Chapter 1 - General Rules for Description
Chapter 2 - Books, Pamphlets, and Printed Sheets
Chapter 3 - Cartographic Materials
Chapter 5 - Music
Chapter 6 - Sound Recordings
Chapter 7 - Motion Pictures and Videorecordings
Chapter 9 - Electronic Resources
Chapter 23 - Geographic Names
Chapter 23 - Geographic Names (Appendix: Subject Headings)
Appendix C - Numerals
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
DESCRIPTIVE CATALOGING OF EAST ASIAN MATERIAL: CJK Examples of AACR2 and Library of Congress Rule Interpretations
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/CJKIntro.html
A Work in Progress
The Technical Processing Committee of the Council on East Asian Libraries (CEAL) agreed in 1996 that the most valuable contribution that it could make to the East Asian library community would be the updating and expansion of the AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd ed.) workbook for East Asian publications.
The original workbook was compiled in 1983 by Beatrice Ohta of the Library of Congress (LC) and Thomas Lee of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Beatrice and Thomas were assisted in their efforts by several other CEAL librarians. Their workbook was intended to provide guidelines and examples for treating materials in East Asian languages, and to supplement AACR2 training institutes by addressing special problems faced by East Asian catalogers. The workbook, covering Chapters 1, 2, 12, 21-25 and Appendix C (Numerals), was widely utilized by catalogers outside the Library of Congress.
In proposing a revision of the workbook, the Technical Processing Committee primarily intended to show non-LC catalogers of CJK material, many of whom are non-native speakers, how AACR2 and the LCRIs (Library of Congress Rule Interpretations) applied to the material they cataloged by providing actual illustrations from CJK bibliographic records, in the same manner that AACR2 and the LCRIs provide examples in western languages. The committee wished not only to update the workbook to reflect changes to AACR2 and the LCRIs, but also to broaden the scope to include the rules that govern specific types of material. Therefore, this revision includes examples of maps and atlases (Chapter 3), music and sound recordings (Chapters 5-6), motion pictures and videorecordings (Chapter 7), electronic resources (Chapter 9), and references (Chapter 26). Examples were to be presented in a format that would be informative to catalogers.
The committee asked that the revision be undertaken as a joint project by CEAL and LC. Committee members were confident that they could compile examples, but felt that the finished product could only be considered authoritative if it were reviewed by staff at the Library of Congress. Because the Library strongly discourages cataloging by example, the Director for Cataloging agreed to make the revision a joint project only if the examples were clearly intended to be illustrative and informative, in the same manner as the examples that appear in AACR2 and the LCRIs.
An impressive number of CEAL members and LC employees contributed to the workbook. Examples for individual chapters of AACR2 and related LCRIs were compiled by ten CEAL members from outside libraries: Yu-lan Chou of Berkeley, Vickie Fu Doll of Kansas, Tomoko Goto of British Columbia, Wen-ling Liu of Indiana, Hideyuki Morimoto of Berkeley and Columbia, Seunghi Paek of Harvard, Meng-fen Su of Harvard and Texas, Amy Tsiang of UCLA, Reiko Yoshimura of the Freer Gallery, and Abraham Yu of UC-Irvine. Work began in early 1997. Compilers consulted with their colleagues in order to provide a wide range of examples in all three of the CJK languages. The last of these compilations was sent to LC in December 1999.
CEAL members continued to contribute to the project after the initial compilations had been completed. Ai-lin Yang of UC-Berkeley keyed in the Chinese portion of Chapter 25, Uniform Titles, and Hee-Sook Shin of Columbia University is currently keying in the romanized and Korean portions of that lengthy chapter.
It took more than one year to find software with an extensive character set that produced compatible CJK scripts, and a platform on which to use it at LC. In the year 2000, the combination of Twinbridge CJK Partner, running on Windows NT, gave us the compatible scripts and extensive character sets needed for the project. Because the compilers had used the hardware and software that was available to them, their compilations were incompatible not only with each other but also with Twinbridge. Therefore, in most cases, LC staff were able to use only the roman text that they had provided. All non-roman text and a great deal of romanization had to be keyed in manually here at LC (by Young Ki Lee, Sook Hee Weidman, Sonya Lee and myself). That time-consuming process has largely been completed. Fortunately, when it came time to switch to Microsoft with Unicode, most of the text converted successfully. It was easier to create non-roman script on Microsoft with Unicode, but dealing with the indentations on existing text was a time-consuming nightmare.
The first draft of each chapter was then edited by a Chinese, Japanese, and Korean cataloger from LC's Regional and Cooperative Cataloging Division (RCCD) (Beatrice Ohta, Sumiko Takaramura and Youngsook Park respectively). Appropriate chapters were also edited by specialists in the Geography and Map Division, Special Materials Cataloging Division, and the Motion Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division. Examples were checked for accuracy and appropriateness. A certain balance was sought so that each of the three languages was about equally represented. This step in the process, begun in the fall of 2001, has now largely been completed. Sumiko made changes directly on the computer, but everyone else wrote out their changes onto hard copy; I then made the changes on the computer. Because of the passage of time, a further editorial step had to be introduced: changes to the text of AACR2 and the LCRIs had to be identified, and examples adjusted where necessary.
Completed chapters were then sent to the Cataloging Policy and Support Office (CPSO) at the Library of Congress. Following their review, I have begun to key in the corrections that were indicated. MARC format was provided by the compilers; tagging was added in some instances, and margins, indentation, and typescript was aligned.
The examples provided by the compilers formed the basis of this work. Their contribution was supplemented by LC staff, so that there would be a rough balance between languages. All examples have been taken from Korean, Japanese, and Chinese language bibliographic records. Because the intention is to show just what CJK cataloging looks like, some repetition may occur; so an edition statement in an electronic resource may be transcribed in the same manner as one on a map or monograph. Some examples appear only in roman form, just as they do on bibliographic records.
The examples follow the text of AACR2 and the LCRIs themselves. Efforts were made to find examples of each and every rule, so that a rough balance in coverage would occur within each chapter. But sometimes an example of a given rule or LCRI could not be located. The absence of an example for a given rule or LCRI does not imply that the rule is not applicable to East Asian material, nor that there may be no examples of that rule in the corpus of bibliographic records of East Asian material. Notes were added by the compilers and reviewers.
