The CONSER Standard Record: Where are We Now? Steve Shadle Serials 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

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 Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical 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 access Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services

Summary of Mandatory Elements Selected leader/fixed field codes Control/identification numbers/codes (ISSN, LCCN, CODEN, 042) Main entry Titles (abbreviated, title proper, variant, IR former) Edition statement Publisher Place of publication (originally limited, later made mandatory) Extent (for non-print tangible resources) Current frequency Date/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 statement Some URLs Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services

Summary of Omitted Elements Selected leader/fixed field codes Distinguishing uniform titles (except generic titles, monographic series) Other title information Most statements of responsibility Parallel 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) Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical 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 ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services

Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services

16 Guidance for Catalogers Establishing corporate headings Preferred solutions and “if in doubt” help about forms of headings and subordination Major/minor changes Rules of thumb for problematic situations Title change analysis Unformatted 362 (Began with... Ended with...) Quicker for catalogers to construct Easier to train catalogers to create Limit the number of required notes

Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical 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." Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services

A Comment on Time Savings Cataloger time data was collected Not tested for statistical significance Much anecdotal evidence from catalogers on time savings  Uniform titles  AACR2 abbreviations  Notes  362 Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical 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 Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services

When Worlds Collide Guidelines for use of CSR as part of RDA testing: Areas of divergent practice Distinguishing uniform title/Unique work title Translation uniform title/Unique expression title Other title information Statement of responsibility Publication date(s) Extent Notes (DBO, LIC, title source, frequency) Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services

PCC/CONSER Operations Meeting Outcomes CSR 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)* Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical 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 implemented Distinguishing 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 Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical 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 Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services

And One Final Issue Personal 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 are 1) 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. Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical 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 Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services

Resources Project documents: CSR Metadata Application Profile/Instructions: CONSER Operations Meeting 2011 Outcomes: 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 , ISSN , (subscription required) Wang Jing, CONSER Standard Record Documentation: A New Policy on Serials Cataloging (in Chinese), 图书馆杂志, , ISSN , (CNKI subscription required) Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services