









































154  ATLA 2022 PROCEEDINGS

Critical Cataloging
Addressing Bias in Description and  
Finding Solutions
Treshani Perera, Music and Fine Arts Cataloging Librarian, University of 
Kentucky Libraries

ABSTRACT In this paper, the author discusses her experience incorporat-
ing critical cataloging in her cataloging practice and provides examples and 
considerations for prioritizing diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice 
in cataloging and metadata work. The author provides examples pertain-
ing to pattern headings in religion to emphasize inherent biases in library 
cataloging and classification systems, and the need for reflection as well 
as an individual and collective commitment to action to dismantle biases in 
systems, standards, and tools used in cataloging and metadata work. Strat-
egies and resources to consider when cataloging collections highlighting 
diversity, equity, and inclusion are included at the end.

INTRODUCTION AND POSITIONALITY STATEMENT

This paper describes the use of critical cataloging principles in cata-
loging and metadata work in libraries, archives, museums, and cul-
tural heritage organizations. As an arts cataloger, the author is not a 
regular Atla Annual conference attendee and is, therefore, bringing 
her outsider’s perspective here to address issues of diversity, equity, 
and inclusion as they may relate to theological librarianship. The au-
thor has encountered subject headings related to Christianity while 
cataloging music and art collection items depicting early modern 
Europe (late 15th century to late 18th century). The Western art mu-
sic canon and European art history have significant overlap with 
Christianity and related topics, and the author has consulted related 
cataloging resources and subject heading instruction sheets when 
performing subject analysis for arts resources related to Christianity. 
The author will present examples relevant to Library and Informa-
tion Science (LIS) workers in theological librarianship to help recog-



LISTEN AND LEARN SESSIONS  155

nize ways in which bias is inescapable within library collections as 
well as systems and standards used in cataloging and metadata work.

The author works primarily with Library of Congress Subject 
Headings (LCSH) and classification (LCC). Library of Congress (LC) 
systems are standards used in cataloging and metadata work. How-
ever, they tend to reflect mainstream views in librarianship and in 
the greater society. Library and Information Science (LIS) scholar 
Hope Olson defines the mainstream as “White, ethnically European, 
bourgeois, Christian, heterosexual, able-bodied, and male (WEB-
CHAM)” (Olson 2001, 4). Any critique of LC in this paper is simply a 
critical assessment of language used in systems and standards and 
not criticism of those affiliated with the institution.

The author’s critical cataloging work is informed by her lived ex-
periences as a woman of color in the United States and how she navi-
gates professional spaces with marginalized identities. When work-
ing with collections representing intersectionality, a term founded 
by Professor Kimberlé Crenshaw, the author approaches her work 
with cultural humility: by reading and listening to voices from spe-
cific marginalized and underrepresented groups and communities.

CRITICAL CATALOGING

Terms such as critical cataloging, ethical cataloging, radical cata-
loging, conscious editing, inclusive description, reparative descrip-
tion, and more recently, antiracist description are often used inter-
changeably within the context of diversity, equity, and inclusion in 
cataloging and metadata work in libraries, archives, museums, and 
cultural heritage organizations. This paper emphasizes the practice 
of critical cataloging, which is an offshoot of critical librarianship. 
According to Karen Nicholson and Maura Seale, critical librarianship 
is “a growing body of LIS scholarship that draws on critical theory, 
progressive movements within librarianship, an online ‘commu-
nity’ that occasionally organizes in-person meetings, and an infor-
mal Twitter discussion space active since 2014 and identified by the 
#critlib hashtag” (Nicholson and Seale, 2018, 1). Critical cataloging 
is the practical application of critical librarianship in a functional 
area such as cataloging and metadata work, and focuses on critiquing 
knowledge organization systems and dismantling oppressive struc-
tures and hierarchies used in cataloging and classification.



156  ATLA 2022 PROCEEDINGS

Critical cataloging is a growing area of interest among catalog-
ers and metadata LIS workers. Interested individuals engage with 
each other in social media platforms using the #critcat hashtag. In 
recent years, LIS workers outside of cataloging and metadata have 
also taken an interest in critical cataloging topics. While the topic 
has become more popular in recent years, it is not a new concept 
within the history of social justice work in librarianship. Library 
workers such as Frances Lydia Yocom, Dorothy B. Porter, Doris Har-
grett Clack, Dorothy Ann Washington, Sanford Berman, Brian Deer, 
to name a few, had advocated for subject heading and classification 
changes long before critical cataloging was established as a move-
ment in librarianship.

