Resource Description and Access for Students Christee Pascale Associate Head, Metadata & Cataloging North Carolina State University Libraries North Carolina Central University School of Library and Information Sciences LSIS 5425 Organization of Information October 12, 2011

Presentation Overview The Road to Resource Description and Access (RDA) Cataloging at NCSU The U.S. RDA Test What’s New in an RDA Record and RDA Record Examples

THE ROAD TO RESOURCE DESCRIPTION & ACCESS (RDA)

What is RDA? Resource Description & Access, the successor to the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR2) –new content standard –not an encoding standard (MARC is an encoding standard) –intended to be independent of MARC, and hoped to be used beyond the MARC community

Why a new standard? Work started out in 2004 on AACR3 –simplify rules –encourage use as a content standard for metadata schema –encourage international applicability –address current problems with AACR2 –principle-based –build on cataloger’s judgment After an initial draft, it was decided to take a new approach and call the effort Resource Description & Access.

Format Standards (MARC/MODS/DC) Content Standards (AACR2/RDA) Encoding Syntaxes (MARC/XML) Controlled Vocabularies (LCSH/MARC Code Lists) Indexing Display

FRBR & FRAD Underlying RDA are the conceptual models FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) and FRAD (Functional Requirements for Authority Data). Not a set of rules Uses an entity relationship model FRBR tasks: Find/Identify/Select/Obtain FRAD tasks: Find/Identify/Contextualize/Justify

Content standard v. Encoding standard AACR2/RDA For the title proper of a book, use the title page (or image thereof) as the preferred source of information. If a married person is identified only by a partner’s name, treat a term of address as an integral part of the name. –Davis, Maxwell, Mrs. –Strauss, Johann, Frau MARC MARC 245 tag = title proper MARC 246 tag = varying form of title $a The many faces of special education $a The many faces of special educators MARC 100 tag = personal name, primary access point MARC 700 tag = personal name, additional access point MARC 600 tag = personal name, subject 100 1/ $a Strauss, Johann, ǂ c Frau, ǂ d / $a Strauss, Johann, ǂ c Frau, ǂ d $a Strauss, Johann, ǂ c Frau, ǂ d

CATALOGING AT NCSU LIBRARIES

Metadata & NCSU 18 Metadata & Cataloging staff: –5 in Monographs –6 in Serials & Continuing Resources –3 in Metadata & Data Quality –1 Technology Support for Technical Services Highly centralized cataloging output –60,568 physical & electronic titles (MARC) –50,504 physical volumes (MARC) –12,909 digital image assets (non-MARC) –779 digital text assets (non-MARC) – linear feet of manuscript materials (non-MARC) –2,943 faculty citations (non-MARC)

Metadata & NCSU ~5% of NCSU MARC cataloging is original Much of that is new editions and/or electronic derived from print NCSU is not a participant in the PCC MLS holding librarians are doing (next to) no cataloging Support staff are doing all copy AND original cataloging and both MARC and non-MARC cataloging

THE U.S. RDA TEST

U.S. RDA Test Goals Response to concerns about RDA raised by the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control (2008 report) To assure the operational, technical, and economic feasibility of RDA Includes the three national libraries and the broader U.S. library community

U.S. RDA Test Participants Library of Congress National Agricultural Library National Library of Medicine Backstage Library Works Brigham Young University Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh Clark Art Institute Library University of Chicago College Center for Library Automation (Florida) Columbia University Douglas County Libraries, Colorado Emory University GSLIS Group Minnesota Historical Society Morgan Library and Museum Music Library Association/Online Audiovisual Catalogers, Inc. North Carolina State University Libraries University of North Dakota North East Independent School District, San Antonio, Texas Northeastern University OCLC Metadata Contract Services Ohio State University Libraries State Library of Pennsylvania Quality Books Stanford University Libraries George Washington University

Why did NCSU choose to participate? To force ourselves to learn Copy-heavy institution Support-staff-heavy institution Trying to re-invigorate our training program How do records of various types co-exist happily? Assessment/usability & cost/value

U.S. RDA Test Timeline U.S. RDA Test Participant Preparation Jul-Sep 2010 U.S. RDA Test Oct-Dec 2010 Data analysis Jan-Mar 2011 Final report to LC, NAL, NLM senior management US National Library RDA decision May – Jun 2011 Requirements Common Original & Copy Set Extra Set Surveys: –Record by Record –Record Creator Profile –Record Use –Institutional

NCSU U.S. RDA Test Statistics Common set original: 25 Common set copy: –met NCSU criteria for upgrade: 4 –did not meet NCSU criteria for upgrade: 1 Extra set with surveys: 462 –MARC Original: 390 (includes 201 ETDs) –MARC Copy: 62 –MODS: 10 NCSU was the 5 th highest record creator

U.S. RDA Test Record Creation Findings Report & Recommendations of the U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee 26 minutesAverage original record creation time for professionals and paraprofessionals 53 minutesAverage time to create an original RDA records for records minutesAverage copy cataloging record time for professionals and paraprofessionals

NCSU RDA Test Record Creation Findings Record creation times at the end of the test period: minutes for original book cataloging 5-20 minutes for copy book cataloging These times match NCSU’s existing local data for AACR2 book record creation time. 75% of NCSU catalogers showed increased rapidity in record creation over the course of the test. Average time per record decreased 40% by the end of the test. For books, ebooks and ejournals we noted a steady decrease in record creation time The majority of print serials were cataloged by 3 individuals and despite repeat cataloging, time to catalog did not decrease much over time. We have no idea why.

RDA Implementation U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee Final report issued to public on May 9, 2011 U.S. National Libraries RDA implementation no sooner than January 2013 Implementation contingent on satisfactory process/completion of report tasks & action items, two of which are: –Reword RDA instructions in clear, unambiguous, plain English –Demonstrate credible progress towards a replacement for MARC

WHAT’S NEW IN AN RDA RECORD

Fewer Abbreviations AACR2 xiv, 324 p. : ill., ports. ; 23 cm. RDA xiv, 324 pages : illustrations, portraits ; 23 cm AACR2 [S.l. : s.n., 2004]. RDA [Place of publication not identified] : [publisher not identified], [2004].

Transcription: “Take What You See” Edition statement on piece: second edition AACR2:2 nd ed. RDA:Second edition. Title on piece: Melallization of polymers AACR2:title proper: Melallization [i.e. Metallization] of polymers RDA: title proper: Melallization of polymers variant title: Corrected title: Metallization of polymers

General Material Designation (GMD) AACR2 used GMD in title field –[videorecording], [electronic resource], [kit] … RDA replaces GMD with 3 new elements: –Content type text, two-dimension moving image, computer program … –Media type computer, video, unmediated … –Carrier type videodisc, online resource, audio disc, volume …

Q&A SESSION

Documentation & Resources NCSU – Library of Congress –Resource Description and Access: –Testing Resource Description and Access: Joint Steering Committee for the Development of RDA – University of Chicago – RDA-L – Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) Provider Neutral E- Monograph Guide –