Collaborative e-collection management: CEAL cooperative cataloging project for e-collections Prepared by Bie-hwa Ma Presented by Charlene Chou 2017 CEAL CTP Session March 16, 2017

Outline Why Cooperatively Catalogue E-Collections? ERMB Survey and Collection Candidates Initial Cataloging: CONSER DOAJ Model Next Phase: Collection Manager Platform Your Participation in “Do More with More”

Why catalog E-Collections since … digitized e-collections allow keyword searching?   catalog records generated from link services’ knowledge base are good enough?   discovery layers provide efficient discovery and access to all e-contents at all granularity levels?   Have you been asked questions like these? Why do you need to catalog E-collections since E-collections are digital which allows keyword searching at journal/book level and even article/chapter level? Catalog records generated from link services’ knowledge base metadata provided by vendors are good enough? Discovery layers provide efficient discovery and access to all e-contents at all granularity levels?

Why cataloging E-collections? Improves discovery and access Irreplaceable by Knowledge Base records or Search Engines as: Quality metadata and subject cataloging provided by library professionals. Oftentimes, the online catalog is the only discovery tool Not all e-contents were really “digitized” and can be indexed Many CJK e-contents are not discoverable and accessible via the libraries’ link or discovery services e.g., 30K/35K UC subscribed Chinese e-journals + 70K Chinese e-books are not discoverable in SFX Inaccurate, incomprehensive, and outdated metadata, hidden title changes, and other vendor provided metadata issues result in more discovery and access failure As for print or audiovisual collections, providing quality metadata for e-collections improves discovery and access. Library Catalog Records are irreplaceable by Knowledge Base records from link resolution services (such as ProQuest, Ex Libris), search engines (like Google), or discovery tools (like Summon) for the following major reasons: Catalog records have quality metadata and subject cataloging provided by library professionals Oftentimes, the local online catalog/OPAC is the only discovery tool because Not all e-contents were “digitized” and can be indexed for key word searching Many CJK vendors have no relations with link services, search engines, and/or discovery tools services. Since their contents and/or metadata are not included in discovery services’ KB, they are not discoverable and accessible in the libraries’ discovery services. For example, 30K/50K UC subscribed Chinese e-journals and almost all of the 70K Chinese e-books are not included in Knowledge Bases and are not discoverable in SFX. Inaccurate, incomprehensive, outdated metadata, hidden title changes, and other metadata issues have prevented another few thousand titles from discovery through link services and discovery tools

Smooth Discovery & Access Smooth Discovery & Access via search engine and library-subscribed link services In this ideal case, a University of California (UC) user searched journal articles on Chinese simplification movement on Google Scholar and found some citations. UC-eLinks, a link service powered by SFX from Ex Libris, created an OpenURL link next to this citation (see the hyperlinked icon, UC-eLinks) since UC campuses have access right to the journal “语文建设” via CNKI. By clicking the UC-eLinks icon, the user was taken to the journal homepage hosted by CNKI.

Oftentimes, OPAC Is the Only Discovery Tool Unlike for its later title, 語文建設, no OpenURL, created for “文字改革” due to lack of vendor’s metadata in UC SFX Knowledge Base Yay! It’s searchable and accessible from the local OPAC Due to vendors and link/discovery services metadata issues mentioned in the previous slide, oftentimes, OPAC is the only discovery tool. In this example of a hidden title change issue, this article published in the journal, 文字改革, the former title of 語文建設, is not prompted with an OpenURL since the title 文字改革 is not in UC’s SFX Knowledge Base. The user went to A-Z title list and found nothing either. But fortunately enough, the title 文字改革 was cataloged and can be accessible via the local OPAC. No records in A-Z list generated from SFX Knowledge Base (KB)

Why cataloging E-collections? Cont. Increases Return on Investment (ROI) of e-collections. As the e-collection expenses increase, cataloging them becomes even more essential. http://ceal.lib.ku.edu/ceal/stat/ viewed Mar. 12, 2017 Cataloging e-collections improves discovery & access of e-collections, therefore increases Return on Investment (ROI) of e-collections. As CEAL member libraries increased the percentage of e-resource expenses out of the total expenses from 5.48% in 2005/2006 to 30.05% in 2015/2016, cataloging e-collections become essential for enhancing the discovery and access, which will bring up the Return on Investment (ROI) of e-collections.

Why Cooperative Cataloguing? Participating institutions can: Do more with more manpower in less time Collectively identify common issues Collaboratively resolve problems Communicate and cooperate with providers as a group for metadata improvement How can we achieve this goal of cataloging the influx of a ton of e-resources? Besides batch processing and other technical tools, the key is collaboration. The benefit and reasons for Cooperative cataloging e-collections are:

