Saturday, June 28, 1:30-3:00
The Single-Record Approach for E-books
Philip Young
Catalog Librarian, University Libraries at Virginia Tech
Link to presentation: http://presentations.ala.org/index.php?title=Image:singleRecord.ppt
Adding links to print records is often the practical course taken by libraries when batch records are unavailable and a large number of ebooks (either from vendors or locally digitized) must be cataloged. Such a project occurred at Virginia Tech for a set of ebooks in which links were globally added to print records, after careful consideration of the alternatives (no batch records were available).
He cited some cataloging rules which allow this practice. Institutions such as GPO, NLM, UC, Brown have been using the single record option. The advantages include that it’s expedient, preferred by patrons and many librarians, improved access points on collection-level records. However, the disadvantages are that a mixed practice exists in the catalog with record loads, difficulty with standard # matching, and FRBR incompatibility.
He listed factors to be considered in decision-making, such as:
* Equivalent manifestations
* Same publisher
* No batches of MARC records available
* ILS capability (includes consortial considerations)
* Time of staff (if originals needed)
Impact of Vendor Records on the Catalog
Lai-Ying Hsiung
Head of Technical Services, University Library
University of California, Santa Cruz
The speaker started out the talk asking whether we feel in control with these record loads. She then went on to give a presentation dense with information (selected highlights follow).
Why do we load vendor records? To do more with less (due to shrinking budgets), provide timely access to patrons, avoid redundancy in catalog management, and the changing bib control landscape. With the advent of one stop shopping, many of these records might provide good-enough cataloging. The LCWG recommended we make use of bibliographic data earlier in the supply chain (e.g., publishers).
She then described some possible reasons for problems and quality issues of these records. They include incomplete or inaccurate data, lack of authority control, and different cataloging standards.
There is a current problem with duplicate records in OCLC as brief MARC is mixed with full, and also proliferation of multiple separate records for different platforms. All this slows down identification, hinders retrieval, and complicates copy cataloging workflow.
Waiting for another library to catalog or upgrade a title also slows down access and processing. Similarly, if a record upgrades locally, beneficial changes may not be reflected in Worldcat.
She covered ways that OCLC can help, such as by facilitating easier upgrading by member libraries and providing incentives to vendors to contribute full MARC records. Vendors can be helped by providing cataloging training and encouraging them to enrich their records with value-added services, such as table of contents. Finally, libraries can be helped by granting more of them enhance status and allowing re-loads of vendor records into OCLC.
Many record loads are problematic because they are not in Worldcat, and Worldcat Local only searches the holdings in Worldcat. The contract with many ebook vendors prevent libraries from loading their records in Worldcat. UCSC is planning to move to a network level and implement Worldcat Local.
Aggregator-neutral records have already been approved for serials, and most recently, for integrating resources. Discussions of aggregator-neutral ebooks are already occurring and will likely become a standard.
Temporary Employees: Managing Practicum, Internship and Volunteer Experiences in Technical Services Unit
Margaret Mauer
Associate Professor, Head, Catalog & Metadata
Kent State University Libraries and Media Services
Link to presentation: http://www.personal.kent.edu/~mbmaurer
Kent State has been hosting practicum, graduate student assistants, and volunteers for 10 years. National trends that support the use of students include diminishing financial support for libraries (and thus technical services), less “junior” cataloging positions, and decreasing availability of cataloging courses. The students’ often enthusiastic presence does change the tone of the workplace.
It helps to think of them as very temporary employees. You have to consider how to maximize the benefit while minimizing the cost to your department. For example, even though the standard practicum only requires 100 hours, the Cataloging Department requires 150 hours to recover the investment in training. Also, they used to assign them special projects, but have found that works best is to separate the opportunities into 2 tracks: copy cataloging and original cataloging. They write job descriptions for each position. Training material is re-used from semester to semester. They also establish a limit of face-to-face training (for example, 25 hours for copy cat), since constantly answering questions can become a real time-sink. They’ve found it’s best to have a standard workspace as well as a webpage of resources just for the students.
They conduct exit interviews with the students and also provide them with a survey to evaluate the program with 5 or 6 questions. This procedure has provided some valuable feedback that has been used to improve the program.
The benefits include opportunity to do quality control and freeing staff from repetitive work, as well as the additional manpower. In the long run, they are also helping the cataloging profession since some of the students have begun to make professional contributions.
Notes by Mary Aycock