Pennsylvania Integrated Library System (PaILS)
Cataloging Study
October, 2014
1
Table of Contents
Introduction
page 3
Background
page 4
Research Findings
page 5
Points of Concern
page 7
The Options
page 8
Recommendations
page 11
Summary
page 16
Appendix A: PaILS Cataloging Summary Questionnaire
page 17
Appendix B: PaILS Cataloging Summary Data
page 27
Appendix C: Kent State University Libraries Copy Cataloging Procedures
page 42
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
2
INTRODUCTION
In spring 2014, the Pennsylvania Integrated Library System (PaILS), a non-profit
organization responsible for the implementation and management of the SPARK integrated
library system—a cloud-hosted, open-source, “one-price” ILS platform solution developed
by Evergreen—for its member libraries, contracted with The Ivy Group, Ltd. to conduct a
study of member cataloging practices. The Evergreen staff client is the software in the ILS
that is used by library staff to interact with the SPARK consortial catalog. The Evergreen
staff client includes circulation, cataloging, serials and acquisitions functionality. The online
public access catalog (OPAC) display offers enhanced functionality found in many
expensive commercial discovery layers.
The consulting team was commissioned to investigate the cataloging/metadata quality of
the bibliographic records being contributed to the SPARK central catalog. In particular, The
Ivy Group was asked to investigate the causes behind record duplication and bibliographic
errors in the central catalog and to make recommendations for improving the cataloging
process in a way that would be acceptable to PaILS members.
To determine possible causes of these errors and to recommend solutions, an online survey
(Appendix A) was distributed to member library staff responsible for entry and
management of bibliographic data using the Evergreen staff client software. The 42question survey covered demographic, organizational, administrative, budgetary, and
training topics, sources of bibliographic records, as well as the educational level and
personal knowledge of cataloging standards of the individuals completing the survey.
Of the 32 libraries surveyed, 30 participated in the survey—a very strong 94% response
rate. Response data (Appendix B) was used to assess the skills and training levels of
member library staff responsible for the cataloging process and illuminate points of
strength as well as weakness. This report presents and analyzes the survey findings and
recommends strategies to address identified problems.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
3
BACKGROUND
Under their contractual agreement with PaILS, member libraries retain autonomy over
local operations but agree to conform to established policies, procedures, protocols, and
regulations developed and adopted by the PaILS Board of Directors. At the time of the
study, all 32 member libraries had implemented the Evergreen SPARK ILS, and all member
libraries’ patrons were using the same SPARK OPAC. The migration was underwritten by
LSTA funding from the Pennsylvania Office of Commonwealth Libraries.
The libraries are using version 2.4.1 of the Evergreen staff client which allows them to add,
delete, edit, or change bibliographic records in the SPARK central catalog. The Evergreen
staff client also allows for batch loading of bibliographic records, a process that enables
libraries to add multiple bibliographic records in one task. A “bucket” feature enables
libraries to gather together records from the SPARK catalog and make global changes or
edits to groups of bibliographic records simultaneously.
The bibliographic database model for the SPARK catalog is based on a single record model.
The first bibliographic record that enters the database becomes the “master” record in the
catalog, and the library that enters that record then attaches its holdings (ownership) to
the record. Other libraries that purchase or acquire the same bibliographic item simply add
their holding to the same record.
The record that is used as the master record varies. It is based on a “quality metrics”
formula, which can be assigned by each library and is based on the record attribute or the
MARC tags and subfields. A record is assigned a “weight”, and, if a new incoming record has
a greater weight than an existing record, the new record will replace the old one.
The OPAC display is flexible; users can display the holdings of all PaILS libraries or
individual libraries. Visual format icons are displayed to allow users to quickly locate and
identify specific formats, such as print, electronic, or sound recordings.
Any solution to the problem of improving the quality of the records in the SPARK ILS will
require planning and an investment of time and resources. PaILS has provided systems
development and support for the SPARK catalog and is now looking to improve the quality
of bibliographic records in the catalog.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
4
RESEARCH FINDINGS
Acquisitions and Circulation
The majority of respondents—57%—reports acquisitions budgets between $10K and $50K
with 37% budgeting less than $10K. Over half of respondents—53%—purchase 1,000
items or fewer per year. The bulk of these libraries have limited funding for acquisitions,
and, because they purchase so few items, do not need to obtain or create many cataloging
records. Circulation data indicates that member libraries are active, with 50% reporting
annual circulation of 25,000 or more.
Organization and Staffing
The survey gathered data about the administrative structure of the member libraries, as
well as information about the individual submitting each survey. 83% of respondents
reported a job title of “director” or “library director” while 50% of respondents hold a
Masters of Library Science (MLS) degree. Only 43% identified themselves as professional
librarians. 30% of respondents have been in librarianship 3 years or less while another
30% have served more than 20 years. Just over half (53%) have been in the profession
over 10 years.
At 43% of the responding libraries, there is just one member of staff responsible for
cataloging purchased materials. Only two of those 13 individuals report “Technical
Services” as their primary work area.
At libraries that report two or more staff responsible for cataloging, “Technical Services” is
cited as the primary work area in only 7 of 34 instances, less frequently than “Library
Administration” or “Public Services” is named.
Cataloging Practices, Skills, and Training
Among responding libraries, 93% perform copy cataloging and 47% perform original
cataloging. Only one library conducts batch loading—adding, editing, or deleting large
groups of records simultaneously. Two libraries do no original or copy cataloging
whatsoever, but one of these libraries does report doing some batch cataloging. The data
indicates that most cataloging is being performed at the individual bibliographic record
level.
Knowledge of cataloging is required for identification and selection or creation of quality
bibliographic records for SPARK. Yet, when asked about Anglo American Cataloging Rules,
2nd Edition (AACR2), the descriptive cataloging standard used in libraries over the last
three decades, 60% of survey respondents reported no familiarity with it. The new
descriptive cataloging standard, Resource Description and Access (RDA), fared even worse
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
5
as 77% of respondents reported no familiarity with it, with only one respondent having
received formal training on the new standard. Of the libraries who have not received RDA
training, only 59% report that training is of interest to them.
80% of responding libraries reported having no access to these standards or other
subscription-based cataloging tools, including the RDA Toolkit and Cataloger’s Desktop.
Half of respondents indicated they know nothing about the MARC21 Format for
Bibliographic Data, the data encoding standard used by Evergreen, and 67% are totally
unfamiliar with MARC21 Format for Authority Data, the data standard used to encode
authority data.
On a more positive note, 90% of responding libraries have migrated to the Evergreen ILS,
with the remaining libraries in the process of doing so. All but 23% of the libraries have
been trained on Evergreen’s cataloging module. When asked if staff would be interested in
receiving training to improve their overall cataloging knowledge, 87% said yes.
Overall, the skill level and training of cataloging staff is poor, and in some cases, nonexistent. (No doubt, this situation can be partly attributable to the expense of subscriptionbased tools and materials needed to develop and manage effective cataloging workflows.)
More troubling is that cataloging standards and training do not appear to be highly valued.
Quality Control/Bibliographic Record Sources
When asked about a process that periodically reviews the quality of the cataloging records
entered into the ILS, 83% of respondents reported that there is no such process in place at
their library. The same 83% indicated that they understand how local library cataloging
procedures influence the SPARK consortial catalog. While this was not asked directly in the
survey, a follow-up call to the PaILS executive director confirmed that there are no
“consortial” cataloging procedures.
The survey also looked at the sources of bibliographic records used by the PaILS libraries.
(Only seven [23%] of the 30 responding libraries are members of OCLC, a global
subscription-based bibliographic utility an excellent source of quality bibliographic
records.) Among responding libraries, 21% use OCLC; 29% turn to consortial catalogs; and
43% access the Library of Congress for bibliographic records. The overwhelming
majority—96% of libraries—reported that they use other library catalogs via Z39.50. (The
Evergreen cataloging module has a Z39.50 client that connects to other library catalogs
for—usually free—bibliographic records).
The ability of the Evergreen staff client to pull free bibliographic records from other
catalogs via Z39.50 is cost effective. But without consortial procedures in place that define
what “quality” records are, where to find them, and how to identify them, this practice can
be problematic.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
6
POINTS OF CONCERN
It appears that several member libraries either do not understand the cataloging process or
minimize its impact on the SPARK ILS, other libraries in the consortium, and/or library
patrons trying to access services effectively. Because many of the consortium’s libraries are
small, it is no surprise that cataloging tools and other subscription-based resources are
beyond their budgets or that cataloging is only one task of many that staff members
perform. Staff appear to have limited understanding of cataloging standards and are adding
bibliographic records from a variety of sources. Most have no training in automation
processes, such as batch loading, and there is no consistent source of bibliographic records,
even for Z39.50 clients who currently are pulling from a variety of sources.
Because over half of respondents have been in librarianship more than ten years, there
may be resistance to adapting to new ILS standards and technology that has dramatically
altered cataloging practices. Ultimately, the responsibility rests with PaILS to implement a
consortial model for sharing cataloging resources, expertise and training and make quality
consortial cataloging practices a core tenet of its agreements with its members.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
7
THE OPTIONS
Option 1: Decentralized Model
Individual libraries will continue to conduct their own cataloging while PaILS oversees and
enforces quality standards.

