Sounds to me like ONIX-derived records. Publishers don't care about capitalisation in their standard (ONIX).
#justsaying
Anne
Sent from my iPhone
> On 26 Nov 2014, at 15:39, "Goodall, Louise M." <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi Alan,
>
> I wouldn't say it worries me, but it is clear that there is ignorance from suppliers as to what cataloguing standards are. As we are the customers, I think it is fair to say what we would like them to provide. Capitalization, admittedly, is a cosmetic problem, but other problems I have encountered (such as inadequate, incorrect or absent subject headings) are not.
>
> Plus, surely it easier for whoever is inputting the record *not* to have to keep adding capital letters?
>
> Louise Goodall
> Cataoguer
> University of Leicester
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Danskin, Alan
> Sent: 26 November 2014 14:53
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 26 Nov 2014 - Special issue (#2014-8)
>
> Why does it worry us that Every Word of The Title is Capitalised?
>
>
> Alan Danskin
> Metadata Standards Manager
> British Library
> Boston Spa
> Wetherby
> West Yorkshire
> LS23 7BY
>
> Tel: +44(0)1937 546669
> mobile: 07833401117
>
> ISNI: 0000 0001 1825 6037
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of CIG-E-FORUM automatic digest system
> Sent: 26 November 2014 13:22
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 26 Nov 2014 - Special issue (#2014-8)
>
> There are 21 messages totaling 10439 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics in this special issue:
>
> 1. New thread: non-book cataloguing (4)
> 2. Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing (6)
> 3. CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 25 Nov 2014 to 26 Nov 2014 - Special issue (#2014-7)
> (3)
> 4. Subject searches vs. shelf browsing (2)
> 5. Session 3: Training II - special areas (2)
> 6. Session 3: Training II - who assigns the LCSH subject headings /
> classification (3)
> 7. Session 3 thanks
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 11:52:04 +0000
> From: Bernadette O'Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: New thread: non-book cataloguing
>
> Hello all
>
> Please feel free to continue with current threads, but I would like to ask if those of you who are using the new 34X elements for non-book materials have favourite resources to suggest.
>
> I will start with:
>
> For video cataloguing:
> https://lib.stanford.edu/metadata-department/clone-video-cataloging-guidelines
> And for the above and a lot of other Stanford resources:
> https://lib.stanford.edu/metadata/documentation
>
> For music and musical sound recordings (but much of it applicable to non-musical sound recordings):
> http://www.rdatoolkit.org/sites/default/files/rda_best_practices_for_music_cataloging-v1_0_1-140401.pdf
> This includes a brilliant table showing 007, 33X and 34X values for a very wide range of carriers, from piano rolls to MP3 discs.
>
> If you are using 34X, do you just record a few of the many available elements? If so, which ones?
>
> If you are not using 34X, are there any particular reasons why not?
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 11:48:44 +0000
> From: "Goodall, Louise M." <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi all,
>
> Picking up on what Esther has said, the quality of MARC records provided by e-book suppliers is of real concern to us here at Leicester. Subject headings are very often mangled to the point that they become useless, or are so general that you would actually be better off without them (e.g. LCSH “Computer science” in a book about something incredibly specific). The large numbers of records mean that they cannot be edited individually. We have tried using MarcEdit with limited success, and now we are pre-processing the records to remove the most egregious mistakes. But some things, Like Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, seem insoluble.
>
> I would be interested to know if everyone else is suffering the same problem, or if they have found a way around this difficulty.
>
> Louise Goodall
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Esther Arens
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:54
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Oops, forgot to change the subject line... done now. Sorry!
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:44 Uhr
> Von: "Esther Arens" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: [CIG-E-FORUM]
> Ah, that last point (because of which I've now changed the subject for this thread) is of course very different for us: About a third of the students are distance learners; some are able to visit the library in person but others will never do so. This makes subject cataloguing actually important for electronic resources - despite the fact that many (if not most) of the bib data for those are loaded without cataloguers' intervention.
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:24 Uhr
> Von: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:10:51 +0000
> From: Helen Williams <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi Louise,
> A quick comment on Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, which we have come across too –
> You can edit these in MarcEdit, though it’s less advisable if your set of records contains a lot of proper nouns or acronyms as the method for changing the case can’t distinguish these and they end up being changed incorrectly. But if there aren’t many of those in your record set you could manually change those few instances afterwards. In MarcEdit you can change the case by:
>
>
> * Select Edit, followed by Edit Shortcuts, then Change case, and finally Sentence case. You will be asked for a field to process. Enter 245 $a.
>
> * Select Edit, followed by Edit Shortcuts, then Change case, and this time Lower case. You will be asked for a field to process. Enter 245 $b.
> Helen
>
>
> *****************************************************
> Helen Williams
> Discovery and Metadata Manager
> Collection Services Group
>
> LSE Library Services
> The London School of Economics and Political Science
> 10 Portugal Street
> London WC2A 2HD
>
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 020 3486 2988
> www.lse.ac.uk/library
> *****************************************************
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodall, Louise M.
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:49
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi all,
>
> Picking up on what Esther has said, the quality of MARC records provided by e-book suppliers is of real concern to us here at Leicester. Subject headings are very often mangled to the point that they become useless, or are so general that you would actually be better off without them (e.g. LCSH “Computer science” in a book about something incredibly specific). The large numbers of records mean that they cannot be edited individually. We have tried using MarcEdit with limited success, and now we are pre-processing the records to remove the most egregious mistakes. But some things, Like Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, seem insoluble.
>
> I would be interested to know if everyone else is suffering the same problem, or if they have found a way around this difficulty.
>
> Louise Goodall
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Esther Arens
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:54
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Oops, forgot to change the subject line... done now. Sorry!
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:44 Uhr
> Von: "Esther Arens" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: [CIG-E-FORUM]
> Ah, that last point (because of which I've now changed the subject for this thread) is of course very different for us: About a third of the students are distance learners; some are able to visit the library in person but others will never do so. This makes subject cataloguing actually important for electronic resources - despite the fact that many (if not most) of the bib data for those are loaded without cataloguers' intervention.
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:24 Uhr
> Von: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:12:11 +0000
> From: "Young, Thurstan" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: New thread: non-book cataloguing
>
> All,
>
> We’re currently just using the 347 field (Digital File Characteristics) for resources consisting of a text file in a single format. We record the file type ($a) and encoding format ($b) using the vocabularies available in RDA at 3.19.2.3 and 3.19.3.3. We also record the source code ($2).