The committee felt that a digital version of the examples should be posted on the Web, rather than printing them in book or notebook form, to make them conveniently available to a wide audience. Chapters 1 (General Rules for Description), 2 (Books, Pamphlets and Printed Sheets), 5 (Music), and 6 (Sound Recordings) are being posted on the CPSO home page now, and Chapters 7 (Motion Pictures and Videorecodings) and 9 (Electronic Resources) and Appendix C (Numerals) will be posted this summer. Additional chapters will be reviewed by CPSO, edited, and posted in the coming months.
At present, no provision has been made for updating the examples to keep current with changes to the LCRIs and AACR2. Hopefully the CEAL Committee on Technical Processing will find the resources to initiate timely updates and send them to LC for review and posting.
This is a work in progress. My colleagues at LC and I will continue to review and edit the compilations as time permits, and then post them on the CPSO home page when they have been completed.
Phil Melzer
May 24, 2004
(The following links are to PDF files that require the Adobe Acrobat Reader.
The free Reader may be downloaded from the Adobe web site).
Chapter 1 - General Rules for Description
Chapter 2 - Books, Pamphlets, and Printed Sheets
Chapter 5 - Music
Chapter 6 - Sound Recordings
Chapter 7 - Motion Pictures and Videorecordings
The chapter below, posted on January 4, 2006, is in draft form. Please send comments to Philip Melzer, Korean/Chinese Cataloging Team, pmel@loc.gov. Comments must be received no later than February 28, 2006. Chapter 3 - Cartographic Materials
The chapters below, posted November 3, 2004, are in draft form. Please send comments to Philip Melzer, Korean/Chinese Cataloging Team, pmel@loc.gov. Comments must be received no later than December 17, 2004.
Chapter 9 - Electronic Resources
Chapter 23 - Geographic Names
Chapter 23 - Geographic Names (Appendix: Subject Headings)
Appendix C - Numerals
A Work in Progress
The Technical Processing Committee of the Council on East Asian Libraries (CEAL) agreed in 1996 that the most valuable contribution that it could make to the East Asian library community would be the updating and expansion of the AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd ed.) workbook for East Asian publications.
The original workbook was compiled in 1983 by Beatrice Ohta of the Library of Congress (LC) and Thomas Lee of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Beatrice and Thomas were assisted in their efforts by several other CEAL librarians. Their workbook was intended to provide guidelines and examples for treating materials in East Asian languages, and to supplement AACR2 training institutes by addressing special problems faced by East Asian catalogers. The workbook, covering Chapters 1, 2, 12, 21-25 and Appendix C (Numerals), was widely utilized by catalogers outside the Library of Congress.
In proposing a revision of the workbook, the Technical Processing Committee primarily intended to show non-LC catalogers of CJK material, many of whom are non-native speakers, how AACR2 and the LCRIs (Library of Congress Rule Interpretations) applied to the material they cataloged by providing actual illustrations from CJK bibliographic records, in the same manner that AACR2 and the LCRIs provide examples in western languages. The committee wished not only to update the workbook to reflect changes to AACR2 and the LCRIs, but also to broaden the scope to include the rules that govern specific types of material. Therefore, this revision includes examples of maps and atlases (Chapter 3), music and sound recordings (Chapters 5-6), motion pictures and videorecordings (Chapter 7), electronic resources (Chapter 9), and references (Chapter 26). Examples were to be presented in a format that would be informative to catalogers.
The committee asked that the revision be undertaken as a joint project by CEAL and LC. Committee members were confident that they could compile examples, but felt that the finished product could only be considered authoritative if it were reviewed by staff at the Library of Congress. Because the Library strongly discourages cataloging by example, the Director for Cataloging agreed to make the revision a joint project only if the examples were clearly intended to be illustrative and informative, in the same manner as the examples that appear in AACR2 and the LCRIs.
An impressive number of CEAL members and LC employees contributed to the workbook. Examples for individual chapters of AACR2 and related LCRIs were compiled by ten CEAL members from outside libraries: Yu-lan Chou of Berkeley, Vickie Fu Doll of Kansas, Tomoko Goto of British Columbia, Wen-ling Liu of Indiana, Hideyuki Morimoto of Berkeley and Columbia, Seunghi Paek of Harvard, Meng-fen Su of Harvard and Texas, Amy Tsiang of UCLA, Reiko Yoshimura of the Freer Gallery, and Abraham Yu of UC-Irvine. Work began in early 1997. Compilers consulted with their colleagues in order to provide a wide range of examples in all three of the CJK languages. The last of these compilations was sent to LC in December 1999.
CEAL members continued to contribute to the project after the initial compilations had been completed. Ai-lin Yang of UC-Berkeley keyed in the Chinese portion of Chapter 25, Uniform Titles, and Hee-Sook Shin of Columbia University is currently keying in the romanized and Korean portions of that lengthy chapter.
It took more than one year to find software with an extensive character set that produced compatible CJK scripts, and a platform on which to use it at LC. In the year 2000, the combination of Twinbridge CJK Partner, running on Windows NT, gave us the compatible scripts and extensive character sets needed for the project. Because the compilers had used the hardware and software that was available to them, their compilations were incompatible not only with each other but also with Twinbridge. Therefore, in most cases, LC staff were able to use only the roman text that they had provided. All non-roman text and a great deal of romanization had to be keyed in manually here at LC (by Young Ki Lee, Sook Hee Weidman, Sonya Lee and myself). That time-consuming process has largely been completed. Fortunately, when it came time to switch to Microsoft with Unicode, most of the text converted successfully. It was easier to create non-roman script on Microsoft with Unicode, but dealing with the indentations on existing text was a time-consuming nightmare.