IDENTIFYING BIAS

To understand inherent biases in standards, structures, and systems 
used for library cataloging and classification, the author wishes to 
offer some questions for reflection. The purpose of these questions is 
to help the reader understand why critiquing systems and standards 
is necessary for identifying bias as part of cataloging and metadata 
work. In libraries, archives, museums, and cultural heritage organi-
zations: Who has been doing description work historically, and who 
continues to engage in description work? Who has been involved in 
creating and contributing to controlled vocabularies and cataloging 
standards and systems, and who continues to engage in that work? 
Where is the intellectual labor coming from, and where is the work 
being done? Who has the resources to contribute to the systems used 
in resource description? Whose expertise is being consulted, and for 
which communities? Under whose leadership is description work 
being done? The author invites readers to reflect on past processes 
to understand the present state of cataloging and classifications sys-
tems and standards. Reflection is necessary for envisioning how to 
dismantle inherent biases in these systems and standards.

PATTERN HEADINGS FOR RELIGION

The Library of Congress (LC) identifies certain subject headings as 
representative of a particular category; these are called pattern 
headings. Pattern headings help catalogers with subject assignment 
and subject authority work. Construction of pattern headings is 



LISTEN AND LEARN SESSIONS  157

supported by instruction sheets in the Subject Heading Manual, a 
resource intended to assist with the use of LCSH. Although some in-
struction sheets are specific to LC’s work, knowledge of instruction 
sheets is essential for LIS workers seeking to understand and apply 
LCSH correctly.

Instruction sheets for headings related to religion are dominated 
by examples reflecting denominations, sacred works and texts, and 
orders specific to Christianity. As seen in the image below (figure 1), 
examples from Christianity represent three out of four pattern head-
ing recommendations for religion.

FIGURE 1: Pattern headings for Religion. (Source: OCLC. “Pattern Headings for LC 
Subjects.” February 6, 2020. Accessed June 30, 2022. https://help.oclc.org/Metadata_
Services/Authority_records/Authorities_Format_and_indexes/Get_started/70Pattern_
headings_for_LC_subjects)

Furthermore, there are extensive authorized headings and in-
struction sheets specific to LCSH Bible and related headings. LCSH 
Bible is LC’s recommended pattern heading to consult when creating 
a subject authority record for a sacred text. A search of the term Bible 
in the Library of Congress Linked Data Subject Headings website (id.
loc.gov/authorities/subjects) returns 819 authorized headings in the 
search results. When comparing the representation of authorized 
headings related to the Bible with authorized headings for sacred 
text in other religions: there are two authorized headings for the 
Bhagavadgītā, which is the sacred text in Hinduism, and 133 autho-
rized headings for the Qur’an, which is the sacred text in Islam. The 
overwhelming number of authorized headings for topics related to 
Christianity show an inherent bias for Christianity being the norm 
for religious headings in LCSH. One could also argue that the over-
representation of headings could be due to Christianity and its de-
nominations, sacred works and texts, rites and rituals, and related 
topics dominating library collections depicting religions and theol-

https://help.oclc.org/Metadata_Services/Authority_records/Authorities_Format_and_indexes/Get_started
https://help.oclc.org/Metadata_Services/Authority_records/Authorities_Format_and_indexes/Get_started
https://help.oclc.org/Metadata_Services/Authority_records/Authorities_Format_and_indexes/Get_started


158  ATLA 2022 PROCEEDINGS

ogy, thereby justifying the need for granular and extensive subject 
terms to accurately describe library collections.

These observations do not intend to critique one’s faith. The pur-
pose of this critical analysis is to point out inherent biases in catalog-
ing standards and systems favoring one type of religion as the norm. 
This is particularly important to consider in the context of communi-
ties where Christianity is not the predominant religion. According to 
the Pew Research Center, Muslims are the fastest-growing religious 
group in the world (Pew Research Center 2017), but there are no in-
struction sheets or scope notes for using the LCSH Qur’an and related 
topics. The sole instruction sheet specific to Islam is H1680, providing 
guidance on when to use Islamic vs Muslim headings. As it stands, 
there is little guidance for catalogers looking to establish and revise 
LCSH related to non-Western religions impacting a global audience.

DISMANTLING BIAS

Resource description and subject analysis continues to be a primarily 
human-managed workflow. Due to different experiences and back-
grounds of LIS workers performing subject cataloging and classifica-
tion, subjectivity is to be expected as part of library cataloging and 
classification decisions. While catalogers and metadata LIS workers 
are guided by instruction sheets and resource description standards 
(e.g. RDA), ambiguity in guidelines could lead to different interpreta-
tions of rules and instructions.