PaILS develops cataloging procedures for both original and copy cataloging (all
formats), including workflow procedures.

PaILS provides procedures and cataloging training, especially on standards, to all
library staff engaged in any facet of cataloging.

All catalogers have access to necessary cataloging tools such as Cataloger’s Desktop
and the RDA Toolkit.

PaILS develops procedures for checking the quality of bibliographic records.

Libraries agree on a particular source (or sources) of bibliographic records and to
quality metrics.

All member libraries agree to maintain in-house cataloging expertise and to be
responsible for cataloging their own materials.
Caveats:

Quality continues to vary according to the commitment of individual member
libraries to the quality of the shared OPAC and the expertise of individuals
responsible for cataloging.
Option 2: Centralized Model
PaILS manages a centralized cataloging functionality that controls all bibliographic data
entered into SPARK. No investment in training cataloging staff at member libraries is
necessary.

PaILS invests in hiring cataloging staff and providing access to necessary cataloging
tools.

PaILS develops work flow, cataloging, and quality control procedures for creating or
obtaining the bibliographic records and then entering the correct holdings
information into SPARK.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
8

Individual libraries order materials through vendor partner programs that enable
vendors to ship bibliographic records directly to a central site.

PaILS assumes responsibility for cataloging administration, staffing, and budgets
and develops a charge-back formula for allocating costs to consortium members.
Caveats:

Cataloging knowledge and expertise among PaILS members decreases dramatically.

Turnaround time for cataloging local materials increases since little to no cataloging
occurs at the local level.

Individual libraries do not receive the benefits from maximum use of the Evergreen
software.
Option 3: Partially Distributed Model
Cataloging functionality is distributed among several “key” member libraries, staffed by
individuals with appropriate cataloging skills, and serving as cataloging “agents” or “hubs”
for all other libraries in the consortium.

Cataloging procedures for both original and copy cataloging, including workflow
and quality control procedures, are standardized.

PaILS trains selected “key” library personnel and provides access to necessary
cataloging tools, such as Cataloger’s Desktop and the RDA Toolkit.

PaILS develops a fair cost-distribution formula that would take into account the
costs of “key” libraries and the other members of the consortium.
Caveat:

Cataloging expertise is limited to “key” libraries.
Option 4: Outsourcing to External Contract Catalogers
PaILS is responsible for contract negotiation and management of the cataloging profiles and
workflow process. Member libraries no longer bear any cataloging responsibilities.

PaILS establishes and oversees an automated workflow to move data between the
member libraries and the contract catalogers.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
9

PaILS provides exact profiles to the contract catalogers regarding standards and
quality.

PaILS supplies the software or other development tools necessary for PaILS
libraries, vendors, and the contract catalogers to interact effectively.

PaILS is responsible for catalog maintenance and clean-up projects.

PaILS develops a fair cost-distribution formula.
Caveats:

Contract cataloging can be expensive.

There will be no cataloging expertise or knowledge of cataloging standards among
the member libraries.

The perception will exist that libraries are not getting the cost benefits from the
open-source Evergreen staff client because they are no longer using its cataloging
functionality.