The first draft of each chapter was then edited by a Chinese, Japanese, and Korean cataloger from LC's Regional and Cooperative Cataloging Division (RCCD) (Beatrice Ohta, Sumiko Takaramura and Youngsook Park respectively). Appropriate chapters were also edited by specialists in the Geography and Map Division, Special Materials Cataloging Division, and the Motion Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division. Examples were checked for accuracy and appropriateness. A certain balance was sought so that each of the three languages was about equally represented. This step in the process, begun in the fall of 2001, has now largely been completed. Sumiko made changes directly on the computer, but everyone else wrote out their changes onto hard copy; I then made the changes on the computer. Because of the passage of time, a further editorial step had to be introduced: changes to the text of AACR2 and the LCRIs had to be identified, and examples adjusted where necessary.
Completed chapters were then sent to the Cataloging Policy and Support Office (CPSO) at the Library of Congress. Following their review, I have begun to key in the corrections that were indicated. MARC format was provided by the compilers; tagging was added in some instances, and margins, indentation, and typescript was aligned.
The examples provided by the compilers formed the basis of this work. Their contribution was supplemented by LC staff, so that there would be a rough balance between languages. All examples have been taken from Korean, Japanese, and Chinese language bibliographic records. Because the intention is to show just what CJK cataloging looks like, some repetition may occur; so an edition statement in an electronic resource may be transcribed in the same manner as one on a map or monograph. Some examples appear only in roman form, just as they do on bibliographic records.
The examples follow the text of AACR2 and the LCRIs themselves. Efforts were made to find examples of each and every rule, so that a rough balance in coverage would occur within each chapter. But sometimes an example of a given rule or LCRI could not be located. The absence of an example for a given rule or LCRI does not imply that the rule is not applicable to East Asian material, nor that there may be no examples of that rule in the corpus of bibliographic records of East Asian material. Notes were added by the compilers and reviewers.
The committee felt that a digital version of the examples should be posted on the Web, rather than printing them in book or notebook form, to make them conveniently available to a wide audience. Chapters 1 (General Rules for Description), 2 (Books, Pamphlets and Printed Sheets), 5 (Music), and 6 (Sound Recordings) are being posted on the CPSO home page now, and Chapters 7 (Motion Pictures and Videorecodings) and 9 (Electronic Resources) and Appendix C (Numerals) will be posted this summer. Additional chapters will be reviewed by CPSO, edited, and posted in the coming months.
At present, no provision has been made for updating the examples to keep current with changes to the LCRIs and AACR2. Hopefully the CEAL Committee on Technical Processing will find the resources to initiate timely updates and send them to LC for review and posting.
This is a work in progress. My colleagues at LC and I will continue to review and edit the compilations as time permits, and then post them on the CPSO home page when they have been completed.
Phil Melzer
May 24, 2004
(The following links are to PDF files that require the Adobe Acrobat Reader.
The free Reader may be downloaded from the Adobe web site).
Chapter 1 - General Rules for Description
Chapter 2 - Books, Pamphlets, and Printed Sheets
Chapter 5 - Music
Chapter 6 - Sound Recordings
Chapter 7 - Motion Pictures and Videorecordings
The chapter below, posted on January 4, 2006, is in draft form. Please send comments to Philip Melzer, Korean/Chinese Cataloging Team, pmel@loc.gov. Comments must be received no later than February 28, 2006. Chapter 3 - Cartographic Materials
The chapters below, posted November 3, 2004, are in draft form. Please send comments to Philip Melzer, Korean/Chinese Cataloging Team, pmel@loc.gov. Comments must be received no later than December 17, 2004.
Chapter 9 - Electronic Resources
Chapter 23 - Geographic Names
Chapter 23 - Geographic Names (Appendix: Subject Headings)
Appendix C - Numerals
Professional Organizations / Groups
International Association of Orientalist Librarians (IAOL)
The Council on East Asian Libraries (CEAL)
NCC (North American Coordinating Committee on Japanese Library Resources)
European Association of Sinological Librarians (EASL)
European Association of Japanese Resource Specialists (EAJRS)
East Asian Library Resources Group of Australia (EALRGA)
OCLC CJK Users Group
RLG East Asian Studies Community
China Society for Library Science (CSLC)
Library Association of China (Taiwan) (LAC)
Hong Kong Library Association (HKLA)
Japan Library Association (JLA)
Korean Library Association (KLA)
Library Association of Singapore (LAS)
The Council on East Asian Libraries (CEAL)
NCC (North American Coordinating Committee on Japanese Library Resources)
European Association of Sinological Librarians (EASL)
European Association of Japanese Resource Specialists (EAJRS)
East Asian Library Resources Group of Australia (EALRGA)
OCLC CJK Users Group
RLG East Asian Studies Community
China Society for Library Science (CSLC)
Library Association of China (Taiwan) (LAC)
Hong Kong Library Association (HKLA)
Japan Library Association (JLA)
Korean Library Association (KLA)
Library Association of Singapore (LAS)
Cataloging Rules and Standards
Cataloging Rules
Descriptive Cataloging of East Asian Material (Library of Congress)
Library of Congress Rule Interpretations (Library Corporation)
CONSER Cataloging Manual (Library Corporation)
CONSER Editing Guide (Library Corporation)
Descriptive Cataloging of Rare Books (Library Corporation)
ABN Cataloguing Manual
MARC Standards
MARC 21 Bibliographic Data
MARC 21 Authority Data
MARC 21 Holdings Data
MARC 21 Classification Data
MARC 21 Community Information
MARC Code List for Languages
MARC Code List for Countries
MARC Code List for Geographic areas
MARC Code List for Relators, Sources, Descriptive Conventions
MARC Field List for Bibliographic
MARC Field List for Authority
MARC Field List for Holdings
MARC Field List for Classification
MARC Field List for Community Information
CAN/MARC
UKMARC
UNIMARC
OCLC and RLIN standards
OCLC Bibliographic Formats and Standards
RLIN Supplement to USMARC Bibliographic Format
Subject Headings
Subject Headings Weekly Lists (Library of Congress)
Free-floating Subdivisions (Library of Congress)
LCSH: Principles of Structure and Policies for Application (Library Corporation)
Use of Subfield v for Form Subdivisions in Subject Headings (University of Southern Mississippi)
List of Australian Subject Headings (National Library of Australia)
Canadian Subject Headings (National Library of Canada)
Chinese Conventional Place Names (Library of Congress)
