The CONSER Standard Record: Where are We Now? Steve Shadle Serials Access Librarian University of Washington Libraries

The CONSER Standard Record: Where are We Now?

Steve ShadleSerials Access Librarian

University of Washington Libraries

CONSER Standard Record (CSR)

Overview of rationale and development Implementation and use CSR in the context of RDA implementation

Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical

Services


Services

Original Record Objectives (2005/2006)

Single ‘standard’ record to replace several ‘levels’ of CONSER records

Floor record that can be added to Focus on access (with sufficient description) Cost effective (record creation, maintenance,

training) Must play well with others


Services

5

A Structured, Collaborative Process Build the record based on user needs by:

Evaluating core data set of elements using FRBR tasks

Determining mandatory element set (primarily only elements receiving a value of “high”)

Interview catalogers for pain points Brainstorm and develop cataloging guidelines Test via pilot project (13 libraries, 38 catalogers, 88

reviewers) Revise based on pilot results

Mandatory Element Set WG started with complete list of serial

record elements Each element scored high/low in support

of FRBR tasks A few elements were added to support

processing or shared cataloging efficiency No change in practice for name/subject

accessHosted by ALCTS The Association for

Library Collections and Technical Services


Services

Summary of Mandatory Elements

Selected leader/fixed field codesControl/identification numbers/codes

(ISSN, LCCN, CODEN, 042)Main entry Titles (abbreviated, title proper, variant,

IR former)Edition statementPublisherPlace of publication (originally limited,

later made mandatory)Extent (for non-print tangible

resources)

Current frequencyDate/designation (all unformatted)Limited notes (title source, DBO,

LIC, reproduction, some system details, language, index)

Subject and name added entries Linking fields (except 787)Either series added entry or series

statementSome URLs


Services

Summary of Omitted ElementsSelected leader/fixed field codesDistinguishing uniform titles (except

generic titles, monographic series)

Other title informationMost statements of responsibilityParallel titles from 245 (retained in

246)Place of publication generally (later

reinstated)Added entries that duplicate linking

fields (730/740)Series statement (unless no SAR)

Extent for textual and online resources

Formatted beginning and ending volumes and dates (362); all will be unformatted

Many notes (including 321, 580, 550)

Other relationship entry (787)


Services


Services

Guideline Goals Eliminate or minimize redundancies Use system and system-display capabilities more fully Provide cataloger guidance to expedite decision making Allow for omitted elements (e.g., place) to be supplied by

publishers or others Make records clearer for users Use language consistent with the "floor" approach by

stating, It is not required to... rather than Do not...

Hosted by ALCTSThe Association for Library Collections and Technical Services


Services


Services


Services


Services

16

Guidance for Catalogers Establishing corporate headings

Preferred solutions and “if in doubt” help about forms of headings and subordination

Major/minor changesRules of thumb for problematic situationsTitle change analysis

Unformatted 362 (Began with... Ended with...)Quicker for catalogers to constructEasier to train catalogers to create

Limit the number of required notes


Services

18

Reviewers’ Positive Reactions“There is less clutter on the Access record

and most users don't look at all the extra stuff we put in anyway.”

Spelling out abbreviations was viewed positively

Unformatted 362 easier for patrons and staff to understand

Requiring fewer notes results in cleaner display

Reviewers’ Critical Reaction

"I am a fanatic for detail; I need to have, or feel that I have, every possible detail in order to do the best work. Probably in 99 out of 100 reference desk transactions, an access level record would be sufficient; but I still prefer to have as much detail as possible."


Services

A Comment on Time Savings Cataloger time data was collected Not tested for statistical significance Much anecdotal evidence from catalogers

on time savingsUniform titlesAACR2 abbreviationsNotes362


Services


Services


Services


Services


Services

One Person’s Floor Is Another Person’s Ceiling

“In its first year in practice, this study shows that libraries are mostly accepting of the changes seen at the ‘floor’ of the CONSER Standard Record. Even though the sample is relatively small, this initial snapshot of local practice would indicate that the omission of particular data elements has not led most catalogers to view these records as inadequate for their needs.”

Lori J. Terrill, A Snapshot of Early Acceptance of the CONSER Standard Record in Local Catalogs, Serials Review, Volume 35, Issue 1, March 2009, Pages 16-27


Services

When Worlds CollideGuidelines for use of CSR as part of RDA testing:

http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/CSR-RDA-Test.pdfAreas of divergent practice

Distinguishing uniform title/Unique work titleTranslation uniform title/Unique expression titleOther title informationStatement of responsibilityPublication date(s)ExtentNotes (DBO, LIC, title source, frequency)


Services

http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/CSR-RDA-Test.pdf

PCC/CONSER Operations Meeting OutcomesCSR practices to be retained after RDA implementation Other title information only required for clarification/support (not RDA core) Recording parallel title only in 246 Statement of responsibility not required Keep former frequencies Source of title note always required Always provide DBO with existing CONSER wording Extent required only for tangible non-print formats Provider-neutral practice (PCC decision) Single-record approach (PCC decision)*


Services

CSR Practices Still Under Consideration

Identification of language expression (130 vs. 730) Continue CSR practice for now Form a CONSER Core Elements WG before RDA is

implementedDistinguishing Uniform/Work Title Continue CSR practice for now No consensus within RDA context. Must explore

consequences of maintaining current practice and explore alternative for distinguishing identical titles


Services

CSR Practices Still Under Consideration

Date of publication (260) Continue CSR practice for now (although no consensus on

existing practice due to existing system considerations) Form a CONSER Core Elements WG before RDA is

implemented


Services

And One Final IssuePersonal name main entry (LCRI 21.1A2) Consider the entire run of a serial before entering it under the heading for a person.

If different issues of the serial are known to have been or are likely to be created by different persons, do not enter the work under the heading for a person.

Enter a serial under the heading for a person only in instances in which one person is so closely connected to or involved with the serial that the publication seems unlikely to continue without that person. Some types of serials that might sometimes be considered to be unlikely to continue without the person named as author are1) serials for which the same person is named as both author and publisher;2) serials that carry the whole name or part of the name of a person in the title;3) serials that do not emanate from a corporate body that might assure that the

serial is continued. Always lean toward not entering a serial under the heading for a person.


Services

Personal Name Authorized Access Point Continue existing practice for now Reframe LCRI 21.1A2 within the context of RDA to

specifically mention application to serials and ongoing integrating resources

Ask ALA/JSC representative to add this clarification to RDA for serials and ongoing integrating resources

Reinstate provisions of LCRI 21.1A2 as a CONSER/PCC best practice upon RDA implementation


Services

ResourcesProject documents: http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/CSR.htmlCSR Metadata Application Profile/Instructions:

http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/conserdoc.pdfCONSER Operations Meeting 2011 Outcomes: http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/Action-Items-CONSER-2011-OpCo.pdf

Articles:Lori J. Terrill, A Snapshot of Early Acceptance of the CONSER Standard Record in

Local Catalogs, Serials Review, Volume 35, Issue 1, March 2009, Pages 16-27, ISSN 0098-7913, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0098791308001263 (subscription required)

Wang Jing, CONSER Standard Record Documentation: A New Policy on Serials Cataloging (in Chinese), 图书馆杂志 , 2008-05, ISSN 1000-4254, http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-TNGZ200805005.htm (CNKI subscription required)


Services

http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/CSR.html

http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/conserdoc.pdf

http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/Action-Items-CONSER-2011-OpCo.pdf

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0098791308001263

http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-TNGZ200805005.htm


Services

Documents

The CONSER Standard Record: Where are We Now? Steve Shadle Serials Access Librarian University of Washington Libraries