Turnaround time for materials that are not purchased or received through
cataloging partner programs may increase.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
10
RECOMMENDATIONS
To ensure the highest quality service to consortium members and library users, the
consulting team recommends Option 3: the Partially Distributed Model. Resolving the
cataloging and database quality issues for the consortial catalog will involve a substantial
investment in time and resources. The project will require active management by a team
with access to project management tools for project tracking and access to a
documentation repository, or wiki, for archiving and sharing documents such as cataloging
standards and statistical reports.
Leadership
PaILS would enlist “key” libraries as cataloging partners for establishing cataloging policy,
preparing and maintaining documentation, and providing appropriate levels of training.
OhioLINK, an academic consortium where cataloging policy and standards are set by a
committee of member libraries, would provide a model.1
There are libraries that will be unable to participate or contribute as cataloging libraries.
The PaILS cataloging group would be required to enforce cataloging policy and standards
with these libraries.
Legacy Data
For problems with record quality and duplication in the Evergreen bibliographic data,
PaILS must address both existing legacy data as well as the new incoming cataloging data.
The solution to this problem will be controversial, because Evergreen is marketed as a costeffective one-stop solution for libraries. The Z39.50 functionality in the Evergreen staff
client allows libraries to connect seamlessly to various other library catalogs and take
bibliographic records, in most cases, “for free”. OCLC also allows Z39.50 access as part of its
subscription package. However, with no procedures, and insufficient training, PaILS
libraries may not always be pulling the best available records.
PaILS will need to invest in improving the quality of legacy data by contracting with one of
the major authority control vendors (Backstage, MARCIVE, LTI) to clean up all existing
authorized headings (authority control) and perform validation checks on all MARC
records. Library patrons will benefit immediately from more consistent headings and
records. This process must then continue on an ongoing basis. Staff resources will be
necessary for any clean-up efforts with the resulting costs distributed across all libraries.
1
The OhioLINK Database Management and Standards web site is located at:
https://www.ohiolink.edu/content/technical_services_staff_information.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
11
PaILS would also contract for RDA enrichment to its legacy data. RDA enrichment will bring
all legacy cataloging data in AACR2 up to RDA hybrid standards. This is important for
future development as it will make consistent all data in Evergreen.
Advantages are:

Developers designing or enhancing Evergreen will only need to consider one
standard;

Training and documentation (procedures, best practices, etc.) need to consider only
one standard; and