Classifications
Outline of the Library of Congress Classification (Library of Congress)
Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC homepage) (OCLC)
LC Cutter Tables (QTECH)
Authority Control
NACO Participants' Manual
Hong Kong Chinese Authority (Name) Workgroup (HKCAN)
Romanization
Romanization systems for CJK languages (University of California Los Angeles)
ALA-LC Romanization tables: Chinese (Library of Congress)
ALA-LC Romanization tables: Japanese (Library of Congress)
ALA-LC Romanization tables: Korean (Library of Congress)
Descriptive Cataloging of East Asian Material (Library of Congress)
Library of Congress Rule Interpretations (Library Corporation)
CONSER Cataloging Manual (Library Corporation)
CONSER Editing Guide (Library Corporation)
Descriptive Cataloging of Rare Books (Library Corporation)
ABN Cataloguing Manual
MARC Standards
MARC 21 Bibliographic Data
MARC 21 Authority Data
MARC 21 Holdings Data
MARC 21 Classification Data
MARC 21 Community Information
MARC Code List for Languages
MARC Code List for Countries
MARC Code List for Geographic areas
MARC Code List for Relators, Sources, Descriptive Conventions
MARC Field List for Bibliographic
MARC Field List for Authority
MARC Field List for Holdings
MARC Field List for Classification
MARC Field List for Community Information
CAN/MARC
UKMARC
UNIMARC
OCLC and RLIN standards
OCLC Bibliographic Formats and Standards
RLIN Supplement to USMARC Bibliographic Format
Subject Headings
Subject Headings Weekly Lists (Library of Congress)
Free-floating Subdivisions (Library of Congress)
LCSH: Principles of Structure and Policies for Application (Library Corporation)
Use of Subfield v for Form Subdivisions in Subject Headings (University of Southern Mississippi)
List of Australian Subject Headings (National Library of Australia)
Canadian Subject Headings (National Library of Canada)
Chinese Conventional Place Names (Library of Congress)
Classifications
Outline of the Library of Congress Classification (Library of Congress)
Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC homepage) (OCLC)
LC Cutter Tables (QTECH)
Authority Control
NACO Participants' Manual
Hong Kong Chinese Authority (Name) Workgroup (HKCAN)
Romanization
Romanization systems for CJK languages (University of California Los Angeles)
ALA-LC Romanization tables: Chinese (Library of Congress)
ALA-LC Romanization tables: Japanese (Library of Congress)
ALA-LC Romanization tables: Korean (Library of Congress)
Bibliographic Utility Systems
OCLC CJK
RLIN CJK
NCJK (Australian National Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Service)
OLCC (Online Library Cataloging Center, China)
NBINet (National Bibliographic Information Network, Taiwan)
NACSIS-CAT (National Institute of Informatics, Japan)
KOLIS-NET (Korean Library Information System Network)
RLIN CJK
NCJK (Australian National Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Service)
OLCC (Online Library Cataloging Center, China)
NBINet (National Bibliographic Information Network, Taiwan)
NACSIS-CAT (National Institute of Informatics, Japan)
KOLIS-NET (Korean Library Information System Network)
CJKat Company
http://www.cjkat.com/us.htm
CJKat is a cataloging service vendor that specializes in Chinese, Japanese and Korean (CJK) materials. We provide a range of services to any library with a CJK language collection in the English-speaking world. We are dedicated to providing our cataloging services with these features:
Commitment
* We do more – our objective is to offer whatever is needed to meet your goals
* We do better – our policies and procedures will meet your most rigid requirements
* We have more flexibility – our services are tailored exactly to your specifications
* We guarantee quality – our jobs will never be done until you are satisfied
* We guarantee completion date – our task force grows whenever our workload grows
* We charge less – our prices are the lowest anywhere
* We provide financing – our program will help you run a big project within budget
Team
We are a group of experienced catalogers and cataloging assistants working on contract at different locations throughout the United States. All native speakers of Chinese, Japanese or Korean, we have extensive and in-depth knowledge in cataloging standards, subject fields, CJK cataloging specifications and bibliographic utility systems. We have experience in planning and managing cataloging and retrospective conversion projects and we know how to deal with a variety of problems in administrative and technical areas as they arise. In addition to our group in the United States, we have a partner company in China, which provides augmentation and backup support with its solid expertise in languages, subjects and cataloging. By taking full advantage of today's online cataloging systems and telecommunication technologies, we are able to form ourselves into a strong production team that can operate as an integral part of your library’s workforce.
If you would like more information on how CJKat can help your library, please email us at info@cjkat.com.
We look forward to hearing from you!
CJKat is a cataloging service vendor that specializes in Chinese, Japanese and Korean (CJK) materials. We provide a range of services to any library with a CJK language collection in the English-speaking world. We are dedicated to providing our cataloging services with these features:
Commitment
* We do more – our objective is to offer whatever is needed to meet your goals
* We do better – our policies and procedures will meet your most rigid requirements
* We have more flexibility – our services are tailored exactly to your specifications
* We guarantee quality – our jobs will never be done until you are satisfied
* We guarantee completion date – our task force grows whenever our workload grows
* We charge less – our prices are the lowest anywhere
* We provide financing – our program will help you run a big project within budget
Team
We are a group of experienced catalogers and cataloging assistants working on contract at different locations throughout the United States. All native speakers of Chinese, Japanese or Korean, we have extensive and in-depth knowledge in cataloging standards, subject fields, CJK cataloging specifications and bibliographic utility systems. We have experience in planning and managing cataloging and retrospective conversion projects and we know how to deal with a variety of problems in administrative and technical areas as they arise. In addition to our group in the United States, we have a partner company in China, which provides augmentation and backup support with its solid expertise in languages, subjects and cataloging. By taking full advantage of today's online cataloging systems and telecommunication technologies, we are able to form ourselves into a strong production team that can operate as an integral part of your library’s workforce.
If you would like more information on how CJKat can help your library, please email us at info@cjkat.com.
We look forward to hearing from you!
