1 / 21

March 5, 2007 Richard Sapon-White

A Crisis in Cataloging: The Impact and Implications of the Library of Congress’ Series Authority Decision on Cooperative Cataloging. March 5, 2007 Richard Sapon-White. The Library of Congress’ Role. The official library of the United States Congress Technically, not a national library

zorana
Download Presentation

March 5, 2007 Richard Sapon-White

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. A Crisis in Cataloging:The Impact and Implications of the Library of Congress’ Series Authority Decision on Cooperative Cataloging March 5, 2007 Richard Sapon-White

  2. The Library of Congress’ Role • The official library of the United States Congress • Technically, not a national library • Functionally, a leader for US and world libraries in creation of catalog records and promulgation of cataloging standards

  3. LC’s Product History • Catalog cards • Cataloging-in-Publication (CIP) • Library of Congress Classification • Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) • MARC, METS, MODS, EAD

  4. LC’s Role in Quality Control • Maintains the National Authority File (NAF) • Name, series, and subject authority records • Since 1990’s, other libraries could contribute authority records • LC retains control of NAF through approval of authority record proposals • Until recently, LC has had primary role in training (increasingly in hands of Program for Cooperative Cataloging)

  5. April 21, 2006 • Internal announcement • Suspend the creation of series authority records on May 1 • Record all series as “untraced” – 490 0b • But would continue to provide training in the creation of series authority records

  6. Immediate Concerns of Library Community • No consultation or discussion conducted outside of LC • No studies done to evaluate impact • Some ILS will search untraced series, others will not

  7. Reaction • Petition circulated on the web • Signed by many notable US librarians • Guild of LC workers resolution • Thomas Mann, LC reference librarian and noted speaker on library research • ALA/ALCTS reaction • Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) response

  8. LC’s Response • Reasons for making decision are economic • Insufficient funds to continue same level of service as in the past • Need to redirect $$$ into digital products • Refusal to back down, but delayed implementation until June 1, 2006

  9. OCLC Responses • OCLC no longer treating LC’s records as uneditable • Any library can edit series fields for quality control • 490 0b from LC records will not overlay series tracings in OCLC records

  10. Oregon State University Evaluation • Since August, OSU has been examining the impact on series • Questions to be answered: • How many untraced series are being added to the OSU catalog? • What is the source of cataloging of these untraced series? • Is the form of the series title in 490 0b different from the form in the series authority record? • Do series authority records exist for these untraced series?

  11. Conducting the Monthly Examination • Innovative Interfaces, Inc., system allows queries by MARC field • Search for all records entered within the past month which have a 490 0b • Sort by series title, then search each in National Authority File (NAF)

  12. Data: Summer 2006 For June-August, 2006: • 10,940 records reviewed • 179 have at least one untraced series heading • 21% of 179 (37 records) require addition of a traced series that differs from the untraced form

  13. Fall 2006 Data

  14. Discussion • The number of records needing revision each month is relatively small • Takes one person 1 to 1.5 hours to complete analysis and revision of records each month • Most of the records needing revision are from either government documents or retrospective conversion of serials! • Very few are records from Library of Congress

  15. Discussion (cont.) • Other libraries are editing LC records in OCLC to provide traced series and adding series authority records to the NAF • More untraced series expected in future • Will other libraries be able to keep up with revisions and series authority record creation?

  16. Conclusion • Impact on library has been small so far • Few new series coming in • Few needing revision of bibliographic records • No complaints from users • Over time, expect the numbers to increase • However, many libraries are changing CIP and other records as they become available in OCLC

  17. Is This The End of the Story? • More significant is the impact on LC’s role • LC continues to be a significant player BUT • Shift has occurred in responsibility from LC to other US and international libraries • Concern over whether other libraries will follow LC’s path or if they will try to counteract the impact

  18. What Has This Experience Shown Us About the Role of LC? • Reducing its role as metadata creator • Encouraging cooperative efforts of others • Channeling funds and effort into digital projects

  19. What is the Future for Cooperative Cataloging? • Two opposing forces: • Traditional cataloging community • Seeking to continue traditional role of catalog and cataloging • Also making efforts to incorporate new modes of metadata creation and management in the digital world • Library administrators • Seeking cost savings as digital world escalates • View traditional – and possibly all – metadata creation as a too-costly activity • Look to business models for answers (Google, Amazon)

  20. What About Non-U.S. Libraries? • LC records are used around the world • National Library of the Czech Republic uses OCLC and collects US imprints, so likely uses LC cataloging • LC cataloging then becomes available to Czech libraries • The future National Technical Library will also use LC records

  21. Richard Sapon-White Head of Monographs Cataloging Oregon State University richard.sapon-white@oregonstate.edu Děkuji za Pozornost!

More Related