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Thurstan
>
> Thurstan Young,
> Metadata Standards Analyst,
> Metadata Standards,
> Building 6, Floor 1,
> British Library,
> Boston Spa,
> Wetherby,
> West Yorkshire,
> LS23 7BQ
>
> Tel.: 01937 546213
>
>
>
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:52
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] New thread: non-book cataloguing
>
> Hello all
>
> Please feel free to continue with current threads, but I would like to ask if those of you who are using the new 34X elements for non-book materials have favourite resources to suggest.
>
> I will start with:
>
> For video cataloguing:
> https://lib.stanford.edu/metadata-department/clone-video-cataloging-guidelines
> And for the above and a lot of other Stanford resources:
> https://lib.stanford.edu/metadata/documentation
>
> For music and musical sound recordings (but much of it applicable to non-musical sound recordings):
> http://www.rdatoolkit.org/sites/default/files/rda_best_practices_for_music_cataloging-v1_0_1-140401.pdf
> This includes a brilliant table showing 007, 33X and 34X values for a very wide range of carriers, from piano rolls to MP3 discs.
>
> If you are using 34X, do you just record a few of the many available elements? If so, which ones?
>
> If you are not using 34X, are there any particular reasons why not?
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
>
> ******************************************************************************************************************
> Experience the British Library online at www.bl.uk<http://www.bl.uk/>
> The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts : www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html<http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html>
> Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. www.bl.uk/adoptabook<http://www.bl.uk/adoptabook>
> The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
> *****************************************************************************************************************
> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.
> The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
> *****************************************************************************************************************
> Think before you print
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:12:09 +0000
> From: Bernadette O'Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hello Louise
>
> There was an interesting discussion at the CIG Biennial on this kind of issue, and the conclusion was (I think) that the only practical solution is to put much more pressure on suppliers to provide good records. E-resource batches are too large to edit individually, and edits are also liable to be overwritten when the batch is refreshed.
>
> This ties in with yesterday’s discussion about whether the decline in cataloguing posts in library-type institutions might be compensated for to some extent by the development of professional posts in new commercial services (e-resources, shelf-ready, outsourcing services).
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodall, Louise M.
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:49
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi all,
>
> Picking up on what Esther has said, the quality of MARC records provided by e-book suppliers is of real concern to us here at Leicester. Subject headings are very often mangled to the point that they become useless, or are so general that you would actually be better off without them (e.g. LCSH “Computer science” in a book about something incredibly specific). The large numbers of records mean that they cannot be edited individually. We have tried using MarcEdit with limited success, and now we are pre-processing the records to remove the most egregious mistakes. But some things, Like Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, seem insoluble.
>
> I would be interested to know if everyone else is suffering the same problem, or if they have found a way around this difficulty.
>
> Louise Goodall
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Esther Arens
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:54
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Oops, forgot to change the subject line... done now. Sorry!
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:44 Uhr
> Von: "Esther Arens" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: [CIG-E-FORUM]
> Ah, that last point (because of which I've now changed the subject for this thread) is of course very different for us: About a third of the students are distance learners; some are able to visit the library in person but others will never do so. This makes subject cataloguing actually important for electronic resources - despite the fact that many (if not most) of the bib data for those are loaded without cataloguers' intervention.
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:24 Uhr
> Von: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:04:33 +0000
> From: "Alan MacLennan (abs)" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 25 Nov 2014 to 26 Nov 2014 - Special issue (#2014-7)
>
> I teach cataloguing as part of a compulsory Cat & Class module on our MSc Information and Library Studies here at RGU. The arrival of RDA has certainly made it more challenging to fit everything in - well, it's impossible to fit *everything* in, but I'm trying to include a reasonably representative sample of both AACR2 and RDA, because I think many libraries are in transition, and some may not change in the near future, so best to equip students either way. In any case, it's good to know where the rules came from. I thought, when I was nominated to take up the cataloguing aegis from a predecessor, that I was in for an easy life, just the decennial updates to AACR to worry about. Ooops. ;-)
>
> Sorry if this is late, I'm finding even the volume of the digests too hard to keep up with, along with the day job.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alan
>
>
> Dr Alan MacLennan
> Lecturer/Course Leader
> Aberdeen Business School
> Robert Gordon University
> Garthdee Rd, Aberdeen AB10 7QE
> T: 01224 263910 F: 01224 263553 E: [log in to unmask]
> The Robert Gordon University, a Scottish charity registered under charity number SCO 13781
>
>
> Robert Gordon University is the top university for graduate jobs in the UK HESA 4 July 2013
>
> Robert Gordon University, a Scottish charity registered under charity number SC 013781.
>
> This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Robert Gordon University. Thank you.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:18:42 +0000
> From: "Goodall, Louise M." <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: New thread: non-book cataloguing
>
> Hi Bernadette,
>
> We are not using 34X. Looking at what these fields contain it seems we are covering most of the information that would go there by using 007 and information we put in the 300.
>
> Louise
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:52
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] New thread: non-book cataloguing
>
> Hello all
>
> Please feel free to continue with current threads, but I would like to ask if those of you who are using the new 34X elements for non-book materials have favourite resources to suggest.
>
> I will start with:
>
> For video cataloguing:
> https://lib.stanford.edu/metadata-department/clone-video-cataloging-guidelines
> And for the above and a lot of other Stanford resources:
> https://lib.stanford.edu/metadata/documentation
>
> For music and musical sound recordings (but much of it applicable to non-musical sound recordings):
> http://www.rdatoolkit.org/sites/default/files/rda_best_practices_for_music_cataloging-v1_0_1-140401.pdf
> This includes a brilliant table showing 007, 33X and 34X values for a very wide range of carriers, from piano rolls to MP3 discs.
>
> If you are using 34X, do you just record a few of the many available elements? If so, which ones?
>
> If you are not using 34X, are there any particular reasons why not?
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:19:06 +0000
> From: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> As a bit of an aside:
>
> It sounds to me as though subject classification is something people really do learn on-the-job, even more so than cataloguing.
>
> We touched on a range of classification systems during my MA, so when I worked in a UDC library I at least knew what it was, but this wasn’t something I was expected to know about beforehand, let alone feel confident using! (we actually had a part-toime staff member who was ‘moulding’ the UDC into a new form to suit our needs anyway).
>
> If records are coming in with such a range in the quality of subject headings then staff are inevitably going to have to have their own in-house policies on dealing with it/leaving them/removing them, as Louise mentions.