Cataloging Outsourcing: Berkeley's East Asian Library's Experience
Cataloging Outsourcing: Berkeley's East Asian Library's Experience
By Evelyn Kuo. March 24, 2007
By Evelyn Kuo. March 24, 2007
OCLC CJK Users Group 2007 Annual Meeting
http://oclccjk.lib.uci.edu/mtg2007.htm
Amy Tsiang: Cataloging Outsourcing---Practice and Thinking
accessed on December 16, 2009
http://www.eastasianlib.org/ctp/cealctp06/CEAL2006-Cataloging_Outsourcing.htm
Cataloging Outsourcing -- Practice and Thinking
Amy Tsiang
Presented at the CEAL Committee on Technical Processing Program
San Francisco, April 5, 2006
Cataloging outsourcing has been a heated topic in library services. From time to time, we heard many different opinions from library professionals. The pros regard cataloging outsourcing as a trend in future library services, and the cons see it as a threat to the library profession. At this moment, I don’t think I have sufficient data or background to support either side. I would like to share our experience in outsourcing of cataloging backlogs, discuss the advantages and problems of our practice, and then raise some issues for discussion.
My presentation includes three parts:
1. Initiation: Why did we need cataloging outsourcing?
2. Practice: How did we handle the cataloging outsourcing?
3. Thinking: what will be the future of cataloging outsourcing?
I. Initiation: Why did we need cataloging outsourcing?
The UCLA East Asian Library has been pursuing an outsourcing project for cataloging backlogs since October 2005, with a pilot project in September 2004. The cataloging outsourcing project at the UCLA East Asian Library was not part of our strategic plan. To the opposite, it was initially a temporary measure in dealing with cataloging backlogs.
In 2002-2003, the UCLA East Asian Library had two vacant positions of professional librarians. At the time of budget shortage in California, we were unable to fill the positions. As a result, a cataloging backlog was gradually built up. As of December 2003, the Library had a cataloging backlog of 11,504 titles, including 4,998 Chinese titles, 3,980 Japanese titles and 2,752 Korean titles.
In late 2004, we learned that we were able to fill only one of the two vacant librarian positions. Obviously, even though we could catch up on cataloging of current acquisitions, the cataloging backlog could be there forever. Based on the urgency of cataloging need and the budgetary constraint, we started to consider outsourcing as an alternative for eliminating the backlog. With the support of the library administration, we launched a pilot project for cataloging outsourcing.
We started with outsourcing original cataloging of Chinese monographs. Due to the vacancy of Chinese professional cataloger for two years, Chinese section has accumulated the largest backlog among the three East Asian languages. In early September 2004, Richard Siao, the head of the acquisition and processing unit of the UCLA East Asian library, assisted me in selecting materials for outsourcing. The selected Chinese materials were from a backlog waiting for original cataloging. Then, a student assistant was assigned to conduct bibliographic checking on OCLC-CJK, making sure that no copy cataloging available in the database. Meanwhile, Toshie Marra, the then interim head of the library’s cataloging unit, was assigned to coordinate the project, by preparing cataloging specifications and providing guidance for complex cataloging situations. After careful bibliographic checking, totally 234 volumes were shipped to a cataloging agency, via UPS, on September 9, 2004.
By January 2005, all the shipped materials were returned to the East Asian Library, after being cataloged. The 234 volumes were cataloged into 219 titles. Of them, 186 were processed by original cataloging, 19 by simple copy-cataloging, and 14 by complex copy-cataloging. This means that, during the period from September 2004 to January 2005, 33 titles, about 15 percent of all the titles outsourced, became available for copy-cataloging at OCLC-CJK.
A student assistant did bibliographic check on all the returned materials first. Then, Hong Cheng, our new Chinese Studies Librarian, and Toshie Marra reviewed all the cataloging records. By the end of January, the pilot project was concluded.
To assess the cost-effectiveness, we kept track of the library staff time spent on the project. The pilot project totally cost the library 36 professional hours, 7 staff hours and 29 student assistant hours, including preparing outsourcing cataloging specifications and providing guidance for complex cataloging situations. However, it was not reasonable to regard all these hours as extra cost of the project. Bibliographic checking by student assistants and selecting materials for cataloging are normal procedures even for in-house cataloging. Preparing outsourcing cataloging specifications and providing guidance for complex cataloging situations by a professional librarian should be a one-time procedure for all outsourcing projects, including future projects.
After the pilot project, we recommended expanding the outsourcing project to the entire cataloging backlog, including Japanese and Korean materials. Based on the size of cataloging backlogs and current available manpower of the Library, outsourcing was crucial in reducing cataloging backlog. We hope that, as the outsourcing program continues as initially planed, the East Asian Library will be able to finally eliminate the cataloging backlog in foreseeable future.
II. Practice: How did we handle the cataloging outsourcing?
After approval of the library administration, the UCLA East Asian Library started a two-year cataloging outsourcing project in October 2005. According to the agreement with the cataloging agency, the library plans to ship 400 titles to the agency each month, including 200 Chinese titles, 100 Japanese titles and 100 Korean titles, for either original or copy cataloging. The agency will complete the cataloging within two months after receiving the materials, and then ship back to the Library. To date, three shipments, about 1,200 titles, have been completed. We expect the whole outsourcing project to be concluded as planned. By October 2007, the old cataloging backlog could be finally eliminated.
As for the two-year outsourcing project, we set up the following library procedures:
1. Librarians or copy catalogers select materials for outsourcing (200 Chinese titles, 100 Japanese titles and 100 Korean titles each month)
Preferred Criteria for selection:
* Single volume items
* Simple treatment (i.e., no Non-circulating, no Reference)
* Books only (no serials, no CD-ROMs, etc.)
2. Copy Catalogers delete item/holdings/bibliographic records on local online catalog, and exclude those titles from shipment that records cannot be deleted from the local online catalog. This preparation is to simplify the merge of cataloged records with existing acquisitions/processing records.
3. Cataloging Student Assistants make copy of colophon pages or any other pages that include the most complete bibliographical information including title, series title, imprint, and ISBN, for the Library’s records.
4. The processing unit packs books and barcodes, count the number of titles and volumes included in a shipment, and ship the packages to the outsourcing agency via U.S. postal service or UPS with insurance.
5. When cataloged shipments are back from the outsourcing agency, cataloging student assistants check if all the books in the package are returned by comparing with copies of colophon pages.