Data can be more easily ported to a linked data environment where it will work
better with the replacement for the MARC standard being developed by the
BIBFRAME project2 at the Library of Congress.
These processes, authority control and RDA enrichment would be run continuously for all
new data, once the initial cleanup projects are complete. Most major authority control
vendors will perform these on an ongoing basis.
Source of Bibliographic Records
To prevent duplication as well as to improve the quality of bibliographic records entering
the SPARK catalog, PaILS would develop standardized procedures for copy catalogers that
define a good quality bibliographic record. These procedures would cover both AACR2 and
RDA records and would be based on existing national standards developed by the Library
of Congress Program for Cooperative Cataloging.3 Procedures for each format, such as
monographs, serials, sound recordings and audio-visual recordings, must be made
available. See Appendix C for examples of RDA and AACR2 monographs from Kent State
University. (The Kent State procedures are for an Innovative Millennium system, but they
can be adapted to other systems.)
Any records not meeting these standards would be reviewed by properly trained
catalogers. The PaILS procedures would also be required to include Dewey Decimal as well
as Library of Congress classifications.
2
BIBFRAME project documentation is found at: http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/.
PCC documentation can be found here:
http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/.
3
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
12
Process
PaILS would develop and train staff from “key” libraries on original cataloging. This core
group of catalogers would be responsible for reviewing and upgrading any poor quality
records passed on to them through consortial workflows.
Libraries without trained original catalogers would be expected to pass records needing
original cataloging on to trained staff.
PaILS and the core group of catalogers would develop a quality control process, conducted
semi-annually, to examine copy cataloging and original cataloging. To verify record quality,
a handful of records from each library would be checked visually or run through a
validation process.
OCLC and Reclamation
The algorithm for matching incoming records with records currently existing in the SPARK
catalog would be made consistent across all libraries. Primarily, the highest score for the
match point should be the OCLC number, which is unique and found in many records in
various MARC tags such as the 001 or 035, often with the prefix “(OCoLC)”.
All libraries in PaILS that are OCLC members would register to conduct a “free” batch
reclamation project with OCLC. This will ensure that all the OCLC control numbers in their
records are accurate.
Development effort will be needed to place all OCLC numbers in a single specific MARC tag.
The MARC tag 035 is suitable. Here is an example of an 035 in a SPARK record:
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
13
LDR 01587cam a2200433 i 4500
001 858742
003 True
005 20131025153014.0
008 130322s2013 nyuaf 001 0aeng
010
. ‡a 2013012077
040
. ‡aDLC ‡beng ‡erda ‡cDLC ‡dOCLCO ‡dUPZ ‡dIH7 ‡dYDXCP ‡dVP@ ‡dFOLLT
019
. ‡a857852829
020
. ‡a9780385347549
020
. ‡a0385347545
035
. ‡a(OCoLC)835951542 (OCLC number)
042
. ‡apcc
050 0 0. ‡aML420.N353 ‡bA3 2013
082 0 0. ‡a782.42166/092 ‡aB ‡223
100 1 . ‡aNash, Graham, ‡d1942- ‡eauthor.
245 1 0.
‡aWild tales : ‡ba rock & roll life / ‡cGraham Nash.
For libraries that do not subscribe to OCLC, the procedures should require that the
presence of an OCLC number rank high on the list of acceptable copy for copy cataloging.
(Many libraries, especially small libraries, cannot afford the cost of an OCLC subscription.
Some are opposed to OCLC on the basis of it not being an “open” platform. However, it is
still the best source of cataloging data and the OCLC record number is a unique identifier
that can easily be used as a match point for input and overlay.)
Once the matching algorithm is adjusted giving the OCLC number a high score (quality
metrics), it is recommended that a process be run against the SPARK database to identify
duplicates. Staff resources will then be needed to clean these up.
For small libraries, serving a population of 20,000 or fewer, PaILS could investigate a group
OCLC CatExpress purchase.4 Small libraries that do copy cataloging but no original
cataloging can buy blocks of records (current price is $1.07 per record, minimum 250
records) for materials they purchase. These records can be selected from OCLC through a
web interface, then exported and downloaded to the SPARK catalog the following day. The
downloading can be performed by the individual library or by any other library that is
designated as a “key”.
4
For details on OCLC CatExpress see: https://oclc.org/catexpress/ordering.en.html. The State Library of Iowa has
set up a CatExpress group for small public libraries, see:
http://www.statelibraryofiowa.org/ld/c-d/cat-exp.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
14
A major benefit of CatExpress is that it can be used with vendor partner programs. OCLC
has a WorldCat Cataloging Partners program (formerly PromptCat) with most major book
and media vendors.5 When placing a material order through any of these vendors, the
vendors will notify OCLC that the library needs a cataloging record for the item. OCLC will
set the library’s holdings on the master record. PaILS libraries can choose to have the
MARC records delivered automatically and the records will even include fund accounting
information from the purchase. Libraries can also pay to have the materials delivered shelfready, with labels and barcodes attached. PaILS would be well-advised to automate the
cataloging process by using these partner programs to the fullest extent possible. This
automation will cut down on cataloging errors and prevent duplicates from entering the
catalog.
Batch Loading Proficiency
A core group of catalogers must be established within PaILS who are proficient in batch
loading of MARC records from vendors. These include bibliographic records from any
cataloging partners programs. This group must have knowledge of MarcEdit or scripting
language to be able to manipulate large batches of MARC records. Batch loading
procedures must be established, and a register of vendor numbers be made available in
case multiple libraries purchase the same product.
Vendors often provide cataloging records when libraries purchase or subscribe to their
products. Vendor records usually contain a specific vendor number or identifier that can
also be used as a unique match point by Evergreen. When negotiating contracts for
purchases that include MARC records from vendors, it is recommended that vendors be
given copies of PaILS cataloging procedures and asked to follow them.
Training and Tools
Key libraries, responsible for original cataloging and documentation, must agree to
allowing staff to participate in ongoing training—either in person, remote, or contracted—
to ensure they are abreast of changes and updates to cataloging standards. In addition,
PaILS must ensure that catalogers have access to all necessary cataloging tools, including
the RDA Toolkit, Cataloger’s Desktop, and, if necessary, WebDewey.
5
The complete list of OCLC Cataloging Partner vendors can be found here: https://oclc.org/catalogingpartners/partners.en.html.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
15
SUMMARY
This report is primarily based on the data obtained from the cataloging survey conducted
in June 2014 indicating major problems with knowledge of cataloging standards and
procedures. The research revealed issues with staff training and competencies, the
prioritization of cataloging tasks within the day-to-day work of library staff, and the
understanding of the effect that individual cataloging practices have on SPARK’s integrity.
In engineering the transition, PaILS must address the false perception that Evergreen, an
open-source system, should provide cataloging functionality cheaply or freely. On the
contrary, quality cataloging requires a commitment and investment in staff, training and
tools. It can be more cost-effective to manage cataloging by purchasing quality records and
automating both cataloging and authority control processes than having untrained staff
randomly select records from various databases. Alternately, the talents and expertise of
qualified staff can be shared across libraries, in the same fashion that open source
developers share their codes.
Communications regarding the project are the critical success factors for the process and
the credibility of PaILS itself. Early on, PaILS must engage member libraries in
