J., Caballero, G. V. A., & Aquino-Ong, S. C. (2022). Philippine landscape heritage education: review of the preparedness of landscape architecture curricula in the Philippines for cultural landscape heritage conservation specialization. Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development.
10. Muhammad Ali, M. L. S., Ananta, M. Z., Sos, S., Hafiz Ahmad, S. S. T., & SP, C. (2021). JOB SATISFACTION AMONG SELECTED ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS IN NORTH SUMATERA. SCOPINDO MEDIA PUSTAKA.
11. Ibanez, A. G., Quezon, E. T., & Ararsa, W. (2021). Assessment on Materials Quality Control Implementation of Building Construction Projects and Workmanship: A Case Study of Ambo University.
12. Almacen, R. M., Castilla, D., Gonzales, G., Gonzales, R., Costan, F., Costan, E., … & Aro, J. L. (2023). Preparedness Indicator System for Education 4.0 with FUCOM and Rough Sets. Systems 2023, 11, 288.
13. Fernandez, R. E. (2023). Quipper School and The Reading Comprehension Performance Of Grade 11 Students. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 20.
14. Palcullo, V. E., Geromiano, J. F., & Superio, D. (2021). Grey literature usage among Filipino aquaculture researchers: A bibliometric analysis of research from 2009 to 2018. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
15. Alarios, P. A. (2022). Walking on Sunshine: Defining the Legal Parameters of Open Data in the Philippines. Ateneo LJ, 67, 275.
16. Albis, M. L. F., Romasoc, S. O., Pelayo, S. G., Gavira, B. A. C., & Asombrado, J. P. J. (2023). Web scraping for price statistics in the Philippines. Statistical Journal of the IAOS, 39(4), 933-945.
17. Reston, E. D., & Jugar, R. R. (2023). Building a Research Culture in Philippine Graduate Education: Reflections on Experiences in Mathematics Education. In Asian Research in Mathematics Education: Mapping the Field(pp. 3-23). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
18. Ayson-Plank, C. (2024). Counter-Productivity as Resistance: Contemporary Art of the Filipino Labor Diaspora. University of California, Santa Cruz.
19. Ocampo, A. R. (2021). Looking Back 6: Prehistoric Philippines(Vol. 6). Anvil Publishing, Inc.
20. Sangalang, S. O., Lemence, A. L. G., Ottong, Z. J., Valencia, J. C., Olaguera, M., Canja, R. J. F., … & Kistemann, T. (2022). School water, sanitation, and hygiene (WaSH) intervention to improve malnutrition, dehydration, health literacy, and handwashing: a cluster-randomised controlled trial in Metro Manila, Philippines. BMC Public Health, 22(1), 2034.
21. Talusan, M. (2021). Instruments of Empire: Filipino Musicians, Black Soldiers, and Military Band Music during US Colonization of the Philippines. Univ. Press of Mississippi.
22. Yerbury, H., Olsson, M., & Perera, P. (2024). Capital as the outcome of information practices: a study of devotees and monks of a Theravada Buddhist Temple. Journal of Documentation, 80(1), 101-115. Pineda, D. (2022). Building Our Own Houses: AAPIs in Congress.
23. Radvan, M. —Tom Cornford, Senior Lecturer in Theatre and Performance, The Royal Central School of Speech and Drama, University of London “Peter Zazzali’s comprehensive investigation expertly unpicks the rifts and fissures underlying contemporary actor-training across the US, Canada, UK, Australia and New Zealand. For anyone seeking to understand how it came.
24. López, L. L. L., & Coello, G. (Eds.). (2021). Indigenous futures and learnings taking place. Taylor & Francis Group.
25. Hardon, A., & Lim Tan, M. (2024). Packaged Plants: Seductive supplements and metabolic precarity in the Philippines(p. 272). UCL Press.