6. Librarians or copy catalogers take final look, and then cataloging student assistants send books for marking.
After six months of practice, we consider that the outsourcing of cataloging backlogs has both obvious advantages and disadvantages. We have to balance the benefit with the drawback. Especially, we need to evaluate and balance the following issues from time to time.
First, let’s consider cost and manpower. Outsourcing did not lower the cost of cataloging. If we calculate only the cataloging fee charged, outsourcing cataloging cost is comparable to in-house cataloging, perhaps slightly higher. If adding shipping, insurance and other cost, outsourcing is obviously more expensive than in-house, especially for copy cataloging. However, the key question is: do we have the manpower for doing all the cataloging in-house? Using UCLA as an example, if we had to handle the cataloging backlog in-house, we would need at least two catalogers. The reality gave us no choice but to go outsourcing.
Second, we need to balance quality and quantity. Outsourcing focuses more on quantity, not on quality. It meets the need for putting more books on shelves. Of course, it can also meet basic requirements on quality, such as the minimum of one subject heading per title. The more quality we require, the higher price we have to pay; it is just simple business. In most cases, what you get is what available on the union catalog. And thus at UCLA, we prefer to have all reference titles and important titles cataloged in-house.
Third, we have to solve the conflict with local network. In our cataloging outsourcing project, a notable problem is how to coordinate with the local network. On the UCLA library system, acquisition units create an initial record for each acquired library item. During cataloging, cataloger needs to update the initial record for it to merge with the cataloged record downloaded from OCLC. Unless we give the outsourcing vendors the access to the local network, there will be a problem in merging records. When outsourcing the cataloging backlogs, we simply delete the initial records from the local network. However, for items awaiting invoice payment or other processing activities, the initial records cannot be deleted. If we use our staff to update such records, much time and effort would be required. Then we might as well do our copy cataloging in house as we are not realizing much staff time saving from outsourcing. So far we have no better solutions, and if this conflict is not solved, I don’t think we should further expand the outsourcing project.
III. Thinking: What will be the future of cataloging outsourcing?
What we did in outsourcing is solely to eliminate cataloging backlogs. So far we have no plan to outsource cataloging routinely. Outsourcing as a routine is a much more controversial issue, which could affect the future of our library profession.
In fact, many libraries, especially public libraries and smaller libraries, are outsourcing cataloging to private companies or agencies. These companies employ part-time workers, or subcontract to individuals or even companies abroad. There are many arguments over the issue of the outsourcing. Here I summarize some of the opinions from both sides for your further discussion.
The pro side of the issue regards outsourcing as a trend for future. They emphasize that, no matter or not, outsourcing would play a major role in library, just like what is happening in computer, entertainment and finance industries. The key points of the pros are:
1. Outsourcing saves library budget and speeds up the cataloging process.
Almost all the academic, public and school libraries are facing serious budget cuts, so outsourcing gives libraries opportunities reducing library staff.
2. Outsourcing helps library get much needed specialized service.
To many smaller libraries, cataloging materials in foreign languages or in certain specialized field is always a challenge. Outsourcing can help such libraries get the service they need.
3. Outsourcing centralizes the library functions to specialists in the fields.
Centralization and specialization is the direction for cataloging. Outsourcing enables specialists to maximize their roles in the fields. In recent years, major libraries centralized their cataloging service into metadata centers. For smaller libraries, outsourcing makes available similarly centralized services from specialists.
4. Outsourcing goes along with the trend of privatization and globalization.
Like it or not, outsourcing represents the trend of privatization and even globalization. Some people regard privatization as a way of cutting cost and raising efficiency. To cataloging foreign language materials, outsourcing might mean taking advantages of lower labor cost abroad.
The con side of the issue looks outsourcing as a threat to the library profession. The cons focus more on the long-term effects on library services. At the time we launched outsourcing project for cataloging backlogs, the union organization expressed their concerns over library jobs. Quite a few librarians who heard of the project also openly expressed their oppositions. We can expect more concerns and oppositions if cataloging outsourcing become routine in library services. The main concerns over outsourcing are with the following aspects.
1. Outsourcing diminishes library profession.
Librarianship is a profession that requires many years of formal education and even more years of continuing education. Private outsourcing companies and/or agents might hire people lacking formal education and training for lower cost. Using outsourcing to replace in-house cataloging and using teaching faculty for collection development, together with Googlization, could eventually eliminate librarianship in many institutions of education and higher education while some accrediting groups tend to drop library services from the accrediting requirements.
2. Outsourcing lowers library’s service quality by using less skilled part-time or foreign workers.
Private outsourcing companies and agents mainly use part-time workers and subcontractors. Due to lack of professional education and training and lack of quality control, they might create substandard records. We would see more duplicate and substandard records appearing at OCLC and other databases, which is adding burden to records management. However it should be noted that some private companies also use skilled catalogers from major libraries and take advantage of their training and expertise.
3. Outsourcing reduces the job market for permanent fulltime library workers.
The cost saved from outsourcing is actually from cutting staff benefits, not from productivity or efficiency. Outsourcing companies and agencies use mostly part-time workers or subcontractors with no fringe benefits or retirement pensions. So, the library budget saving from outsourcing is achieved at the expense of library workers, or I might say, through the unscrupulous exploitation of library workers.
4. Outsourcing moves American jobs abroad.
While library jobs in the United States are shrinking, outsourcing could mean jobs go abroad especially for foreign language materials, just as happening in computer, finance, and entertainment industries. The difference is that most libraries are operating on taxpayers’ money, which means U.S. tax dollars are going abroad.