>
> So whilst courses etc are useful for people to familiarise themselves with the schemes or find out more, I’m getting the impression that in terms of recruitment, it’s not something employers are necessarily looking for. (with exceptions of course – anyone applying for a 3-month classification project should probably know about the scheme they’ll be using!
>
> Helen.
>
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodall, Louise M.
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:49
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi all,
>
> Picking up on what Esther has said, the quality of MARC records provided by e-book suppliers is of real concern to us here at Leicester. Subject headings are very often mangled to the point that they become useless, or are so general that you would actually be better off without them (e.g. LCSH “Computer science” in a book about something incredibly specific). The large numbers of records mean that they cannot be edited individually. We have tried using MarcEdit with limited success, and now we are pre-processing the records to remove the most egregious mistakes. But some things, Like Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, seem insoluble.
>
> I would be interested to know if everyone else is suffering the same problem, or if they have found a way around this difficulty.
>
> Louise Goodall
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Esther Arens
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:54
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Oops, forgot to change the subject line... done now. Sorry!
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:44 Uhr
> Von: "Esther Arens" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: [CIG-E-FORUM]
> Ah, that last point (because of which I've now changed the subject for this thread) is of course very different for us: About a third of the students are distance learners; some are able to visit the library in person but others will never do so. This makes subject cataloguing actually important for electronic resources - despite the fact that many (if not most) of the bib data for those are loaded without cataloguers' intervention.
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:24 Uhr
> Von: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:21:05 +0000
> From: "Goodall, Louise M." <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Thanks Helen,
>
> I think we decided not to do this because of the proper nouns, but perhaps it would result in a smaller set of problem records than the way we are doing it.
>
> Louise
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Helen Williams
> Sent: 26 November 2014 12:11
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi Louise,
> A quick comment on Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, which we have come across too –
> You can edit these in MarcEdit, though it’s less advisable if your set of records contains a lot of proper nouns or acronyms as the method for changing the case can’t distinguish these and they end up being changed incorrectly. But if there aren’t many of those in your record set you could manually change those few instances afterwards. In MarcEdit you can change the case by:
>
>
> * Select Edit, followed by Edit Shortcuts, then Change case, and finally Sentence case. You will be asked for a field to process. Enter 245 $a.
>
> * Select Edit, followed by Edit Shortcuts, then Change case, and this time Lower case. You will be asked for a field to process. Enter 245 $b.
> Helen
>
>
> *****************************************************
> Helen Williams
> Discovery and Metadata Manager
> Collection Services Group
>
> LSE Library Services
> The London School of Economics and Political Science
> 10 Portugal Street
> London WC2A 2HD
>
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 020 3486 2988
> www.lse.ac.uk/library<http://www.lse.ac.uk/library>
> *****************************************************
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodall, Louise M.
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:49
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi all,
>
> Picking up on what Esther has said, the quality of MARC records provided by e-book suppliers is of real concern to us here at Leicester. Subject headings are very often mangled to the point that they become useless, or are so general that you would actually be better off without them (e.g. LCSH “Computer science” in a book about something incredibly specific). The large numbers of records mean that they cannot be edited individually. We have tried using MarcEdit with limited success, and now we are pre-processing the records to remove the most egregious mistakes. But some things, Like Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, seem insoluble.
>
> I would be interested to know if everyone else is suffering the same problem, or if they have found a way around this difficulty.
>
> Louise Goodall
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Esther Arens
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:54
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Oops, forgot to change the subject line... done now. Sorry!
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:44 Uhr
> Von: "Esther Arens" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: [CIG-E-FORUM]
> Ah, that last point (because of which I've now changed the subject for this thread) is of course very different for us: About a third of the students are distance learners; some are able to visit the library in person but others will never do so. This makes subject cataloguing actually important for electronic resources - despite the fact that many (if not most) of the bib data for those are loaded without cataloguers' intervention.
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:24 Uhr
> Von: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:40:32 +0000
> From: Bernadette O'Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: New thread: non-book cataloguing
>
> Hello again
>
> I think that is quite a common response to the 34X elements. I was certainly dismayed myself when I came across this great wodge of extra stuff, but we decided it was worth implementing now because it has better future prospects than 007 and is also easier to display to users. And we expected to see 34X in downloaded records, so had to say something about them. We only use a few elements, and only when the info is easy to find.
>
> To reduce duplication we now require far fewer specific values in 006 and 007, at least for accompanying material - for most positions we just use a pipe ('|' = no attempt to code). Because our systems expert has created a pick list with 'friendly' descriptions of resources (e.g. 'audio or video CD/DVD, mono' as a 344 option) which enter the coded elements automatically, regular users have even said that they prefer these fields to 007s.
>
> Another innovation is that when we rewrote our training/reference documentation for RDA we included a module for non-book materials as standard. Previously documentation for non-book resources was separate and barely mentioned in training.
>
> I'm certainly getting the impression that no one expects aspiring cataloguers to have a grasp of these elements.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodall, Louise M.
> Sent: 26 November 2014 12:19
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] New thread: non-book cataloguing
>
> Hi Bernadette,
>
> We are not using 34X. Looking at what these fields contain it seems we are covering most of the information that would go there by using 007 and information we put in the 300.
>
> Louise
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:52
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] New thread: non-book cataloguing
>
> Hello all
>
> Please feel free to continue with current threads, but I would like to ask if those of you who are using the new 34X elements for non-book materials have favourite resources to suggest.
>
> I will start with:
>
> For video cataloguing:
> https://lib.stanford.edu/metadata-department/clone-video-cataloging-guidelines
> And for the above and a lot of other Stanford resources:
> https://lib.stanford.edu/metadata/documentation
>
> For music and musical sound recordings (but much of it applicable to non-musical sound recordings):
> http://www.rdatoolkit.org/sites/default/files/rda_best_practices_for_music_cataloging-v1_0_1-140401.pdf
> This includes a brilliant table showing 007, 33X and 34X values for a very wide range of carriers, from piano rolls to MP3 discs.
>
> If you are using 34X, do you just record a few of the many available elements? If so, which ones?
>
> If you are not using 34X, are there any particular reasons why not?
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:45:43 +0000
> From: "Welsh, Anne" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 25 Nov 2014 to 26 Nov 2014 - Special issue (#2014-7)
>
> I can testify to the amount of material that needs to be covered. 6 years ago I taught AACR2 and MARC in 20 hours of practicals and covered theory and other metadata (like DublinCore) in 10 hours of lectures. Those who stayed on for Advanced Cat got 12 more hours on metadata.