Bias is inescapable when LIS workers are expected to work with 
cataloging systems and standards with inherent mainstream bi-
ases. Bias is further perpetuated when subjectivity is plausible in 
descriptive cataloging and subject analysis. In knowledge organiza-
tion systems that rely on humans being able to interpret and apply 
rules and standards, the most impactful way to disrupt mainstream 
bias is to involve humans that are more representative of the greater 
society in all levels of operations related to cataloging and classifica-
tion. It is by bringing in more diverse perspectives and experiences 
that the LIS profession can truly begin to address bias in resource 
description and resolve problematic language in cataloging systems 
and standards.

Dismantling biases in cataloging systems, standards, and tools 
can only be accomplished with systemic change. Systemic change is 
a collective responsibility. Everyone in and engaging with libraries, 



LISTEN AND LEARN SESSIONS  159

archives, museums, and cultural heritage organizations will benefit 
from disrupting existing systems and practices in cataloging and 
metadata work and by a reimagining of cataloging and classifica-
tion that decenters the mainstream in LIS and the greater society. 
Identifying and dismantling bias should matter to not only catalog-
ers and metadata LIS workers, but also anyone in the LIS profession 
invested in making our institutions, collections, and the profession 
more diverse, inclusive, and equitable.

To get to collective responsibility, LIS workers must make an in-
dividual commitment to be responsible for their own education on 
how to dismantle both internal (or implicit) biases and systemic 
biases. Dismantling biases in professional practice, standards, and 
systems requires time and effort towards ongoing self-education. 
Acknowledging one’s privileges is also necessary for dismantling 
and disrupting oppressive structures and systems—everyone has a 
certain amount of privilege. LIS workers with positional power and 
authority, especially those in formal leadership roles, should evalu-
ate and re-evaluate how description work is done, who is doing the 
work, who is getting recognition for work in hierarchical LIS work-
places, whose voices and perspectives are overrepresented, and 
whose voices and perspectives are missing and therefore need to be 
included with intentionality.

CRITICAL CATALOGING IN ACTION

This section provides various steps and strategies for prioritizing 
diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice in cataloging and meta-
data work. The framework below centers the lives and experiences of 
those from historically underrepresented and marginalized groups 
and communities in libraries and the greater society.

In several instances, especially when subjects and other access 
points contain problematic language, LIS workers can practice criti-
cal cataloging by incorporating inclusive keywords in a summary 
statement (MARC 520) or contents note (MARC 505). A general note 
(MARC 500) providing context to problematic language may be ap-
propriate, too. LIS workers with complete control over local discov-
ery systems and cataloging policy decisions are encouraged to con-
sider local subject terms prioritizing equitable access to collections. 
If you are solely dependent on MARC records in a cooperative cata-
loging system such as OCLC WorldCat, local workflows prioritizing 



160  ATLA 2022 PROCEEDINGS

diversity, equity, and inclusion may be necessary for making an im-
mediate impact on your local user community.

When faced with racist or pejorative terms in transcribed data 
such as a title, a subtitle, or contents note, LIS workers can consider 
including a content warning note in the catalog record itself. A gen-
eral note (MARC 500) could provide context explaining why there is 
offensive language in the catalog record. LIS workers can also use 
content warning notes to alert users of potentially offensive language 
in the text of the item. It is important that these content warning 
notes are publicly visible in catalogs and other description platforms. 
The catalog record should be treated as a living document and not 
a historical research document. Racist, offensive, and outdated lan-
guage in general notes should be removed as quickly as possible. A 
collection audit using a list of subject terms or classification ranges 
may point to catalog records with potentially harmful language to 
be addressed systematically either locally or through professional 
groups, such as subject authority funnel programs.

LIS workers representing dominant cultures in libraries (or the 
mainstream) who are looking to partner with underrepresented 
communities for critical cataloging work should approach partner-
ships with cultural humility. Work should be done collaboratively 
with members from the underrepresented group taking the lead on 
how their experiences should be documented and described. If you 
are considering bringing in community voices into a project—for ex-
ample, to change offensive terms, or expanding a set of terms for a 
particular underrepresented group—you should consider how that 
labor—especially emotional labor—can be recognized and compen-
sated. If your institutional policies do not allow for compensation as 
part of partnerships, work to change restrictive policies before you 
begin collaborations. The long-term and sustainable solution is to 
increase diversity in the profession and hire LIS workers from un-
derrepresented and marginalized groups into permanent positions. 
Inclusive hiring practices allow institutions to recruit, retain, and 
compensate LIS workers with professional expertise and diverse 
lived experiences, while also giving them agency to describe their 
own communities.