In general, the pros of outsourcing look at the issue more from the point of management, and the cons of outsourcing look at the issue more from the point of socio-economy. Finally, I would like to share with you a totally different opinion for discussion. Some people view cataloging outsourcing simply as an inevitable yet a transitional mode of library practice. Cataloging as a way of information / knowledge management, is quickly loosing ground to massive speedy metadata processing / retrieving. Google is already digitizing full-texts of library books in great multitude today and they will not be taken by surprise someday to see the bulk of cataloging as we know it, which we have cherished and practiced for so long, evolves into a totally new library operation. Such an operation would be in the charge of managers rather than catalogers and most likely, it would be outsourced for efficiency and economy.
http://www.eastasianlib.org/ctp/cealctp06/CEAL2006-Cataloging_Outsourcing.htm
Cataloging Outsourcing -- Practice and Thinking
Amy Tsiang
Presented at the CEAL Committee on Technical Processing Program
San Francisco, April 5, 2006
Cataloging outsourcing has been a heated topic in library services. From time to time, we heard many different opinions from library professionals. The pros regard cataloging outsourcing as a trend in future library services, and the cons see it as a threat to the library profession. At this moment, I don’t think I have sufficient data or background to support either side. I would like to share our experience in outsourcing of cataloging backlogs, discuss the advantages and problems of our practice, and then raise some issues for discussion.
My presentation includes three parts:
1. Initiation: Why did we need cataloging outsourcing?
2. Practice: How did we handle the cataloging outsourcing?
3. Thinking: what will be the future of cataloging outsourcing?
I. Initiation: Why did we need cataloging outsourcing?
The UCLA East Asian Library has been pursuing an outsourcing project for cataloging backlogs since October 2005, with a pilot project in September 2004. The cataloging outsourcing project at the UCLA East Asian Library was not part of our strategic plan. To the opposite, it was initially a temporary measure in dealing with cataloging backlogs.
In 2002-2003, the UCLA East Asian Library had two vacant positions of professional librarians. At the time of budget shortage in California, we were unable to fill the positions. As a result, a cataloging backlog was gradually built up. As of December 2003, the Library had a cataloging backlog of 11,504 titles, including 4,998 Chinese titles, 3,980 Japanese titles and 2,752 Korean titles.
In late 2004, we learned that we were able to fill only one of the two vacant librarian positions. Obviously, even though we could catch up on cataloging of current acquisitions, the cataloging backlog could be there forever. Based on the urgency of cataloging need and the budgetary constraint, we started to consider outsourcing as an alternative for eliminating the backlog. With the support of the library administration, we launched a pilot project for cataloging outsourcing.
We started with outsourcing original cataloging of Chinese monographs. Due to the vacancy of Chinese professional cataloger for two years, Chinese section has accumulated the largest backlog among the three East Asian languages. In early September 2004, Richard Siao, the head of the acquisition and processing unit of the UCLA East Asian library, assisted me in selecting materials for outsourcing. The selected Chinese materials were from a backlog waiting for original cataloging. Then, a student assistant was assigned to conduct bibliographic checking on OCLC-CJK, making sure that no copy cataloging available in the database. Meanwhile, Toshie Marra, the then interim head of the library’s cataloging unit, was assigned to coordinate the project, by preparing cataloging specifications and providing guidance for complex cataloging situations. After careful bibliographic checking, totally 234 volumes were shipped to a cataloging agency, via UPS, on September 9, 2004.
By January 2005, all the shipped materials were returned to the East Asian Library, after being cataloged. The 234 volumes were cataloged into 219 titles. Of them, 186 were processed by original cataloging, 19 by simple copy-cataloging, and 14 by complex copy-cataloging. This means that, during the period from September 2004 to January 2005, 33 titles, about 15 percent of all the titles outsourced, became available for copy-cataloging at OCLC-CJK.
A student assistant did bibliographic check on all the returned materials first. Then, Hong Cheng, our new Chinese Studies Librarian, and Toshie Marra reviewed all the cataloging records. By the end of January, the pilot project was concluded.
To assess the cost-effectiveness, we kept track of the library staff time spent on the project. The pilot project totally cost the library 36 professional hours, 7 staff hours and 29 student assistant hours, including preparing outsourcing cataloging specifications and providing guidance for complex cataloging situations. However, it was not reasonable to regard all these hours as extra cost of the project. Bibliographic checking by student assistants and selecting materials for cataloging are normal procedures even for in-house cataloging. Preparing outsourcing cataloging specifications and providing guidance for complex cataloging situations by a professional librarian should be a one-time procedure for all outsourcing projects, including future projects.
After the pilot project, we recommended expanding the outsourcing project to the entire cataloging backlog, including Japanese and Korean materials. Based on the size of cataloging backlogs and current available manpower of the Library, outsourcing was crucial in reducing cataloging backlog. We hope that, as the outsourcing program continues as initially planed, the East Asian Library will be able to finally eliminate the cataloging backlog in foreseeable future.
II. Practice: How did we handle the cataloging outsourcing?
After approval of the library administration, the UCLA East Asian Library started a two-year cataloging outsourcing project in October 2005. According to the agreement with the cataloging agency, the library plans to ship 400 titles to the agency each month, including 200 Chinese titles, 100 Japanese titles and 100 Korean titles, for either original or copy cataloging. The agency will complete the cataloging within two months after receiving the materials, and then ship back to the Library. To date, three shipments, about 1,200 titles, have been completed. We expect the whole outsourcing project to be concluded as planned. By October 2007, the old cataloging backlog could be finally eliminated.
As for the two-year outsourcing project, we set up the following library procedures:
1. Librarians or copy catalogers select materials for outsourcing (200 Chinese titles, 100 Japanese titles and 100 Korean titles each month)
Preferred Criteria for selection:
* Single volume items
* Simple treatment (i.e., no Non-circulating, no Reference)
* Books only (no serials, no CD-ROMs, etc.)
2. Copy Catalogers delete item/holdings/bibliographic records on local online catalog, and exclude those titles from shipment that records cannot be deleted from the local online catalog. This preparation is to simplify the merge of cataloged records with existing acquisitions/processing records.
3. Cataloging Student Assistants make copy of colophon pages or any other pages that include the most complete bibliographical information including title, series title, imprint, and ISBN, for the Library’s records.
4. The processing unit packs books and barcodes, count the number of titles and volumes included in a shipment, and ship the packages to the outsourcing agency via U.S. postal service or UPS with insurance.
5. When cataloged shipments are back from the outsourcing agency, cataloging student assistants check if all the books in the package are returned by comparing with copies of colophon pages.