>
> Now, we still have 30 contact hours in the core module, which I divide into 10 hours of theory and 20 hours of practicals. This has to include AACR2, RDA, MARC, FRBRised catalogues and now BIBFRAME. Many of our students choose UCL because we give plenty of Cat and Class as core, so not to deliver on the latest developments would really let them down.
>
> I have coped by introducing the extended (or "flipped") classroom for our practicals. Students engage with text-based, video and audio instructional materials - some produced by practitioners like the Cambridge and LOC materials and others produced specifically for them - they get the theory for everything through the 10 hours of plenary sessions and then choose (and let me know) their learning objectives for the practicals. Most this year are focusing on RDA in MARC for their assessment, but are choosing to engage with RDA in BIBFRAME and AACR2 in MARC as well. Others are choosing to be assessed in AACR2 in MARC or simply AACR2 in ISBD ("catalogue card display"), but again are engaging with the others in the practicals. There's only one student who isn't really keen to know a lot about Cataloguing, and they are simply working on their assessment (a cataloguing policy with examples) in AACR2 in ISBD.
>
> Classes are more challenging to teach, as I have to switch between RDA and AACR2 as I move between work groups, and they are a lot noisier, but I think that's a good thing. The students take ownership of their learning and are good about asking questions and bringing in challenging materials to share. This year, I'm trialling Padlet, which allows anyone in the group to share images and links instantly on a shared webpage.
>
> One of my aims in teaching is for each student to feel they have an individualised learning experience within a group setting, and I was scared having to cover so much in so much detail would require going back to drilling everyone in the same examples at the same time. Instead, thanks to technology there is more choice and more chance for each to build on their trainee experience.
>
> This year all the students are helping us to design an Open Educational Resource to teach BIBFRAME: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/research/collaborativeprojects/lobd So we had a session on RDF and a practical using Protege (an ontology editor) to get them up to speed on RDF triples. Then we played around with the LOC and Zepheira's editor, comparison tool and transformations service. It was *brilliant* to hear the students' observations on these - an stunning to see those who had started with no Cataloguing experience and a bit scared of cataloguing feel able to voice their constructive feedback on the tools in beta.
>
> Next year, my teaching goal will be to incorporate more co-creation of knowledge in this way in the second half of the core module. As Debbie Lee pointed out in her paper at the CIG conference this year, the next generation, unburdened of decades of experience using AACR2 don't seem to flounder when faced with new stuff, but, on the contrary, thrive.
>
> I'm going to go away and be quiet again now.
>
> Thanks for all the comments in the for so far - hearing about real-world challenges is a vital part of keeping the cataloguing curriculum up-to-date, and I'm sure other educators are finding the forum as inspiring as I am.
>
> All the best
>
> Anne
>
> Anne Welsh
> Programme Director MA LIS
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 26 Nov 2014, at 12:20, "Alan MacLennan (abs)" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> I teach cataloguing as part of a compulsory Cat & Class module on our MSc Information and Library Studies here at RGU. The arrival of RDA has certainly made it more challenging to fit everything in - well, it's impossible to fit *everything* in, but I'm trying to include a reasonably representative sample of both AACR2 and RDA, because I think many libraries are in transition, and some may not change in the near future, so best to equip students either way. In any case, it's good to know where the rules came from. I thought, when I was nominated to take up the cataloguing aegis from a predecessor, that I was in for an easy life, just the decennial updates to AACR to worry about. Ooops. ;-)
>>
>> Sorry if this is late, I'm finding even the volume of the digests too hard to keep up with, along with the day job.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Alan
>>
>>
>> Dr Alan MacLennan
>> Lecturer/Course Leader
>> Aberdeen Business School
>> Robert Gordon University
>> Garthdee Rd, Aberdeen AB10 7QE
>> T: 01224 263910 F: 01224 263553 E: [log in to unmask]
>> The Robert Gordon University, a Scottish charity registered under charity number SCO 13781
>>
>>
>> Robert Gordon University is the top university for graduate jobs in the UK HESA 4 July 2013
>>
>> Robert Gordon University, a Scottish charity registered under charity number SC 013781.
>>
>> This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Robert Gordon University. Thank you.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:47:41 +0000
> From: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hi Flora,
>
> Crikey, that’s a lot of resources! Some of them are new to me (makes you realise how important proper training etc is).
>
> Do you know of any events or courses on any of these? If not I think it'd be great if CIG did some kind of classification event - would anyone else be interested in something like that?
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lee, Flora
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:40
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> In the digital objects database that I work on here in NLS, we use LCNA (and LCSH) for people, The Getty Name Thesaurus (TGN) for places, LCSH for events (as opposed to dates), LC’s Thesaurus of Graphic Materials (TGM) for form and genre, the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT) and TGM for subject, content, etc.
>
> Flora
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Pierce
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:58
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello both,
>
> We use LCSH and MeSH at Cardiff. MeSH for our medical/health care libraries because it is more specific in certain aspects of medicine/healthcare than LCSH.
>
> I don’t think I have ever had specific proper training on either – and I know when I started using LCSH I did wish I could attend a course to help me use it better, but I couldn’t find anything available at the time. As I have responsibility for the medical/healthcare cataloguing I use MeSH more often and am more comfortable with it (the opposite is probably true of my colleagues). Keeping up to date with it is a bit hit and miss though, as I never have time to fully review the annual updates.
> It is also one of those things I have learnt on the job. As I used to work at the medical library (rather than in the cataloguing dept), I was also use to being aware of MeSH for Medline searches as well.
>
> I do believe subject headings are very valuable, and as noted below are now getting used as facets in discovery tools. I believe they add an extra layer of discoverability to items. I certainly find them useful when checking for books in certain areas, but I am very aware that cataloguers are not your standard user!
>
> Karen
>
> Karen Pierce
> Cataloguing Librarian
> Cataloguing Department
> University Library Service
> Cardiff University
> PO BOX 430
> 1st Floor
> 30-36 Newport Road
> Cardiff
> CF24 0DE
>
> Tel: (029) 20875680
> Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
> Karen Pierce
> Llyfrgellydd Catalogio
> Adran Catalogio
> Gwasanaeth Llyfrgell y Brifysgol
> Prifysgol Cymru
> PO BOX 430
> Llawr 1af
> 30-36 Heol Casnewydd
> Caerdydd
> CF24 0DE
>
> Ffôn: (029) 20875680
> E-bost: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> http://darksideofthecatalogue.wordpress.com/
> http://scolarcardiff.wordpress.com/
> http://cardiffcataloguers.wordpress.com/
>
> [Please consider the environment before printing]
> Ystyriwch yr amgylchedd cyn argraffu yr e-bost yma os gwelwch yn dda.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:42
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello Helen
>
> We also find that few of our users do sophisticated searches, but a simple, general search in our resource disccovery tool will bring up results from subject headings as well as from titles, etc. Particularly useful if the titles are in foreign languages. It also offers hyperlinks on access points, so users who have found a resource that suits them can click to find other material on the same subject.