understanding the logic behind decisions, the process, and the costs—especially because
PaILS will have the responsibility of enforcing standards and procedures and will be held
accountable for the ultimate quality of the catalog. PaILS and the leadership of PaILS
member libraries must ensure that the goal is just that: to improve catalog quality—not
eliminate jobs—thereby freeing staff up for other important functions and ultimately
improving service to library customers.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
16
Appendix A
PaILS Cataloging Survey Questionnaire
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
17
ABOUT YOUR LIBRARY
1. Please indicate the name of your library: [DROP DOWN LIST OF ALL MEMBER LIBRARIES]
2. What is your library’s annual budget for acquisitions?
___
___
___
___
___
Under $1,000
$1,000-$10,000
$10,001-$50,000
$50,001-$100,000
More than $100,000
3. How many items (all formats) does your library purchase annually?
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
Under 200
201 – 500
501- 1,000
1,001 – 3,000
3,001- 6,000
6,001-10,000
10,001 – 20,000
More than 20,000
4. How many items does your library circulate annually?
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
Under 2,000
2,001 to 5,000
5,001 to 10,000
10,001 to 25,000
25,001 to 50,000
50,001 to 100,000
100,001 to 250,000
250,001 – 500,000
Over 500,000
5. How many registered card holders does your library have?
___
___
___
___
___
___
Under 500
501 to 1,000
1,001 to 2,500
2,501 to 5,000
5,001 to 10,000
More than 10,000
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
18
6. Is your library a member of OCLC?
___ Yes
___ No
7. How much does your library spend per year purchasing bibliographic records?
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
8.
$0
$1 to $500
$501 to $2,000
$2,001 to $5,000
$5,001 to $10,000
10,001 to $25,000
More than $25,000
What classification system(s) does your library use? Please select all that apply.
___ Dewey Decimal System
___ Library of Congress
___ Other
Please specify ___________
9.
What subject heading vocabularies does your library use? Please select all that apply.
___
___
___
___
___
Book Industry Standards and Communication (BISAC)
Library of Congress
Library of Congress Children’s Headings
Sears
Other
Please specify ___________
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
19
ABOUT YOUR CATALOGING STAFF
10.
How many staff members, including you, are responsible for cataloging purchased materials at
your library?
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
0
1
2
3
4
5
6 to 10
More than 10
[CONTINUE TO Q11]
[CONTINUE TO Q11]
[SKIP TO Q13]
[SKIP TO Q13]
[SKIP TO Q13]
[SKIP TO Q13]
[SKIP TO Q13]
[SKIP TO Q13]
11. What is your primary work area (where you work more than 50% of the time)? [SELECT ONE]
___
___
___
___
___
Library administration
Public services
Technical services
Special collections
Other
Please specify ___________
12. What other job duties do you perform? Please select all that apply.
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
Acquisitions
Children/Youth services
Circulation/reserves
Collection development
Interlibrary loan
Library administration
Preservation
Reference
Serials/electronic resources
Special collections
Supervision
Vendor relations
Other
Please specify ____________
[SKIP TO Q15]
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
20
13.
For all staff involved in cataloging at your library, please mark primary work areas (where they
work more than 50% of the time). Please select all that apply.
___
___
___
___
___
14.
Library administration
Public services
Technical services
Special collections
Other
Please specify ____________
For all staff involved in cataloging at your library, what other job duties do they currently
perform? Please select all that apply.
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
Acquisitions
Children/Youth services
Circulation/reserves
Collection development
Interlibrary loan
Library administration
Preservation
Reference
Serials/electronic resources
Special collections
Supervision
Vendor relations
Other
Please specify ____________
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
21
ABOUT CATALOGING AT YOUR LIBRARY
15.
For which formats does your library do original cataloging? Please select all that apply.
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
16.
Our library does not perform original cataloging.
Books
Computer files
Continuing resources (serials)
Electronic resources (electronic books and serials)
Maps
Mixed materials
Scores
Sound recordings
Visual materials
Other
Please specify ____________
Does your library do batch cataloging?
___ Yes [CONTINUE TO Q17]
___ No [SKIP TO Q19]
17.
For which formats does your library do batch cataloging? Please select all that apply.
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
18.
Books
Computer files
Continuing resources (serials)
Electronic resources (electronic books and serials)
Maps
Mixed materials
Scores
Sound recordings
Visual materials
Other
Please specify __________________________
How familiar are you with batch cataloging tools like MarcEdit to batch update and load large
files of bibliographic records?
___
___
___
___
Expert
Working familiarity
Some familiarity
Not at all
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
22
19.
Does your library do copy cataloging?
___ Yes
___ No
20.
For which formats does your library do copy cataloging? Please select all that apply.
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
21.
Consortial catalogs
Library of Congress
OCLC
Sky River
Other library catalogs via Z39.50
Vendors
Other
Please specify _____________________
How familiar are you with Anglo American Cataloging Rules, 2nd Edition (AACR2) descriptive
cataloging standards?
___
___
___
___
23.
Books
Computer files
Continuing resources (serials)
Electronic resources (electronic books and serials)
Maps
Mixed materials
Scores
Sound recordings
Visual materials
Other
Please specify ____________________
For copy cataloging, what is your library’s source of bibliographic records? Please select all that
apply.
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
22.
[CONTINUE TO Q20]
[SKIP TO Q22]
Expert
Working familiarity
Some familiarity
Not at all
Resource Description and Access (RDA) is the new descriptive cataloging standard replacing
AACR2. How familiar are you with RDA?
___
___
___
___
Expert
Working familiarity
Some familiarity
Not at all
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
23
24.
Has your library received any formal training on RDA?
___ Yes
___ No
25.
[CONTINUE TO Q25]
[SKIP TO Q26]
What RDA training have you received? _______________
[SKIP TO Q27]
26.
Would you be interested in receiving RDA training?
___ Yes
___ No
27.
Do you have access to the following products and/or tools for cataloging? Please select all that
apply.
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
28.
AACR2 in print
Classification Web
Library of Congress Cataloger’s Desktop
OCLC WebDewy
RDA in print
RDA Toolkit
None of the above
How familiar are you with the MARC 21 Format for Authority Data?
___
___
___
___
Expert
Working familiarity
Some familiarity
Not at all
29. How familiar are you with the MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data?
___
___
___
___
Expert
Working familiarity
Some familiarity
Not at all
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
24
30.
What is the status of your library’s migration to the Evergreen Integrated Library System (ILS)?
___ Completed
[SKIP TO Q32]
___ In progress
[SKIP TO Q32]
___ Not yet begun [CONTINUE TO Q31]
31.
What ILS is your library currently running?
32.
How familiar are you with the cataloging module of the Evergreen ILS?
___
___
___
___
33.
Expert
Working familiarity
Some familiarity
Not at all
Have you received training on the use of the Evergreen cataloging module?
___ Yes
___ No
34.
[CONTINUE TO Q34]
[SKIP TO Q35]
How would you rate the training you have received on the use of the Evergreen ILS cataloging
module?
___ Excellent
___ Good
___ Poor
35.
Do you understand how your library’s cataloging procedures influence the SPARK consortial
catalog?
___ Yes
___ No
36.
Does your library have a process that periodically reviews the quality of cataloging records
entered into the ILS system?
___ Yes
___ No
37.
Would you be interested in training to improve your cataloging knowledge or the cataloging
processes at your library?
___ Yes
___ No
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
25
PLEASE TELL US ABOUT YOURSELF
38.
Your name
39.
Job Title
40.
How many years have you been in librarianship?
___
___
___
___
___
___
41.
What is your highest level of educational attainment?
___
___
___
___
___
___
42.
0 to 3
4 to 6
7 to 10
11 to 15
16 to 20
More than 20
