A Crisis in Cataloging: The Impact and Implications of the Library of Congress

1
A Crisis in CatalogingThe 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
LCs Product History

• Catalog cards
• Cataloging-in-Publication (CIP)
• Library of Congress Classification
• Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH)
• MARC, METS, MODS, EAD

4
LCs Role in Quality Control

• Maintains the National Authority File (NAF)
• Name, series, and subject authority records
• Since 1990s, 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
LCs 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 LCs 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
Records with untraced series Series titles needing revision Records revised
Sept. 66 5 11
Oct. 54 13 20
Nov. 17 7 6
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 LCs 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
  LCs 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
Dekuji za Pozornost!

• Richard Sapon-White
• Head of Monographs Cataloging
• Oregon State University
• richard.sapon-white_at_oregonstate.edu