>
> Resource discovery tools also make extensive use of LCSH and similar for facets – the hierarchical structure is ideal for facets, and perhaps gives users the impression that the subject terms are better organised and assigned more systematically than they really are. A few years ago I was expecting LCSH to fade out of use – it can be so difficult to get everything just right that the results of subject searches are generally less reliable than one would wish, at the expense of a great deal of cataloguing time – but resource discovery tools seem to have given LCSH a new lease of life.
>
> How valuable do other people think that LCSH are nowadays? Is there a better way?
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Doyle, Helen
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:24
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:52:45 +0000
> From: Helen Williams <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi Louise,
> Yes, it’s a delicate balancing act isn’t it, when correcting one problem gives you another!
> I think Katrina mentioned smug tweaking yesterday, and Bernadette has just mentioned today about liaising with suppliers to provide good quality records. Despite the fact we have done some capitalization changes in the past, using MarcEdit, we lean towards liaising with e-book records suppliers as our preferred option for dealing with quality issues.
> Helen
>
>
> *****************************************************
> Helen Williams
> Discovery and Metadata Manager
> Collection Services Group
>
> LSE Library Services
> The London School of Economics and Political Science
> 10 Portugal Street
> London WC2A 2HD
>
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 020 3486 2988
> www.lse.ac.uk/library
> *****************************************************
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodall, Louise M.
> Sent: 26 November 2014 12:21
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Thanks Helen,
>
> I think we decided not to do this because of the proper nouns, but perhaps it would result in a smaller set of problem records than the way we are doing it.
>
> Louise
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Helen Williams
> Sent: 26 November 2014 12:11
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi Louise,
> A quick comment on Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, which we have come across too –
> You can edit these in MarcEdit, though it’s less advisable if your set of records contains a lot of proper nouns or acronyms as the method for changing the case can’t distinguish these and they end up being changed incorrectly. But if there aren’t many of those in your record set you could manually change those few instances afterwards. In MarcEdit you can change the case by:
>
>
> * Select Edit, followed by Edit Shortcuts, then Change case, and finally Sentence case. You will be asked for a field to process. Enter 245 $a.
>
> * Select Edit, followed by Edit Shortcuts, then Change case, and this time Lower case. You will be asked for a field to process. Enter 245 $b.
> Helen
>
>
> *****************************************************
> Helen Williams
> Discovery and Metadata Manager
> Collection Services Group
>
> LSE Library Services
> The London School of Economics and Political Science
> 10 Portugal Street
> London WC2A 2HD
>
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 020 3486 2988
> www.lse.ac.uk/library<http://www.lse.ac.uk/library>
> *****************************************************
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodall, Louise M.
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:49
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi all,
>
> Picking up on what Esther has said, the quality of MARC records provided by e-book suppliers is of real concern to us here at Leicester. Subject headings are very often mangled to the point that they become useless, or are so general that you would actually be better off without them (e.g. LCSH “Computer science” in a book about something incredibly specific). The large numbers of records mean that they cannot be edited individually. We have tried using MarcEdit with limited success, and now we are pre-processing the records to remove the most egregious mistakes. But some things, Like Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, seem insoluble.
>
> I would be interested to know if everyone else is suffering the same problem, or if they have found a way around this difficulty.
>
> Louise Goodall
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Esther Arens
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:54
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Oops, forgot to change the subject line... done now. Sorry!
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:44 Uhr
> Von: "Esther Arens" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: [CIG-E-FORUM]
> Ah, that last point (because of which I've now changed the subject for this thread) is of course very different for us: About a third of the students are distance learners; some are able to visit the library in person but others will never do so. This makes subject cataloguing actually important for electronic resources - despite the fact that many (if not most) of the bib data for those are loaded without cataloguers' intervention.
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:24 Uhr
> Von: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer
>
> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:43:50 +0000
> From: Siobhan Wood <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Session 3: Training II - who assigns the LCSH subject headings / classification
>
>
> Here at the University of Reading the allocation of LCSH and classification is split between cataloguers and Liaison Librarians (including 3 trainee LL's on a 3 year fixed term contract). For some subjects the LL's allocate the LCSH and classification and give the books to their allocated cataloguer to check, input and edit the records while any remaining subjects are the full responsibility of the cataloguer. LL's are expected to create valid headings/ strings but not code them.
>
> I would be interested in hearing if this practice is or has been followed elsewhere and the advantages/disadvantages of such an arrangement.
>
> Siobhan
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Siobhan Wood
> Metadata Co-ordinator / Liaison Librarian (Geography and Environmental Science)
> University of Reading Library, Whiteknights,
> PO Box 223, Reading RG6 6AE
>
> Tel: 0118 378 8778
> www.reading.ac.uk/library
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the 'Getting started in cataloguing' e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday's sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years' time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 13:03:35 +0000
> From: Bernadette O'Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 25 Nov 2014 to 26 Nov 2014 - Special issue (#2014-7)
>
> Hello Anne
>
> That sounds brilliant. I am particularly envious of the BIBFRAME options. Far beyond what is generally on offer in on-the-job training.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
>
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Welsh, Anne
> Sent: 26 November 2014 12:46
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 25 Nov 2014 to 26 Nov 2014 - Special issue (#2014-7)
>
> I can testify to the amount of material that needs to be covered. 6 years ago I taught AACR2 and MARC in 20 hours of practicals and covered theory and other metadata (like DublinCore) in 10 hours of lectures. Those who stayed on for Advanced Cat got 12 more hours on metadata.
>
> Now, we still have 30 contact hours in the core module, which I divide into 10 hours of theory and 20 hours of practicals. This has to include AACR2, RDA, MARC, FRBRised catalogues and now BIBFRAME. Many of our students choose UCL because we give plenty of Cat and Class as core, so not to deliver on the latest developments would really let them down.
