Page 2517
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026
Extent Difficulty of Cataloging Books as Perceivedby Library and
Information Science Students
Romel Rellon, Jessica D. Caubat, Josephine Revira, April Lina
Romel Rellon Library and Information Science, Tagoloan Community College,
Cagayan de Oro City, MISAMIS ORIENTAL, Philippines
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.150500201
Received: 28 May 2026; Accepted: 02 June 2026; Published: 15 June 2026
ABSTRACT
Cataloging is essential for efficient information retrieval in library science. This mixed-methods study
investigates the book cataloging challenges faced by Bachelor of Library and Information Science (BLIS)
students at Tagoloan Community College, utilizing surveys and in-depth interviews. The results reveal that while
most students showed satisfactory proficiency, they experienced mild difficulties in identifying access points,
assigning classification numbers, and selecting subject headings. Crucially, a strong correlation emerged
between students' perceived difficulties and their cataloging outcomes, proving these challenges directly impact
academic performance. Qualitative data highlighted a critical need for more practical exercises, better access to
cataloging tools, and collaborative learning spaces. Based on these findings, the study recommends enhancing
instructional strategies and updating learning resources to prepare students for real-world professional demands.
Keywords: Cataloging, cataloging books, cataloging difficulties, access point, classification, subject heading,
accuracy, reliability, accessibility.
INTRODUCTION
Cataloging is a cornerstone of library science, vital for managing information resources and ensuring efficient
retrieval. Accurate cataloging allows users to locate materials quickly, facilitating research and learning (Mats
University, 2024), while reliable practices bolster a library's reputation as a trustworthy information source
(Billey et al., 2024). However, students often face challenges in mastering this process, particularly regarding
access points, classification schemes, and subject headings.
Globally, cataloging complies with standards set by organizations like the International Federation of Library
Associations and Institutions (IFLA), whose International Cataloguing Principles (ICP) standardize
bibliographic data sharing (IFLA, 2023). Yet, cataloging remains complex due to the rise of digital and
multimedia formats. To adapt, many countries have implemented Resource Description and Access (RDA)
frameworks, prompting global education programs to update their curricula accordingly (Smith, 2019).
In the Philippines, the National Library of the Philippines (NLP) guides bibliographic management, but
widespread underfunding and resource scarcity hinder the process (NLP, 2023). Local Library and Information
Science (LIS) students frequently struggle due to a lack of advanced cataloging systems and practical training.
Nevertheless, library schools are increasingly adopting RDA to align future Filipino librarians with international
standards (Cruz, 2020).
Libraries in Region 10 face identical constraints, relying heavily on manual methods due to limited budgets and
outdated tools (NLP, 2023). Regional LIS students report persistent difficulties in mastering these tasks.
Bridging these gaps in training and resources is vital to ensuring catalog records remain accurate and accessible
(Hernandez, 2019).
Page 2518
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026
At Tagoloan Community College, Bachelor of Library and Information Science (BLIS) students face these exact
hurdles. They struggle to formulate effective access points and navigate complex classification systems across
diverse collections (Rellon, 2025). Additionally, selecting precise subject headings to describe content accurately
remains a significant barrier. These challenges directly compromise the accuracy, reliability, and accessibility
of their cataloged materials.
Methods
This study used a mixed-methods research design, combining quantitative and qualitative approaches to explore
the perceived difficulty of cataloging books among Library and Information Science students. The quantitative
component employed structured questionnaires to collect numerical data on students' experiences and challenges
with cataloging. The qualitative aspect included open-ended questions and follow-up interviews to gather
detailed insights into specific issues students faced during the cataloging process. By integrating both methods,
this design ensured a comprehensive understanding of the topic, allowing for deeper analysis of the data and
validation of findings from multiple perspectives (Dawadi, Shrestha, & Giri, 2021).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Respondent’s Profile
The respondent’s profile covered the age, year level, and sex.
On Partcipant’s age
The data shows that respondents aged 18–20 years old comprise almost half of the overall population with 64
(47.06%) responses, followed by those aged 21–23 years old with 59 (43.38%) responses. This indicates an
increase in the number of new enrollees compared to the previous year. However, respondents aged 27 years old
and above accounted for the lowest number, with only 5 responses. This suggests that older individuals are less
likely to pursue enrollment, possibly due to work or family responsibilities. This further implies that higher
education is still predominantly accessed by traditional-aged students.