Appendix A includes reading and resources for inclusive descrip-
tion of Indigenous collections and LGBTQIA+ collections as well as 
guidelines for highlighting diversity, equity, and inclusion in general 
library and archives collections. LIS workers interested in creating 



LISTEN AND LEARN SESSIONS  161

new inclusive subject headings and making changes to problematic 
subject headings can get involved via the Cataloging Lab (catalog-
inglab.org). The platform, managed by librarian Violet Fox, offers 
various resources related to critical cataloging as well.

CONCLUSION

Critical cataloging provides a framework for diverse, inclusive, and 
equitable practices in cataloging and metadata work. Acknowledg-
ing and dismantling biases in cataloging standards, systems, and 
structures are essential for impactful efforts in resource description 
and advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion in libraries, archives, 
museums, and cultural heritage organizations.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The author expresses her sincere thanks to Jamie Lin, Denise Mc-
Farlin, and Atla leadership for the invitation and support to present 
virtually during the Atla Annual 2022 conference.

WORKS CITED 

Library of Congress. n.d. “Islam H1680 [instruction sheet].” 
Accessed June 29, 2022. https://www.loc.gov/aba/publications/
FreeSHM/H1680.pdf.

———. n.d. “SACO Funnels.” Accessed June 30, 2022. https://www.
loc.gov/aba/pcc/saco/funnels.html.

Nicholson, Karen P., and Maura Seale. 2018. “Introduction.” In The 
Politics of Theory and the Practice of Critical Librarianship, 
edited by Karen P. Nicholson and Maura Seale, 1-18. 
Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.

OCLC. 2020. “Pattern Headings for LC Subjects.” February 6, 2020. 
Accessed June 30, 2022. https://help.oclc.org/Metadata_Services/
Authority_records/Authorities_Format_and_indexes/Get_
started/70Pattern_headings_for_LC_subjects.

Olson, Hope. 2001. “Patriarchal Structures of Subject Access and 
Subversive Techniques for Change.” Canadian Journal of 
Information and Library Sciences 26, no.2/3 (2001): 1-29.

Pew Research Center. 2017. “Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-
growing religious group.” April 6, 2017. Accessed June 29, 
2022. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/06/why-
muslims-are-the-worlds-fastest-growing-religious-group/.

https://www.loc.gov/aba/publications/FreeSHM/H1680.pdf
https://www.loc.gov/aba/publications/FreeSHM/H1680.pdf
https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/saco/funnels.html
https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/saco/funnels.html
https://help.oclc.org/Metadata_Services/Authority_records/Authorities_Format_and_indexes/Get_started
https://help.oclc.org/Metadata_Services/Authority_records/Authorities_Format_and_indexes/Get_started
https://help.oclc.org/Metadata_Services/Authority_records/Authorities_Format_and_indexes/Get_started
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/06/why-muslims-are-the-worlds-fastest-growing-religiou
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/06/why-muslims-are-the-worlds-fastest-growing-religiou


162  ATLA 2022 PROCEEDINGS

APPENDIX A

Readings, Resources, and Guidelines for DEI in Cataloging and Metada-
ta Work (Not an exhaustive list)
Archives for Black Lives in Philadelphia’s Anti-Racist 

Description Working Group. “Archives for Black Lives in 
Philadelphia: Anti-Racist Description Resources.” https://
archivesforblacklives.files.wordpress.com/2020/11/ardr_202010.
pdf.

Berry, Dorothy. “The House Archives Built.” UpRoot. June 22, 2021. 
https://www.uproot.space/features/the-house-archives-built.

Cataloging Ethics Steering Committee. “Cataloguing 
Code of Ethics.” https://docs.google.com/document/
d/1IBz7nXQPfr3U1P6Xiar9cLAkzoNX_P9fq7eHvzfSlZ0/edit.

Fox, Violet. The Cataloging Lab. https://cataloginglab.org/.
———. “List of Statements on Bias in Library and Archives 

Description.” The Cataloging Lab. March 2022. http://
cataloginglab.org/list-of-statements-on-bias-in-library-and-
archives-description/.

Fox, Violet, Tammy Moorse, and Tiffany Wilson. “Addressing Bias 
in Your Catalog.” Public Library Association 2020 presentation. 
tinyurl.com/PLA2020critcat.

Gross, Tina, and Violet B. Fox. “Authority Work as Outreach.” In 
Ethical Questions in Name Authority Control, edited by Jane 
Sandberg, 335-348. Sacramento: Library Juice Press, 2019. 
https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/lrs_facpubs/65/.