High school Diploma
Associate’s Degree
Bachelor’s Degree
Masters in Library Science (MLS)
Ph.D
Other
Please specify _______________________
What is the highest level of PA library certification you hold?
___
___
___
___
___
Professional Librarian
Provisional Librarian
Library Assistant
Clerk
Other
Please specify ________________________
___ I do not hold PA certification.
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
26
Appendix B
PaILS Cataloging Survey Data
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
27
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
28
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
29
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
30
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
31
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
32
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
33
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
34
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
35
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
36
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
37
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
38
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
39
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
40
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
41
Appendix C
Kent State University Libraries Copy Cataloging Procedures
PaILS Cataloging Study, 2014
42
Kent State University Libraries: Cataloging Procedures
Copy Cataloging New Monographs: Fields to Check: RDA
Last revised 2013/10/01
Audience: primarily Kent Campus people, though most criteria are applicable in any library
Scope: primarily newly-acquired books; though most criteria are applicable to older books and
other formats as well
Distinctive features of RDA:
RDA records contain in the 040 field $e rda, and the fields 336,337, and 338
Capitalization: information may now be capitalized exactly as is on the preferred source
Brackets [ ] : each subfield containing missing information is bracketed individually
Abbreviations: abbreviations are generally not used in RDA
Search database (OCLC or KentLINK, as workflow requires), for the best matching bibliographic record. If
the best matching record is an AACR2 record, see document, Copy Cataloging New Monographs: Fields to
Check: AACR and Hybrid Records
AACR2 records will not contain an 040 $e rda
Decide whether to Route
Remember to remove CATDATE for all pieces routed to Catalog Librarians.
Route the following to the “Needs Cataloging Attention” shelves for a Catalog Librarian to complete
Originals – No bibs found
Title needs original cataloging (can’t find matching copy on OCLC)
Could be Serial, could be Monograph – Treatment decision needed
These titles often have large edition numbers, or contain a year in the title: 2013 writer’s guide
Encoding level issues
Route copy with Encoding level that is less than full.
Less than full:. K, M, E, 2, 3, 5, 7, or 8.
EnLv 4 and J: check additional fields as explained below; if any are missing or incorrect, route as
needed.
EnLv 8: if the only information missing from a bibliographic record with encoding level 8 is the physical
description (300: pagination, illustrations, and height), and you know how to make the changes in RDA to both
the 300 and the fixed field, then do add the physical description to the OCLC bib record. Then replace. If you
have any questions, ask a catalog librarian. If anything more than the physical description is needed, then
route to the “Needs Cataloging Attention” shelf as usual.
FYI: Full = blank, letter I, L , 1 and 4. Note that RDA records containing only Core elements are EnLv blank or
letter I. Use guidelines below to route appropriately.
For explanations of all Encoding levels, see OCLC Bib Formats and Standards, Encoding Level
http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/fixedfield/elvl.shtm
1
040
All RDA records should have $e rda in the 040. If this is lacking, then refer to the document, Copy
Cataloging New Monographs: Fields to Check: AACR and Hybrid Records instead of this one.
If cataloging copy is found where the 040 contains a $b with a language code other than eng, route to
catalog librarian (Notes and Subject headings will often be in a foreign language)
Example: 040 PCL $b ger
If it passes the tests above, look for these miscellaneous situations. If encountered, route to catalog
librarian:
copy that is a translation into English from another language
copy that has more than one language of text (example: some in English, some in French)
copy that was has been published under a different title in the past
copy for a book that includes accompanying material: a book with a CD, CD-ROM, or DVD, for
example.
Check that the bib record has the following components. If missing or wrong, route to catalog
librarian:
Bib lvl = m
Type = a
Language in fixed field. (008 field, 29 and fixed field area)
Route if it doesn’t match the main language of the book
Call number 090 or 050. Route if:
It doesn't have a complete LC-style call number (Typical class separately call number composed of:
Classification number, one or two Cutters; plus new material has year of publication) Example:
G155.A1 $bP67 2013
If it has two LC call numbers
It's a bibliography but lacks a Z number
Its call number is PZ3 or PZ4
1xx Author
Route if it isn’t the same person or organization as on the book. Check that it makes sense
RDA records may include relationship designators after the name, such as: $e author.
245 Title
Accept capitalization if it matches what appears on the preferred source (title page)
Route if title or subtitle doesn’t match what’s on the preferred source exactly, any word is misspelled, or
the subtitle is missing
Route if some or all of the statement of responsibility is missing, the statement of responsibility
contains the phrase “[and X others]”, or names listed in the statement of responsibility aren't traced in
7xx fields
2
250 Edition
Route if the edition doesn't match. Ignore “Paperback edition.” when it’s the only difference.
260 or 264 Publication, distribution, manufacturing, copyright information
Accept either 260 or 264 field (264 is the new standard)
Route if the place of publication or the publisher doesn’t match
Route if the date doesn’t match
Prior to mid-2012 the publication date plus the copyright date in RDA records often appeared like this:
[2011], ©2011.
From mid-2012 on, 264 fields are used in all new RDA records. Different indicators show
what type of information follows.
2nd indicator 0 = production info
2nd indicator 1 = publishing info
2nd indicator 2 = distribution info
2nd indicator 3 = manufacturing info
2nd indicator 4 = copyright date
Example:
264_1 New York, N.Y. : $b Bollingen Foundation, $c [1964]
264_2 New York, N.Y. : $b Distributed by Pantheon Books
264_4 $c ©1964
263 Projected date of publication
Delete this; it isn’t needed once the book is published.
300 Physical description
Route if pagination is missing.
Route if pagination is off by more than 2 pages or if height is off by more than 1 cm
RDA records should have abbreviations spelled out (“pages” instead of “p.”; “color illustrations” instead
of “col. ill.”)
336-338 Content type, Media type and Carrier type
Route if the fields 336 (content type), 337 (media type), and 338 (carrier type) do not appear. Accept
with or without $b
For print monographs, these will appear as follows:
336 __ text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 __ unmediated $b n $2 rdamedia
338 __ volume $b nc $2 rdacarrier
4xx or 8xx Series
Route to catalog librarian if the series is in a 490 0_ (490 1_ is acceptable), or the series on piece
doesn’t match either a 4xx or an 8xx field, or the series appears in the bib, but doesn’t exist on the
piece
Accept bibs that use either series practice: 440 alone; or the combination, 490 + 8xx.
3
See document on Intranet, “Series Checking for Catalogers” for instructions on what to do with series.
Note about multiple practices: in the past, only a 440 was used to show that the series as it appeared on the
piece matched the 1xx of the series authority record. The 440 is now obsolete. As of Nov. 2008, the 490 1_ is
used to transcribe a traced series as it appears on the piece, and the 830 (or sometimes other 8xx field)
contains the series as it is recorded in the authority record. Sometimes the 490 1_ and the 830 are identical.
You are likely to see both the obsolete 440 practice and the new practice.
500 or 504 Index and Bibliographical references notes
If the book has bibliographical references and/or an index, but the record lacks a note about them, then
put in a generic note without pagination. Edit the fixed field also. SEE document Adding
Bibliographical References and Index Notes to OCLC records for full instructions on adding these notes