On Participant’s sex
The data shows that 99 (69.85%) of the people who answered were female, while 41 (30.15%) of the people
who answered were male.
This indicates that women continue to have strong representation in higher education. Furthermore, this trend
reflects the increasing participation of women in tertiary education, as evidenced by the 2023 female-to-male
enrollment ratio of 1.30 in the Philippines (World Bank, 2023, page 13).
On Participant’s year level
It has been noticed that most of the participants are second year students with 101 (74.26%) responses. This is a
manifestation that more students are added to the profession, reflecting the continued growth of the profession.
This is because second-year students are typically in the early stages of their academic journey, where enrollment
numbers are generally higher due to initial interest and program accessibility. However, fourth-year students had
the lowest representation, with only 10 (7.35%) responses.
This indicates limited enrollment in the BLIS program in previous years, which aligns with findings from Cameja
et al. (2023, page 13), suggesting that many high school students are aware of the BLIS program but lack a deep
understanding of its curriculum and career opportunities, leading to a lower inclination to pursue it as a college
course.
Page 2519
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026
Extent difficulty on cataloging books as perceived by the respondents
On Access Point
The data displays the distributed mean of each indicator, yielding an overall mean of 2.16. This score suggests
that, on average, students perceive a moderate level of difficulty in understanding and applying access points in
cataloging. The relatively low mean implies that while students possess foundational knowledge, practical
application and deeper comprehension remain significant areas of struggle. Notably, the item “Selecting the right
access points when cataloging books is difficult for me” registered the highest mean of 2.78, indicating that
identifying appropriate access points serves as the most challenging aspect for the respondents. This difficulty
likely stems from limited experience in interpreting bibliographic data and assessing the contextual relevance of
various access points. This finding aligns with Ayık and Yılmaz (2021, p. 15), who noted that inconsistencies in
assigning access points in academic settings often stem from variations in cataloging practices and insufficient
exposure to real-world cataloging systems during training.
On Classification
“I have a hard time in choosing classification numbers for items” got the highest mean of 2.68. This means that
students often find it moderately challenging to pick the right classification numbers, which are needed to help
organize library materials properly. This could be because classification systems are detailed, and students need
to understand the subject well to choose the correct number. A study by Pattah, Almah, and Taufiq (2023, page
17) showed that even in university libraries in South Sulawesi, different ways of using the Dewey Decimal
Classification system sometimes lead to confusion, which may be similar to what students are experiencing.
However, the question “Understanding classification systems like Dewey Decimal or Library of Congress is
difficult” got the lowest mean of 2.49. This is still in the difficult range, which means students have a harder
time learning and understanding how these systems work. This could be because these systems have many rules
and can be confusing at first. Ajani and Sulyman (2023, page 17) explained that many catalogers, including
students, need better training and support to feel more confident in using these systems.
On Subject Heading
The data shows the average mean for each statement, with an overall mean of 2.69. The question “I can use
standard subject heading lists effectively” got the highest mean of 2.72. This means that students struggle when
using tools like the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH). Patel and Mathur (2020, page 18), found that
students frequently experience confusion when deciding whether to assign a broad or a more specific subject
term. However, the question “I can easily match subject headings to a book’s content” had the lowest mean of
2.67, which also means slightly difficult. This shows that students have some trouble choosing the right subject
heading that fits the book. This may be because it takes skill and practice to understand a book’s topic and choose
the best subject heading. This supports what Chow, Kao, and Li (2023, page 19) said: that students need more
time and practice to get better at cataloging tasks like this.
Outcome of Cataloging Books by the respondents
On Accuracy
Table 9 presents the mean distribution for each indicator, yielding an overall mean of 2.64. This result indicates
that while students possess a basic understanding of cataloging, they still encounter difficulties in applying rules
accurately and consistently. Interestingly, the item “I am certain on the accuracy of my cataloging tasks” received
the highest mean of 2.70, which falls within the "slightly difficult" threshold. This suggests that while students
feel somewhat confident about the correctness of their work, a degree of uncertainty persists. As McAdie et al.