>
> I have coped by introducing the extended (or "flipped") classroom for our practicals. Students engage with text-based, video and audio instructional materials - some produced by practitioners like the Cambridge and LOC materials and others produced specifically for them - they get the theory for everything through the 10 hours of plenary sessions and then choose (and let me know) their learning objectives for the practicals. Most this year are focusing on RDA in MARC for their assessment, but are choosing to engage with RDA in BIBFRAME and AACR2 in MARC as well. Others are choosing to be assessed in AACR2 in MARC or simply AACR2 in ISBD ("catalogue card display"), but again are engaging with the others in the practicals. There's only one student who isn't really keen to know a lot about Cataloguing, and they are simply working on their assessment (a cataloguing policy with examples) in AACR2 in ISBD.
>
> Classes are more challenging to teach, as I have to switch between RDA and AACR2 as I move between work groups, and they are a lot noisier, but I think that's a good thing. The students take ownership of their learning and are good about asking questions and bringing in challenging materials to share. This year, I'm trialling Padlet, which allows anyone in the group to share images and links instantly on a shared webpage.
>
> One of my aims in teaching is for each student to feel they have an individualised learning experience within a group setting, and I was scared having to cover so much in so much detail would require going back to drilling everyone in the same examples at the same time. Instead, thanks to technology there is more choice and more chance for each to build on their trainee experience.
>
> This year all the students are helping us to design an Open Educational Resource to teach BIBFRAME: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/research/collaborativeprojects/lobd So we had a session on RDF and a practical using Protege (an ontology editor) to get them up to speed on RDF triples. Then we played around with the LOC and Zepheira's editor, comparison tool and transformations service. It was *brilliant* to hear the students' observations on these - an stunning to see those who had started with no Cataloguing experience and a bit scared of cataloguing feel able to voice their constructive feedback on the tools in beta.
>
> Next year, my teaching goal will be to incorporate more co-creation of knowledge in this way in the second half of the core module. As Debbie Lee pointed out in her paper at the CIG conference this year, the next generation, unburdened of decades of experience using AACR2 don't seem to flounder when faced with new stuff, but, on the contrary, thrive.
>
> I'm going to go away and be quiet again now.
>
> Thanks for all the comments in the for so far - hearing about real-world challenges is a vital part of keeping the cataloguing curriculum up-to-date, and I'm sure other educators are finding the forum as inspiring as I am.
>
> All the best
>
> Anne
>
> Anne Welsh
> Programme Director MA LIS
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 26 Nov 2014, at 12:20, "Alan MacLennan (abs)" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> I teach cataloguing as part of a compulsory Cat & Class module on our
>> MSc Information and Library Studies here at RGU. The arrival of RDA
>> has certainly made it more challenging to fit everything in - well,
>> it's impossible to fit *everything* in, but I'm trying to include a
>> reasonably representative sample of both AACR2 and RDA, because I
>> think many libraries are in transition, and some may not change in the
>> near future, so best to equip students either way. In any case, it's
>> good to know where the rules came from. I thought, when I was
>> nominated to take up the cataloguing aegis from a predecessor, that I
>> was in for an easy life, just the decennial updates to AACR to worry
>> about. Ooops. ;-)
>>
>> Sorry if this is late, I'm finding even the volume of the digests too hard to keep up with, along with the day job.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Alan
>>
>>
>> Dr Alan MacLennan
>> Lecturer/Course Leader
>> Aberdeen Business School
>> Robert Gordon University
>> Garthdee Rd, Aberdeen AB10 7QE
>> T: 01224 263910 F: 01224 263553 E: [log in to unmask] The Robert
>> Gordon University, a Scottish charity registered under charity number
>> SCO 13781
>>
>>
>> Robert Gordon University is the top university for graduate jobs in
>> the UK HESA 4 July 2013
>>
>> Robert Gordon University, a Scottish charity registered under charity number SC 013781.
>>
>> This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Robert Gordon University. Thank you.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 13:08:19 +0000
> From: Bernadette O'Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Session 3 thanks
>
> Hello all
> Many thanks to everyone who has taken part in this morning's discussions. You are very welcome to continue with these threads, but this afternoon Helen (Doyle) will be taking over and focusing particularly on alternative approaches and roles, such as non-MARC records, brief records, data harvesting and outsourcing.
> I have to be on a conference call after lunch, but look forward to catching up later in the afternoon.
>
> Thanks again!
>
> All good wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 13:08:16 +0000
> From: Bernadette O'Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Session 3: Training II - who assigns the LCSH subject headings / classification
>
> Hello Siobhan
>
> That's an interesting arrangement. We have often wished we could let a few people focus on LCSH, but decided that the workflows, with resources passing through more hands and possible bottlenecks during staff absences, would be too awkward. And in smaller libraries, such as college ones, there is no possibility of specialising.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Siobhan Wood
> Sent: 26 November 2014 12:44
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - who assigns the LCSH subject headings / classification
>
>
> Here at the University of Reading the allocation of LCSH and classification is split between cataloguers and Liaison Librarians (including 3 trainee LL's on a 3 year fixed term contract). For some subjects the LL's allocate the LCSH and classification and give the books to their allocated cataloguer to check, input and edit the records while any remaining subjects are the full responsibility of the cataloguer. LL's are expected to create valid headings/ strings but not code them.
>
> I would be interested in hearing if this practice is or has been followed elsewhere and the advantages/disadvantages of such an arrangement.
>
> Siobhan
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Siobhan Wood
> Metadata Co-ordinator / Liaison Librarian (Geography and Environmental Science)
> University of Reading Library, Whiteknights,
> PO Box 223, Reading RG6 6AE
>
> Tel: 0118 378 8778
> www.reading.ac.uk/library<http://www.reading.ac.uk/library>
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the 'Getting started in cataloguing' e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday's sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years' time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 13:10:43 +0000
> From: "Clifford, Katrina M" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Session 3: Training II - who assigns the LCSH subject headings / classification
>
> Hi Siobhan,
>
> We don't have the exact set-up though in the past we've had some of the subject teams doing some basic cataloguing (they do a bit of classification in that they specify classmarks on the orders). I've always found explaining LCSH really tricky and think it's it's very much something you pick up the more you do.
>
> Katrina
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Siobhan Wood
> Sent: 26 November 2014 12:44
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - who assigns the LCSH subject headings / classification
>
>
> Here at the University of Reading the allocation of LCSH and classification is split between cataloguers and Liaison Librarians (including 3 trainee LL's on a 3 year fixed term contract). For some subjects the LL's allocate the LCSH and classification and give the books to their allocated cataloguer to check, input and edit the records while any remaining subjects are the full responsibility of the cataloguer. LL's are expected to create valid headings/ strings but not code them.
>
> I would be interested in hearing if this practice is or has been followed elsewhere and the advantages/disadvantages of such an arrangement.