Henry, Tiffany, Rhonda Kauffman and Anastasia Chiu. “The 
Old and the Prudish: An Examination of Sex, Sexuality, 
and Queerness in Library of Congress Classification.” In 
the Library With The Lead Pipe. June 1, 2022. https://www.
inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2022/the-old-and-the-prudish/.

Homosaurus Editorial Board. Homosaurus. https://homosaurus.
org/.

Hughes-Watkins, Lae’l. “Moving toward a Reparative Archive: A 
Roadmap for a Holistic Approach to Disrupting Homogenous 
Histories in Academic Repositories and Creating Inclusive 
Spaces for Marginalized Voices.” Journal of Contemporary 
Archival Studies 5, Article 6. https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/
jcas/vol5/iss1/6.

Jeung, Da-Yee, Changsoo Kim, and Sei-Jin Chang. “Emotional Labor 
and Burnout: A Review of the Literature.” Yonsei Medical 
Journal 59, no. 2 (2018):187-193. DOI:10.3349/ymj.2018.59.2.187.

https://archivesforblacklives.files.wordpress.com/2020/11/ardr_202010.pdf
https://archivesforblacklives.files.wordpress.com/2020/11/ardr_202010.pdf
https://archivesforblacklives.files.wordpress.com/2020/11/ardr_202010.pdf
https://www.uproot.space/features/the-house-archives-built
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IBz7nXQPfr3U1P6Xiar9cLAkzoNX_P9fq7eHvzfSlZ0/edit
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IBz7nXQPfr3U1P6Xiar9cLAkzoNX_P9fq7eHvzfSlZ0/edit
https://cataloginglab.org/
http://cataloginglab.org/list-of-statements-on-bias-in-library-and-archives-description/
http://cataloginglab.org/list-of-statements-on-bias-in-library-and-archives-description/
http://cataloginglab.org/list-of-statements-on-bias-in-library-and-archives-description/
http://tinyurl.com/PLA2020critcat
https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/lrs_facpubs/65/
https://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2022/the-old-and-the-prudish/
https://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2022/the-old-and-the-prudish/
https://homosaurus.org/
https://homosaurus.org/
https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/jcas/vol5/iss1/6
https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/jcas/vol5/iss1/6
DOI:10.3349/ymj.2018.59.2.187


LISTEN AND LEARN SESSIONS  163

Norsworthy, Kent, and T-Kay Sangwand. “From Custody to 
Collaboration: The Post-Custodial Archival Model at the 
University of Texas Libraries.” 2013 Texas Conference 
on Digital Libraries Presentation. http://hdl.handle.
net/123456789/66973.

Sunshine State Digital Network. “Introduction to 
Conscious Editing Series.” September 16, 2020. https://
sunshinestatedigitalnetwork.wordpress.com/2020/09/16/
introduction-to-conscious-editing-series/.

Tai, Jessica. “Cultural Humility as a Framework for Anti-
Oppressive Archival Description.” In Radical Empathy in 
Archival Practice, edited by Elvia Arroyo-Ramírez, Jasmine 
Jones, Shannon O’Neill, and Holly Smith (Special issue). Journal 
of Critical Library and Information Studies 3, no. 2 (2021). 
https://doi.org/10.24242/jclis.v3i2.120.

Trans Metadata Collective. “Metadata Best Practices for Trans and 
Gender Diverse Resources.” June 22, 2022. https://zenodo.org/
record/6773159#.Yr36cHbMKUl.

University of British Columbia Xwi7xwa Library. “Indigenous 
Knowledge Organization.” https://xwi7xwa.library.ubc.ca/
collections/indigenous-knowledge-organization/.

https://tdl-ir.tdl.org/handle/2249.1/66973
https://tdl-ir.tdl.org/handle/2249.1/66973
https://sunshinestatedigitalnetwork.wordpress.com/2020/09/16/introduction-to-conscious-editing-serie
https://sunshinestatedigitalnetwork.wordpress.com/2020/09/16/introduction-to-conscious-editing-serie
https://sunshinestatedigitalnetwork.wordpress.com/2020/09/16/introduction-to-conscious-editing-serie
https://doi.org/10.24242/jclis.v3i2.120
https://zenodo.org/record/6773159#.Yr36cHbMKUl
https://zenodo.org/record/6773159#.Yr36cHbMKUl
https://xwi7xwa.library.ubc.ca/collections/indigenous-knowledge-organization/
https://xwi7xwa.library.ubc.ca/collections/indigenous-knowledge-organization/