(2023, p. 21) note, effective cataloging requires rigorous training and deliberate practice to improve students'
accuracy and professional confidence. Conversely, the item “I can follow cataloging rules correctly and
consistently” garnered the lowest mean of 2.56, also falling into the "slightly difficult" category. This lower
score suggests that students struggle with the consistent execution of cataloging protocols, likely due to the
Page 2520
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026
inherent complexity of bibliographic standards and the evolving nature of the discipline. This structural struggle
aligns with Hertenstein's (2023, p. 20) observation that many library science programs lack sufficient specialized
coursework, which often impedes students' mastery of complex cataloging rules.
On Reliability
The data reveals the average mean for each indicator, resulting in an overall mean of 2.60. According to the
interpretation scale, this score indicates that students find maintaining the reliability of their cataloging work
slightly difficult. This suggests that while students strive for precision and accuracy, achieving systematic
consistency remains a challenge. Notably, the item “I can create records that accurately reflect the items
cataloged” registered the highest mean score of 2.71, which also falls within the "slightly difficult" category.
This finding implies that while students are successfully developing the skills needed to generate correct and
comprehensive bibliographic records, they still encounter minor execution hurdles. This pattern aligns with the
findings of Rellon et al. (2025, p. 22), who note that students demonstrate significant improvement in producing
reliable records when provided with deliberate, hands-on cataloging practice and targeted feedback from
instructors.
On Accessibility
The data presents the average mean for each statement, yielding an overall mean of 2.63. According to the
interpretation scale, this score indicates that students find cataloging tasks slightly difficult, suggesting that while
they possess a baseline theoretical understanding, applying these rules accurately and consistently remains a
challenge. Notably, the items “It is difficult to follow Cataloging codes” and “Cataloging improves accessibility
to users” tied for the highest mean of 2.66, falling within the slightly difficult threshold. This alignment implies
that while students clearly recognize the value of cataloging in enhancing resource accessibility, they
simultaneously struggle to navigate and apply complex cataloging codes. This dual dynamic reflects the findings
of Luna and Rojas (2023, p. 23), who discovered that targeted training and robust support systems heavily
influence how BLIS students perceive cataloging complexities; specifically, those with access to supplemental
workshops, training materials, and technical support reported lower levels of difficulty. Conversely, the item “I
consistently create records that are user-friendly and accessible” registered the lowest mean of 2.60. Though still
interpreted as slightly difficult, this lower score highlights a persistent struggle among students to successfully
translate their cataloging work into outputs that are both standard-compliant and user-friendly.
Academic performance of the respondents in Cataloging Course
The results in Table 14 reveal that the vast majority of students have achieved a commendable level of
competence, with 94.85% falling within the "Satisfactory (Approaching Proficiency)" category. This indicates
that a significant portion of the cohort demonstrates a reliable understanding of cataloging principles.
Additionally, a small segment (3.67%) achieved a "Very Satisfactory" rating, reflecting a superior level of
subject mastery. Conversely, a minor fraction of the students (1.47%) is classified under the "Fairly Satisfactory
(Developing)" category, underscoring a distinct need for targeted instructional intervention to strengthen their
skills. Collectively, these baselines underscore areas for pedagogical enhancement in the learning process. As
emphasized by Rellon et al. (2025), technical proficiency in this domain is crucial for the effective organization
and retrieval of library materials. Their findings reinforce that mastering bibliographic practices is essential for
aspiring information professionals to ensure accuracy, noting that "cataloging is not merely about following
rules; it involves understanding the underlying principles that facilitate access to information" (p. 22).
Significant Relationship between the Extent of Difficulty of Cataloging and the outcome of Cataloging
Books
The test result revealed a relationship of Difficulty of Cataloging and the outcome of Cataloging Books. The
table presents the variables that show a moderate positive correlation coefficient of 0.87 as indicated in the table
of correlation coefficient. Additionally, the table shows the P-value of 0.0001 which means that the hypothesis
test is statistically significant. This indicates that the challenges students face in aspects such as access points,
Page 2521
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026
classification, and subject headings have a meaningful impact on the accuracy, reliability, and accessibility of
their cataloged outputs.