>
> Siobhan
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Siobhan Wood
> Metadata Co-ordinator / Liaison Librarian (Geography and Environmental Science)
> University of Reading Library, Whiteknights,
> PO Box 223, Reading RG6 6AE
>
> Tel: 0118 378 8778
> www.reading.ac.uk/library<http://www.reading.ac.uk/library>
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the 'Getting started in cataloguing' e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday's sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years' time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 13:15:17 +0000
> From: "Lee, Flora" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Helen,
>
> Yes, we use them for digital objects because LC itself realised LCSH (being concepts) was not very useful for graphic materials.
>
> They are all available online (LC through Cataloguer’s Desktop), although we did arrange a licence for the Getty materials before they started their open content program. Here are some of the URLs
>
> http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/index.html
>
> http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/tgm/
>
> I started at the deep end, and had to teach myself how to use them. (That was back about 2002, I think). I run workshops and training sessions for other staff and have produced an online manual (which I update as new tools appear to further automate the process) – but that is a Users’ Guide to using the entire database.
>
> So, you see, I am an example of how you can go from doing old style cataloguing (including Rare Books cataloguing) to applying your experience in the digital environment.
>
> Flora
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Doyle, Helen
> Sent: 26 November 2014 12:48
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hi Flora,
>
> Crikey, that’s a lot of resources! Some of them are new to me (makes you realise how important proper training etc is).
>
> Do you know of any events or courses on any of these? If not I think it'd be great if CIG did some kind of classification event - would anyone else be interested in something like that?
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lee, Flora
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:40
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> In the digital objects database that I work on here in NLS, we use LCNA (and LCSH) for people, The Getty Name Thesaurus (TGN) for places, LCSH for events (as opposed to dates), LC’s Thesaurus of Graphic Materials (TGM) for form and genre, the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT) and TGM for subject, content, etc.
>
> Flora
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Pierce
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:58
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello both,
>
> We use LCSH and MeSH at Cardiff. MeSH for our medical/health care libraries because it is more specific in certain aspects of medicine/healthcare than LCSH.
>
> I don’t think I have ever had specific proper training on either – and I know when I started using LCSH I did wish I could attend a course to help me use it better, but I couldn’t find anything available at the time. As I have responsibility for the medical/healthcare cataloguing I use MeSH more often and am more comfortable with it (the opposite is probably true of my colleagues). Keeping up to date with it is a bit hit and miss though, as I never have time to fully review the annual updates.
> It is also one of those things I have learnt on the job. As I used to work at the medical library (rather than in the cataloguing dept), I was also use to being aware of MeSH for Medline searches as well.
>
> I do believe subject headings are very valuable, and as noted below are now getting used as facets in discovery tools. I believe they add an extra layer of discoverability to items. I certainly find them useful when checking for books in certain areas, but I am very aware that cataloguers are not your standard user!
>
> Karen
>
> Karen Pierce
> Cataloguing Librarian
> Cataloguing Department
> University Library Service
> Cardiff University
> PO BOX 430
> 1st Floor
> 30-36 Newport Road
> Cardiff
> CF24 0DE
>
> Tel: (029) 20875680
> Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
> Karen Pierce
> Llyfrgellydd Catalogio
> Adran Catalogio
> Gwasanaeth Llyfrgell y Brifysgol
> Prifysgol Cymru
> PO BOX 430
> Llawr 1af
> 30-36 Heol Casnewydd
> Caerdydd
> CF24 0DE
>
> Ffôn: (029) 20875680
> E-bost: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> http://darksideofthecatalogue.wordpress.com/
> http://scolarcardiff.wordpress.com/
> http://cardiffcataloguers.wordpress.com/
>
> [Please consider the environment before printing]
> Ystyriwch yr amgylchedd cyn argraffu yr e-bost yma os gwelwch yn dda.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:42
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello Helen
>
> We also find that few of our users do sophisticated searches, but a simple, general search in our resource disccovery tool will bring up results from subject headings as well as from titles, etc. Particularly useful if the titles are in foreign languages. It also offers hyperlinks on access points, so users who have found a resource that suits them can click to find other material on the same subject.
>
> Resource discovery tools also make extensive use of LCSH and similar for facets – the hierarchical structure is ideal for facets, and perhaps gives users the impression that the subject terms are better organised and assigned more systematically than they really are. A few years ago I was expecting LCSH to fade out of use – it can be so difficult to get everything just right that the results of subject searches are generally less reliable than one would wish, at the expense of a great deal of cataloguing time – but resource discovery tools seem to have given LCSH a new lease of life.
>
> How valuable do other people think that LCSH are nowadays? Is there a better way?
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Doyle, Helen
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:24
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 13:15:00 +0000
> From: "Clifford, Katrina M" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi Louise
>
> We have found ebook records to be often really not what we need at all, leading to all sorts of matching (or non matching) issues in our discovery layer.
>
> To be honest we’ve not had the time to address this up until now, but it’s on my list to look at again in conjunction with my colleagues in Acquisitions to see if there’s a better way to work, especially now we have Alma
>
> Katrina
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodall, Louise M.
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:49
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi all,
>
> Picking up on what Esther has said, the quality of MARC records provided by e-book suppliers is of real concern to us here at Leicester. Subject headings are very often mangled to the point that they become useless, or are so general that you would actually be better off without them (e.g. LCSH “Computer science” in a book about something incredibly specific). The large numbers of records mean that they cannot be edited individually. We have tried using MarcEdit with limited success, and now we are pre-processing the records to remove the most egregious mistakes. But some things, Like Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, seem insoluble.
>
> I would be interested to know if everyone else is suffering the same problem, or if they have found a way around this difficulty.
>
> Louise Goodall
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Esther Arens
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:54
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Oops, forgot to change the subject line... done now. Sorry!
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:44 Uhr
> Von: "Esther Arens" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: [CIG-E-FORUM]
> Ah, that last point (because of which I've now changed the subject for this thread) is of course very different for us: About a third of the students are distance learners; some are able to visit the library in person but others will never do so. This makes subject cataloguing actually important for electronic resources - despite the fact that many (if not most) of the bib data for those are loaded without cataloguers' intervention.
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:24 Uhr
> Von: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 13:21:07 +0000
> From: "Clifford, Katrina M" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> I very much agree with Helen, I think (as a manager), for permanent positions whilst I’d love if they had used Dewey, any classification knowledge can help – as long as you have an idea of the way the scheme works you can apply those skills elsewhere. We have WebDewey which is keyword searchable (working, I think, off LCSH) that does help and have some limited guidance written down for areas where one area is preferred over another. We have areas such as literature where we don’t use standard Dewey and use an in-house scheme.