in Connexion Client
Examples
500 Includes index.
504 Includes bibliographical references.
504 Includes bibliographical references and index.
RDA records should have abbreviations spelled out (“pages” instead of “p.”)
6xx Subject headings
Route if it has no LC Subject Headings, with second indicator zero
Acceptable LCSH: 6xx _0
7xx Access Points
Route if any names or corporate bodies that appear in the 245 $c do not have access points in either a
1XX or 7XX field.
RDA records may include relationship designators after the name, such as: $e author.
Other
If anything else seems off-base or unusual, such as notes that don’t seem to describe the item in hand,
then route it to a catalog librarian.
4
EDITING and CHECKING ACCEPTABLE COPY
Call number
1. Copy the call number, then perform a call number search in KentLINK using that call number
A. Make sure the call number of the piece you’re checking isn’t in use for a different work
However, it is correct if the call number is in use for an earlier/later edition of the same
work, and the only difference is the year of publication.
B. Look at the subject headings of the bib records before and after the call number in
question and make sure they generally match the item in hand.
2. If the call number lacks a year on the end, add it
Exceptions:
A. Series that are classed together. Example: TT771 $b .A35 v. 5
B. Bib that already has item records for copies with no year in the call number, and you’re
adding another copy. Leave year out of copy in hand in order to keep all copies consistent
Subject headings
Retain all 6xx fields, even those that aren’t LC (e.g., 6xx _4 fields, 650 _2 fields (MeSH headings)
440 or 830 Series
For how to read Series Authority Records (SARs), and instructions on what to do when you find series,
See document on Intranet, “Series Checking for Catalogers”
If the following situations occur, take action as instructed below:
A. You notice that we own several titles in the same series that have no authority record (not time sensitive)
Make a print out, note the situation, and put the print out in the box provided for series problems, which
is in the cataloging area.
B. You notice that we own several titles in the same series, but treatment has been mixed: some have a class
together call number, while others have been classed separately (time sensitive)
Consult a catalog librarian
C. You find an authority record, but the instructions are unclear (time sensitive)
Consult a catalog librarian
Final Action on Bib Records
If the record is acceptable at Kent, update holdings on OCLC.
Note that PromptCat records are already updated.
5
Fields to Check to Determine if a Monograph is acceptable as-is; or if it gets Routed to Cat. Librarian
Field or Step
Search OCLC for copy
Call number
040
6xx fields
Encoding level
Type = a / (6) TYPE = a
BLvl = m / (5) Bib lvl = m
LANG in fixed field, and
008 field, position 29
1xx field
245 field
250 field
260 or 264 fields
263
300 field
336-338 fields
490, 440 or 830
500 or 504
Route if :
No matching record
Two matching records: one serial bib and
one monograph bib
No complete LC call # (exception for a class
together call #)
Bibliography, but not a Z call #
PZ3 or PZ4
contains $b with a language code other
than “eng”
lacks $e rda
no 6xx _0 fields
K, M, E, 2, 3, 5, 7, or 8.
(Use your best judgment for “4” and “J”.
Some of them may be fine.)
Note that RDA Core and Full are EnLv blank
Any code that’s not “a”
Any code that’s not “m”
Doesn’t match the main language of the
book
Doesn’t match
title or subtitle doesn’t match
there are misspellings
$b is missing
$c is missing
$c some names from $c aren’t in
1xx or 7xx fields
Edition doesn’t match (ignore “Paperback
edition” when it’s the only difference)
Doesn’t match
Editing Action to Take
Add year to call number if missing
*Unless it’s a class together no.
*Unless we already have dateless
copies on the same bib
Check against catalog for “fit” – route
to Catalog Librarian if it’s odd
Retain all fields
Check that it makes sense
Delete
Pagination is missing
Pagination differs more than 2 pages
Height is off by more than 1 cm
Route if lacking these fields..
Accept with or without $b
Series is in a 490 0_
Series doesn’t match either a 4xx or an 8xx
field
Series appears in bib, but doesn’t exist on
piece.
Series treatment doesn’t match instructions
in Authority Record.
If book has bibl. refs or index, check that
there is a note
Check KentLINK authority record, or
OCLC authority record if there’s
none in KentLINK, and follow
instructions in it. For example,
use class together call # if found
on series authority record.
Follow instructions on p. 5 for series
with no authority record, mixed
treatment, or ambiguity
Edit and replace records on OCLC to
include bibl.refs. and/or index
note, or tell a Catalog Librarian
to do so
6
Update OCLC, for nonPromptCat records
Transfer to KentLINK
Remove CATDATE if going to Catalog
Librarian or to Contract Cataloging
provider
Create item record
7
Kent State University Libraries: Cataloging Procedures
Copy Cataloging New Monographs: Fields to Check: AACR and Hybrid Records
Audience: primarily Kent Campus people, though most criteria are applicable in any library
Scope: primarily newly-acquired books; though most criteria are applicable to older books and
other formats as well
last revised 2013/10/01
There are records created under various cataloging standards in our databases, the main standards being
RDA and AACR2. Hybrid records are non-RDA records that have had some RDA features added to them.
This document pertains to non-RDA records, that is, to AACR and Hybrid records.
All RDA records contain in the 040 field $e rda. If there is no 040 $e rda, then it is not an RDA record. If it is an
AACR record with some or all of the following RDA features, it is called a Hybrid record:
•
•
•
•
•
Relationship designators after access points (examples: $e author; $e editor of compilation)
Spelled-out words rather than abbreviations (examples: pages; color illustrations)
English words instead of Latin abbreviations (example: “Place of publication not identified” instead of
“S.l.”)
Complete statements of responsibility in 245 field (instead of “[et al.]”)
Inclusion of 336, 337, 338 fields
Search database (OCLC or KentLINK, as workflow requires), for the best matching bibliographic record. If the
best matching record is an RDA record, see document, Copy Cataloging New Monographs: Fields to Check:
RDA.
Decide whether to Route
Remember to remove CATDATE for all pieces routed to Catalog Librarians.
Route the following to the “Needs Cataloging Attention” shelves for a Catalog Librarian to complete
• Originals – No bibs found
titles needing original cataloging (can’t find matching copy on OCLC)
• Could be Serial, could be Monograph – Two bibs found
titles that have both a serial bib and a monograph bib record
• Encoding level
copy with Encoding level that is less than full.
Less than full:. K, M, E, 2, 3, 5, 7, or 8.
EnLv 4 and J: check additional fields as explained below; if any are missing or incorrect, route as
needed.
EnLv 8: if the only information missing from a bibliographic record with encoding level 8 is the physical
description (300: pagination, ill., and height), and you know how to make the changes in AACR2 to both the
300 and the fixed field,, then do add the physical description to the OCLC bib record. Then replace. If you
have any questions, ask a catalog librarian. If anything more than the physical description is needed, then
route to the “Needs Cataloging Attention” shelf as usual.
FYI: Full = blank, letter I, L , 1 and 4
For explanations of all Encoding levels, see OCLC Bib Formats and Standards, Encoding Level
http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/fixedfield/elvl.shtm
1
040
If the matching record has 040 $e rda, then refer to the document, Copy Cataloging New Monographs:
Fields to Check: RDA instead of this one.
If cataloging copy is found where the 040 contains a $b with a language code other than eng, route to
catalog librarian (Notes and Subject headings will often be in a foreign language)
Example: 040 PCL $b ger
•
If it passes the tests above, look for these miscellaneous situations. If encountered, route to catalog
librarian:
•
copy that is a translation into English from another language
•
copy that has more than one language of text (example: some in English, some in French)
•
copy that was published under a different title in the past
•
copy for a book that includes accompanying material: a book with a CD, CD-ROM, or DVD, for
example.
Check that the bib record has the following components. If missing or wrong, route to catalog
librarian.
•
Bib lvl = m
•
Type = a
•
Language in fixed field (008 field, 29 and fixed field area)