See also Survey result report by Erica Chang 2015 ERMB Survey to CEAL libraries: Interest in Cooperative Cataloging for CJK E-Resources Interests: 9 out of 16 responded interested in ERMB-coordinated CJK cooperative cataloging, 2 not sure about manpower & workflow, 4 answered no Estimated Commitment: Among the 9 interested, 1 can commit 20-50 records per year, 4 can contribute less than 200 records, 3 can do 200-500, 1 over 500 records per year Packages Interested Chinese: Dacheng x 5, Republican Era x3, Scripta Sinica x 2, CAJ x 2, Late Qing x 2, COJ x2, Ariti (incld. TEPS) x 2, Unihan x 1, China Core Newspapers x 1 Japanese: JapanKnowledge x 2 Korean: Dbpia x 2, KRPia, KSI e-book, KISS, Kbpia, & eKorean Studies x 1 Other: quality records for e-books Other Questions: Local policy (single or separate record), acceptable cataloguing/encoding levels, etc. See also Survey result report by Erica Chang To expedite the title-level cataloging of big packages, ERMB members initiated the idea of Cooperative Cataloging Projects. ERMB conducted a survey for an environmental scan in Feb. 2015. Listed here are the resulting highlights. 9 out of 16 responded were interested in ERMB-coordinated CJK cooperative cataloging, 2 not sure about manpower & workflow, 4 answered no Among the 9 interested, estimated possiblecontributions range from 20-50 records per year to 500 records per year. Packages interested are the base from which the target collected were selected. Other Questions: such as Local policy (single or separate record), acceptable cataloguing/encoding levels, etc. have provided us info for designing the coop cataloguing projects

Target Collections & Participants Initial selection criteria: collections with 3 or more libraries interested Dacheng old periodical full-text database (大成老旧刊全文数据库), 7,500 titles, led by Bie-hwa Ma Partners: UC San Diego (SCP), University of Hong Kong, Stanford University, and University of Washington Chinese periodical full-text database (1911-1949) (民国时期期刊全 文数据库), 25,000 titles, led by Liangyu Fu and Yuhna Sung Partners: University of Michigan, Stanford University, UC San Diego (SCP), and University of Washington China Academic Journals (CAJ, 中国期刊全文数据库), 12,000 titles, led by Sarah Elman. Partners: Cataloging partners: Columbia University, UC San Diego (SCP), University of Maryland, Claremont College, Yale University, Connel University, University of Hong Kong Note: JapanKnowledge, 870+ titles, launched and finished as a non-ERMB coordinated project by a team led by Yukari Sugiyama of Yale University. Based on our initial selection criteria, collections with 3 or more libraries interested, we currently target three Chinese packages. [Charlene, you don’t need to read them all, depending on how much time is left. I list them here just for information] It is worth noting that JapanKonwledge project was launched and finished as a non-ERMB coordinated project by a team led by Yukari Sugiyama of Yale University. If interested, click on the hyperlink JapanKnowledge here to view Ms. Sugiyama’s related article published in Oct. 2016.

Initial Cataloging -- PCC CONSER DOAJ Model Initial cataloging workflow, similar to CONSER DOAJ model: Identify the titles with and without OCLC copy Add encoding level K/3 (brief) records (depending on the quality of vendor provided metadata) into OCLC for those titles without OCLC copy Identify and enhance any existing OCLC records for assigned titles Record OCLC numbers, both online and print version if any, and cataloging dates on the designated Google Form Report resource presentation and metadata issues to providers Load records by institutional pace Encoding level: Level I/up for the existing records, K/3 for brief records Single/separate policy: Both accommodated Tools: OCLC, MarcEdit and its plugins, Excel, Google Form, etc. Communication: as needed For packages that have not been cataloged such as Dacheng and Chinese periodicals, the participants primarily created the following workflow similar to CONSER DOAJ model: Identify the titles with and without OCLC copy Add encoding level K/3 (brief) records (depending on the quality of vendor provided metadata) into OCLC for those titles without OCLC copy Identify and enhance any existing OCLC records for assigned titles Record OCLC numbers, both online and print version if any, and cataloging dates on the designated Google Form Report resource presentation and metadata issues to the provider Load records by institutional pace Encoding level: Level I/up for the existing records, K/3 for brief records Single/separate policy: Both accommodated Tools: OCLC, MarcEdit and its plugins, Excel, Google Form, etc. Communication: communicate cataloging or other issues as needed, for example coverage formats.

Collection Manager as Collaboration Platform Once the cataloging of the initial title list is finished, these records will be added as a collection in OCLC Collection Manager. Brief records may be upgraded at this time by the participating libraries. In addition, new titles will be added. Participating libraries can set up to receive automated notification of updates via OCLC Collection Manager.

Project Status Dacheng: in Phase 2. Phase 1 result: 2,000 brief records, 450 full level records. Chinese periodicals [民国时期期刊]: in prep for initial cataloging, has discussed metadata and URL issues with the vendor. CAJ: Initial cataloging including title changes has been completed and shared by University of Hong Kong Library. Big thanks to them! After URLs are updated, collections by series are to be created in OCLC Collection Manager after CEAL Annual Meeting.

Call for Your Participation Incentives for you to join us: Participants have benefited from obtaining more records with limited time invested in a much shorter time period. Participating libraries that contribute to any project can download the catalog records finished from all projects. Your time commitment is up to your institutional workflow and manpower situation. General guideline has been collectively generated and provided. Cataloging and metadata issues have been collectively discussed and resolved. Talents and technical tips have been shared and learned from partners. Contact us should you have any questions and wlcome your participation. We encourage you to participate in some ways for the following incentives:

Q & A Bie-Hwa Ma bcma@ucsd.edu

Pre-thought questions and answers Will you share your work through Collection Manager? Yes, we plan to share when we finish each project. But we encourage all CEAL libraries to join us now even if you can only contribute a little. the good thing is you can start loading the records from now on through our Google sheet.