Result of the in-depth interview of the respondents in Cataloging Course
In-depth interviews conducted with the BLIS students provided critical qualitative insights into the core
challenges and essential support mechanisms required for effective mastery of cataloging and classification. A
thematic analysis of the participants' responses yielded five major themes: (1) Practical Experience, (2)
Availability of Learning Resources, (3) Collaborative Learning and Feedback, (4) Focus and Application, and
(5) Institutional Support.
The most prominent theme identified by the participants was the critical necessity of practical experience.
Students expressed a profound need for expanded hands-on training, specifically requesting authentic cataloging
exercises and specialized workshops. They emphasized that direct, practical application is vital to bridging the
gap between theoretical knowledge and professional execution, which ultimately builds their technical
confidence and aligns classroom learning with real-world library operations.
Concurrently, the availability of learning resources emerged as a critical determinant of student success.
Participants noted that access to contemporary textbooks, online tutorials, sample bibliographic records, and
digital authorities such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is indispensable for clarifying
complex standards. The data indicates that while resource scarcity severely restricts learning opportunities, a
diverse and accessible repository of tools significantly accelerates professional skill development.
Furthermore, students heavily emphasized the pedagogical value of collaborative learning and feedback. Group
discussions, collaborative brainstorming sessions, and structured mentorship from seasoned catalogers were
highlighted as highly effective strategies for deconstructing intricate frameworks. Through these collaborative
channels, students can cross-share knowledge, systematically resolve technical doubts, and receive constructive
peer and expert feedback necessary for deep comprehension.
Another recurring theme centered on focus and application. The participants recognized that continuous,
deliberate practice and the systematic application of theory to structured tasks are foundational to mastering
cataloging competencies. They underscored that cultivating disciplined practice habits and maintaining high
cognitive engagement are essential to long-term skill retention.
Finally, institutional support was identified as a decisive factor shaping the students' learning trajectories.
Participants suggested re-evaluating instructional delivery by simplifying the presentation of dense cataloging
codes and standards to make them more accessible. Additionally, they highlighted an urgent need for upgraded
technological infrastructure, reliable access to cataloging software, and sustained faculty guidance.
Implementing these structural enhancements would mitigate cognitive overload and render cataloging a far more
approachable and manageable discipline.
Collectively, these qualitative findings underscore a critical imperative to align instructional methodologies with
the localized learning needs of BLIS students. Enhancing practical training pipelines, optimizing resource
distribution, fostering collaborative academic spaces, and solidifying institutional backing are all vital steps to
ensuring student success in cataloging and classification.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, cataloging proficiency depends not only on mastering technical rules and tools but also on
providing students with practical training and a learning environment that supports their development.
Strengthening access to learning resources, enhancing instruction, and fostering collaboration can help students
gain the necessary skills to produce accurate and accessible catalog records. These efforts may empower future
librarians to better serve users and contribute to the overall effectiveness of library services.
Page 2522
www.rsisinternational.org
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026
REFERENCES
1. Ajani, F. O., & Sulyman, A. S. (2023). Prospects and challenges of cataloguing in the digital age.
Communicate: Journal of Library and Information Science, 25(2), 125–138.
https://www.cjolis.org/index.php/cjolis/article/view/49
2. American Library Association. (2021). Bibliographic Control in the Digital Age.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/09610006241240485
3. IFLA. (2023). International cataloguing principles. International Federation of Library Associations and
Institutions.
4. Mats University. (2024). Cataloging and Classification: Principles and Practices in Library Science.
https://www.scribd.com/document/614284419/Mark-Santos-Catalogingand-Classification-1-1
5. McAdie, D. R., Lee, D., Snow, K., Fox, V., & Shoemaker, E. (2023). Toward evidencebased cataloging
ethics: Research, practice, and training in knowledge organization. Proceedings of the Association for
Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 808–812. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.866
6. National Library of the Philippines. (2023). About the National Library of the Philippines.
https://web.nlp.gov.ph/
7. Rellon, R. (2025). Cataloging Books and Non-Books. Tagoloan Community College.
8. Rellon, R et.al (2025). Extent Of Difficulties Faced by Bachelor of Library and Information Science
Students in Cataloging Non-Book Materials. Tagoloan Community College.
https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.12060027
9. Sweller, J. (1988). "Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning." Cognitive Science, 12(2),
257-285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