>
> I think with this, as with anything, knowing when to ask is key – I’d rather people asked me for advice than have to correct a bucket load of wrongly catalogued/classified things down the line.
>
> Katrina
>
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Doyle, Helen
> Sent: 26 November 2014 12:19
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> As a bit of an aside:
>
> It sounds to me as though subject classification is something people really do learn on-the-job, even more so than cataloguing.
>
> We touched on a range of classification systems during my MA, so when I worked in a UDC library I at least knew what it was, but this wasn’t something I was expected to know about beforehand, let alone feel confident using! (we actually had a part-toime staff member who was ‘moulding’ the UDC into a new form to suit our needs anyway).
>
> If records are coming in with such a range in the quality of subject headings then staff are inevitably going to have to have their own in-house policies on dealing with it/leaving them/removing them, as Louise mentions.
>
> So whilst courses etc are useful for people to familiarise themselves with the schemes or find out more, I’m getting the impression that in terms of recruitment, it’s not something employers are necessarily looking for. (with exceptions of course – anyone applying for a 3-month classification project should probably know about the scheme they’ll be using!
>
> Helen.
>
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodall, Louise M.
> Sent: 26 November 2014 11:49
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Hi all,
>
> Picking up on what Esther has said, the quality of MARC records provided by e-book suppliers is of real concern to us here at Leicester. Subject headings are very often mangled to the point that they become useless, or are so general that you would actually be better off without them (e.g. LCSH “Computer science” in a book about something incredibly specific). The large numbers of records mean that they cannot be edited individually. We have tried using MarcEdit with limited success, and now we are pre-processing the records to remove the most egregious mistakes. But some things, Like Capitalizing Every Word Of The Title, seem insoluble.
>
> I would be interested to know if everyone else is suffering the same problem, or if they have found a way around this difficulty.
>
> Louise Goodall
> Cataloguer
> University of Leicester
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Esther Arens
> Sent: 26 November 2014 10:54
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Aw: [CIG-E-FORUM] Subject searches vs. shelf browsing
>
> Oops, forgot to change the subject line... done now. Sorry!
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:44 Uhr
> Von: "Esther Arens" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: [CIG-E-FORUM]
> Ah, that last point (because of which I've now changed the subject for this thread) is of course very different for us: About a third of the students are distance learners; some are able to visit the library in person but others will never do so. This makes subject cataloguing actually important for electronic resources - despite the fact that many (if not most) of the bib data for those are loaded without cataloguers' intervention.
>
> --
> Esther Arens MCLIP
> The Precentory
> 23 St Martins
> Leicester LE1 5DE
>
>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. November 2014 um 10:24 Uhr
> Von: "Doyle, Helen" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> An: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Betreff: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
> In my organisation we pay only cursory attention to what AACR2 says, and I don’t think we follow any rules for adding subjects to records. It’s usually just very board, and then we use a specialist classification scheme for shelving (Moys).
>
> People rarely search the catalogue by subject (though maybe that’s because the subject headings are not great!) – they tend to turn up i8n the library in person and want to be pointed at the relevant section of shelving!
>
> Helen.
>
> From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernadette O'Reilly
> Sent: 26 November 2014 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Session 3: Training II - special areas
>
> Hello again
>
> Welcome to the third session of the ‘Getting started in cataloguing’ e-forum.
>
> As well as continuing threads from yesterday’s sessions, we invite your questions and ideas in this session about training and recruitment for special skills in cataloguing, such as subject cataloguing, classification, non-book materials and rare books. I give a lot of training myself for LCSH and non-book materials (RDA/MARC). I have to admit that I have no expertise in other subject thesauri, classification, Dewey or rare books, but I know a little about how my colleagues handle training in these areas. Esther and Helen will be joining in when they can, and we hope that the experts among you will be able to offer specialised advice.
>
> We have come up with some starter questions, but please feel free to introduce other topics:
>
> - Can you recommend any training material for LCSH and/or other subject thesauri or methods?
> - Can you recommend any training material for LC Classification or other classification systems?
> - Is it practical and/or worthwhile for aspiring cataloguers to gain skills in cataloguing, classification or specialist areas before they apply for posts?
>
> - Does your organisation expect everyone to deal with subject cataloguing and non-book cataloguing straight away, or do you give simpler work to newer cataloguers and introduce these skills gradually?
>
> - If subject cataloguing is not a specialist role in your organisation, how do cataloguers cope with the challenges of maintaining a good repertoire from LCSH and/or other fast-growing thesauri?
> - If your organisation uses LCSH, are cataloguers expected to be very strict in applying all the scope notes and SHM instruction sheets? If not, what are your priorities?
> - What, if anything, is your organisation doing to implement the new LCGFT thesaurus? Is there any training material which you would recommend?
>
> - Do you expect the LCSH system to be as dominant in 5 years’ time as it is now?
>
> - What other subject cataloguing systems should aspiring cataloguers be aware of? What are their advantages?
> - Is non-book cataloguing a specialist role in your organisation?
> - How much use is your organisation making of the new 34X fields and what kind of training has been provided? Are your cataloguers comfortable about using them? Can you recommend any materials?
> - Has your organisation implemented RDA for rare books? If so, did it involve much re-training? Can you recommend any materials?
>
> - Given the frequent changes and growth in cataloguing standards in recent years, is the burden of knowledge and skills expected of cataloguing staff becoming unmanageable? Any survival tips?
>
> We look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bernadette
> *******************
> Bernadette O'Reilly
> Catalogue Support Librarian
> Bodleian Libraries,
> Osney One Building
> Osney Mead
> Oxford OX2 0EW.
> For cataloguing advice: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For course enquiries (cataloguing, holdings & items): [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> For other correspondence: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 01865 2-77134
> *******************
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor all email communications through their networks.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with number OC328697, and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of its members and of the other partners is available at its registered office, 3 More London Riverside, London SE1 2AQ; reference to a partner is to a member or to an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualification employed or engaged by Norton Rose Fulbright LLP or any of its affiliates.
>
> Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright Australia, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa (incorporated as Deneys Reitz Inc) and Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, each of which is a separate legal entity, are members of Norton Rose Fulbright Verein, a Swiss Verein. Details of each entity, with certain regulatory information, are at nortonrosefulbright.com. Norton Rose Fulbright Verein helps coordinate the activities of the members but does not itself provide legal services to clients.
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 26 Nov 2014 - Special issue (#2014-8)
> *****************************************************************
|