Route if it doesn’t match the main language of the book
•
Call number 090 or 050. Route if:
It doesn't have a complete LC-style call number (Typical class separately call numbers are composed
of: Classification number, one or two Cutters; plus new material has year of publication) Example:
G155.A1|bP67 2008
If it has two LC call numbers
It's a bibliography but lacks a Z number
Its call number is PZ3 or PZ4
•
1xx Author
Route if it isn’t the same person or organization as on the book. Check that it makes sense
Hybrid records may include relationship designators after the name, such as: $e author.
245 Title
Route if title or subtitle doesn’t match what’s on the preferred source (title page) exactly, any word is
misspelled, or the subtitle is missing
Route if names listed in the statement of responsibility aren't traced in 7xx fields
Hybrid records may list all authors in the statement of responsibility, instead of the only first author
followed by “[et al.]”
•
2
•
250 Edition
Route if the edition doesn't match. Ignore “Paperback edition.” when it’s the only difference.
•
260 or 264 Production, publication, distribution, manufacture, copyright information
Accept either 260 or 264 field (264 is the new standard)
Note that multivolume sets and loose-leaf materials with multiple publishers can have multiple 260
fields.
Route if the place of publication or the publisher doesn’t match
Route if the date doesn’t match.
Prior to mid-2012 the publication date plus the copyright date in RDA records often appeared like this:
[2011], ©2011.
From mid-2012 on, 264 fields are used in all new RDA records. Different indicators show
what type of information follows.
2nd indicator 0 = production info
2nd indicator 1 = publishing info
2nd indicator 2 = distribution info
2nd indicator 3 = manufacturing info
2nd indicator 4 = copyright date
Example:
264_1 New York, N.Y. : $b Bollingen Foundation, $c [1964]
264_2 New York, N.Y. : $b Distributed by Pantheon Books
264_4 $c ©1964
•
263 Projected date of publication
Delete this; it isn’t needed once the book is published.
300 field
Route if pagination is missing.
Route if pagination is off by more than 2 pages or if height is off by more than 1 cm
Hybrid records may have abbreviations spelled out (“pages” instead of “p.”; “color illustrations” instead
of “col. ill.”)
•
•
336-338 Content type, Media type and Carrier type
Hybrid records may contain fields 336 (content type), 337 (media type), and 338 (carrier type) do not
appear. Accept with or without $b
For print monographs, these will appear as follows:
336 __ text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 __ unmediated $b n $2 rdamedia
338 __ volume $b nc $2 rdacarrier
•
4xx or 8xx Series
Route to catalog librarian if the series is in a 490 0_ (490 1_ is acceptable), or the series on piece
doesn’t match either a 4xx or an 8xx field, or the series appears in the bib, but doesn’t exist on the
piece
3
Accept bibs that use either series practice: 440 alone; or the combination, 490 1_ + 8xx.
See document on Intranet, “Series Checking for Catalogers” for instructions on what to do with
series.
Note about multiple practices: in the past, only a 440 was used to show that the series as it appeared on the
piece matched the 1xx of the series authority record. The 440 is now obsolete. As of Nov. 2008, the 490 1_ is
used to transcribe a traced series as it appears on the piece, and the 830 (or sometimes other 8xx field)
contains the series as it is recorded in the authority record. Sometimes the 490 1_ and the 830 are identical.
•
500 or 504 Index and Bibliographical references notes
If the book has bibliographical references and/or an index, but the record lacks a note about them, then
put in a generic note without pagination. Edit the fixed field also. SEE document Adding
Bibliographical References and Index Notes to OCLC records for full instructions on adding these notes
in Connexion Client
Examples
500 Includes index.
504 Includes bibliographical references.
504 Includes bibliographical references and index.
Hybrid records may have abbreviations spelled out (“pages” instead of “p.”)
•
Subject headings 6xx
Route if it has no LC Subject Headings
Acceptable LCSH: 6xx _0
•
7xx Access Points
Route if any names or corporate bodies that appear in the 245 $c do not have access points in either a
1XX or 7XX field.
Hybrid records may include relationship designators after the name, such as: $e author.
•
Other
If anything else seems off-base or unusual, such as notes that don’t seem to describe the item in hand,
then route it.
4
EDITING and CHECKING ACCEPTABLE COPY
Call number
1. Copy the call number, then perform a call number search in KentLINK using that call number
A. Make sure the call number of the piece you’re checking isn’t in use for a different work
However, it is correct if the call number is in use for an earlier/later edition of the same
work, and the only difference is the year of publication.
B. Look at the subject headings of the bib records before and after the call number in
question and make sure they generally match the item in hand.
2. If the call number lacks a year on the end, add it
Exceptions:
A. series that are classed together. Example: TT771 $b .A35 v. 5
B. Bib that already has item records for copies with no year in the call number, and you’re
adding another copy. Leave year out of copy in hand in order to keep all copies consistent
Subject headings
Retain all 6xx fields, even those that aren’t LC (e.g., 6xx _4 fields, 650 _2 fields (MeSH headings)
440 or 8xx Series
For how to read Series Authority Records (SARs), and instructions on what to do when you find series,
See document on Intranet, “Series Checking for Catalogers”
If the following situations occur, take action as instructed below:
A. You notice that we own several titles in the same series that have no authority record (not time sensitive)
Make a print out, note the situation, and put the print out in the box provided for series problems, which
is in the cataloging area.
B. You notice that we own several titles in the same series, but treatment has been mixed: some have a class
together call number, while others have been classed separately (time sensitive)
Consult a catalog librarian
C. You find an authority record, but the instructions are unclear (time sensitive)
Consult a catalog librarian
Final Action on Bib Records
If the record is acceptable at Kent, update holdings on OCLC.
Note that PromptCat records are already updated.
5
Fields to Check to Determine if a Monograph is acceptable as-is; or if it gets Routed to Cat. Librarian
Field or Step
Search OCLC for copy
Call number
040
6xx fields
Encoding level
Type = a / (6) TYPE = a
BLvl = m / (5) Bib lvl = m
LANG in fixed field, and 008
field, position 29
1xx field and 7xx fields
245 field
250 field
260 or 264 fields
263
300 field
490, 440 or 830
500 or 504
Update OCLC, for nonPromptCat records
Transfer to KentLINK
Create item record
Route if :
• No matching record
• Two matching records: one serial bib
and one monograph bib
• No complete LC call # (exception for a
class together call #)
• Bibliography, but not a Z call #
• PZ3 or PZ4
• contains $b with a language code other
than “eng”
• no 6xx _0 fields
• K, M, E, 2, 3, 5, 7, or 8.
(Use your best judgment for “4” and “J”.
Some of them may be fine.)
• Any code that’s not “a”
• Any code that’s not “m”
• Doesn’t match the main language of the
book
• Doesn’t match
• title or subtitle doesn’t match
• there are misspellings
• $b is missing
• $c is missing
• $c some names from $c aren’t in
1xx or 7xx fields
• Edition doesn’t match (ignore
“paperback ed.” when it’s the only
difference)
• Doesn’t match
Editing Action to Take
• Add year to call number if missing
*Unless it’s a class together no.
*Unless we already have dateless
copies on the same bib
• Check against catalog for “fit” – route
to Catalog Librarian if it’s odd
• Retain all fields
• Check that it makes sense
• Delete
• Pagination is missing
• Pagination differs by more than 2 pages
• Height is off by more than 1 cm.
• Series is in a 490 0_
• Series doesn’t match either a 4xx or an
8xx field
• Series appears in bib, but doesn’t exist
on piece.
• Series treatment doesn’t match
instructions in Authority Record.
• If book has bibl. refs or index, check that
there is a note
• Check KentLINK authority record, or
OCLC authority record if there’s
none in KentLINK, and follow
instructions in it. For example,
use class together call # if found
on series authority record.
• Follow instructions on p. 5 for series
with no authority record, mixed
treatment, or ambiguity
• Edit and replace records on OCLC to
include bibl.refs. and/or index
note, or tell a Catalog Librarian
to do so
• Remove CATDATE if going to Catalog
Librarian or to Contract Cataloging
provider
6