6. Librarians or copy catalogers take final look, and then cataloging student assistants send books for marking.
After six months of practice, we consider that the outsourcing of cataloging backlogs has both obvious advantages and disadvantages. We have to balance the benefit with the drawback. Especially, we need to evaluate and balance the following issues from time to time.
First, let’s consider cost and manpower. Outsourcing did not lower the cost of cataloging. If we calculate only the cataloging fee charged, outsourcing cataloging cost is comparable to in-house cataloging, perhaps slightly higher. If adding shipping, insurance and other cost, outsourcing is obviously more expensive than in-house, especially for copy cataloging. However, the key question is: do we have the manpower for doing all the cataloging in-house? Using UCLA as an example, if we had to handle the cataloging backlog in-house, we would need at least two catalogers. The reality gave us no choice but to go outsourcing.
Second, we need to balance quality and quantity. Outsourcing focuses more on quantity, not on quality. It meets the need for putting more books on shelves. Of course, it can also meet basic requirements on quality, such as the minimum of one subject heading per title. The more quality we require, the higher price we have to pay; it is just simple business. In most cases, what you get is what available on the union catalog. And thus at UCLA, we prefer to have all reference titles and important titles cataloged in-house.
Third, we have to solve the conflict with local network. In our cataloging outsourcing project, a notable problem is how to coordinate with the local network. On the UCLA library system, acquisition units create an initial record for each acquired library item. During cataloging, cataloger needs to update the initial record for it to merge with the cataloged record downloaded from OCLC. Unless we give the outsourcing vendors the access to the local network, there will be a problem in merging records. When outsourcing the cataloging backlogs, we simply delete the initial records from the local network. However, for items awaiting invoice payment or other processing activities, the initial records cannot be deleted. If we use our staff to update such records, much time and effort would be required. Then we might as well do our copy cataloging in house as we are not realizing much staff time saving from outsourcing. So far we have no better solutions, and if this conflict is not solved, I don’t think we should further expand the outsourcing project.
III. Thinking: What will be the future of cataloging outsourcing?
What we did in outsourcing is solely to eliminate cataloging backlogs. So far we have no plan to outsource cataloging routinely. Outsourcing as a routine is a much more controversial issue, which could affect the future of our library profession.
In fact, many libraries, especially public libraries and smaller libraries, are outsourcing cataloging to private companies or agencies. These companies employ part-time workers, or subcontract to individuals or even companies abroad. There are many arguments over the issue of the outsourcing. Here I summarize some of the opinions from both sides for your further discussion.
The pro side of the issue regards outsourcing as a trend for future. They emphasize that, no matter or not, outsourcing would play a major role in library, just like what is happening in computer, entertainment and finance industries. The key points of the pros are:
1. Outsourcing saves library budget and speeds up the cataloging process.
Almost all the academic, public and school libraries are facing serious budget cuts, so outsourcing gives libraries opportunities reducing library staff.
2. Outsourcing helps library get much needed specialized service.
To many smaller libraries, cataloging materials in foreign languages or in certain specialized field is always a challenge. Outsourcing can help such libraries get the service they need.
3. Outsourcing centralizes the library functions to specialists in the fields.
Centralization and specialization is the direction for cataloging. Outsourcing enables specialists to maximize their roles in the fields. In recent years, major libraries centralized their cataloging service into metadata centers. For smaller libraries, outsourcing makes available similarly centralized services from specialists.
4. Outsourcing goes along with the trend of privatization and globalization.
Like it or not, outsourcing represents the trend of privatization and even globalization. Some people regard privatization as a way of cutting cost and raising efficiency. To cataloging foreign language materials, outsourcing might mean taking advantages of lower labor cost abroad.
The con side of the issue looks outsourcing as a threat to the library profession. The cons focus more on the long-term effects on library services. At the time we launched outsourcing project for cataloging backlogs, the union organization expressed their concerns over library jobs. Quite a few librarians who heard of the project also openly expressed their oppositions. We can expect more concerns and oppositions if cataloging outsourcing become routine in library services. The main concerns over outsourcing are with the following aspects.
1. Outsourcing diminishes library profession.
Librarianship is a profession that requires many years of formal education and even more years of continuing education. Private outsourcing companies and/or agents might hire people lacking formal education and training for lower cost. Using outsourcing to replace in-house cataloging and using teaching faculty for collection development, together with Googlization, could eventually eliminate librarianship in many institutions of education and higher education while some accrediting groups tend to drop library services from the accrediting requirements.
2. Outsourcing lowers library’s service quality by using less skilled part-time or foreign workers.
Private outsourcing companies and agents mainly use part-time workers and subcontractors. Due to lack of professional education and training and lack of quality control, they might create substandard records. We would see more duplicate and substandard records appearing at OCLC and other databases, which is adding burden to records management. However it should be noted that some private companies also use skilled catalogers from major libraries and take advantage of their training and expertise.
3. Outsourcing reduces the job market for permanent fulltime library workers.
The cost saved from outsourcing is actually from cutting staff benefits, not from productivity or efficiency. Outsourcing companies and agencies use mostly part-time workers or subcontractors with no fringe benefits or retirement pensions. So, the library budget saving from outsourcing is achieved at the expense of library workers, or I might say, through the unscrupulous exploitation of library workers.
4. Outsourcing moves American jobs abroad.
While library jobs in the United States are shrinking, outsourcing could mean jobs go abroad especially for foreign language materials, just as happening in computer, finance, and entertainment industries. The difference is that most libraries are operating on taxpayers’ money, which means U.S. tax dollars are going abroad.
In general, the pros of outsourcing look at the issue more from the point of management, and the cons of outsourcing look at the issue more from the point of socio-economy. Finally, I would like to share with you a totally different opinion for discussion. Some people view cataloging outsourcing simply as an inevitable yet a transitional mode of library practice. Cataloging as a way of information / knowledge management, is quickly loosing ground to massive speedy metadata processing / retrieving. Google is already digitizing full-texts of library books in great multitude today and they will not be taken by surprise someday to see the bulk of cataloging as we know it, which we have cherished and practiced for so long, evolves into a totally new library operation. Such an operation would be in the charge of managers rather than catalogers and most likely, it would be outsourced for efficiency and economy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)