[Web4lib] Ebooks in libraries : synthesis

Mon Nov 30 19:02:43 EST 2009

Thank you, this was very interesting!
Jean Hewlett
University of San Francisco

Christine Mannaz wrote:
> Synthesis
>  
> Hi,
>  
> Here is a little synthesis about the status of ebooks in libraries, linked to the cataloguing tasks. I just rewrited the messages I received, because I am not a native English speaker and it was difficult for me to sum up all the texts. 
>  
> 1) First case : a little library purchasing not individual ebook titles, only collections :
>  
> The collections are from eBrary, NetLibrary and Gale Virtual Reference.
>  
> The collections of ebooks added to collections can come with MARC records that the librarians could download into the system and make available from the OPAC. The process completely bypasses the catalogers. 
> The librarian may review the entire workflow process, if they purchase individual ebook titles in the next years.
>
>
> 2) Second case : important packages of ebooks (and the special status of science ebooks) :
>  
>  
> This library subscribes to a couple of different packages of ebooks :
> Netlibrary, Safari, Oxford, and eBrary. 
>  
> These packages include about 3,000 titles. The librarians primarily collect technical and medical books because the information changes so quickly. The packages update themselves.
> Essentially, the publishers replace old editions with the new ones asthey become available. 
>  
> For the catalogers, this means that the book records are not static.
> This library previously used serials records instead of book records to represent the items in the catalog. Every couple of months, the catalog records need to be updated. For the license manager, it means a little more work. When the library gets a new package (a rare occurrence), the librarians read the license carefully so that they know what they can and cannot do with these books. For the patrons, this means that they can have access
> to the books anytime, anywhere. They like it, but they occasionally have to contact the reference desk for information on how to log in.
>  
> The librarians regularly have discussions about whether or not they should commit more funds to ebooks and devote fewer funds to print books. The conversations mostly revolve around reference books, since their patterns of use seem to work best in an online format. That is, our patrons aren't reading them through word for word but are rather skipping around in the text looking for specific information. 
>  
> Succinctly :
>  
> 1. Adquiring ebooks may impact the acquisitions and cataloging people the
> most. They are going to have to work out how to deal with these items in
> the catalog. 
> 2. The instruction and reference librarians have to learn how to use them and how to teach people to use them. The reference librarians are also going to have to remember to use this new resource.
>  
> 3) New competences ?
>  
> New competences ? Not the case for all librarians.
>  
> For some colleagues, new, i.e. not necessary/possible or very much different compared to the print world, in the workflow:
>  
> Testing
> Document management for license agreements
> Reference linking
> Evaluating online usage
> Acquiring / Checking :
>  
> Some catalogers are doing acquisitions work with e-books. Catalogers go to the book vendor or OCLC to get the MARC records and they try to make sure the library received access to everything the library paid for. 
>  
> The copy catalogers are sometimes trained in the new MARC fields they would have to verify so that the records would be consistently findable in the catalog.
>  
> The reply of an expert in cataloguing :
>  
>   
>> * Do electronic books induce changes in work flows ? And which ones ?
>>     
>  
> Electronic books do not require "marking and parking", so they do not
> clog preparations. They should have full call numbers with Cutters
> however, to allow classed bibliographies among other things.
>  
>   
>> * Do librarians have to develop new competences ?
>>     
>  
> The ability to cut and paste from PDFs greatly speeds production of
> MARC records. Contents for 505 and abstracts for 520 in particular
> create greater use of electronic resources, due to anyword searching.
>
> In some cases you can get MARC records from electronic publishers and
> aggrigators.
>  
> 4) The reply of an the electronic resources cataloger :
>  
> The problem depends on how the ebooks are acquired. If we are getting a large file, hundreds or thousands, it is best to load them using the bulk loading feature of the ILS. This may not require different skills, but may involve working with the systems department of the library (or whatever group does most of the technical work on the library system). 
> We routinely receive large files of records (37,000; most recently we loaded 136,000). My work, as the electronic resources cataloger, is to evaluate the records, advise the systems department of any changes that needed to be made to them, and figure out what authority issues are involved in the load and how we will deal with them. I also follow up to make sure they look good in the catalog. The workflows are highly dependent on where the expertise in bulk loading in the library resides.
>  
> I would say that, regarding new competencies, you have to think about how the load will affect the catalog and consider things that don't happen when you're only adding a few books at a time. For instance, what happens to the authority file when you load 136,000 records? How do you bring those items under authority control? Can patrons perform a search to call up all of the ebooks in that set? Is that even a useful search? How will you deal with books that are part of a series? I find I have to consider these larger issues more when dealing with large sets. There is always have someone else double-check my changes to the records, since the number of records affected is so large.
>  
> 5) And what about the patrons ? Should librarians classify electronic resources just as if they were books on shelves ? 
> The example of a discussion which took place on the ACAT-list…
>  
> Classifying
>  
> Physical / virtual items : how do patrons search for documents ? If electronic documents are classified just like books, they may “wander aimlessly” in the stacks.
>  
> Classifying electronic or internet resources : the possible evaluation of collections and of the kind of titles owned by the library (and of the money and time spent to acquire and catalog the items…)
>  
> One record (for all formats) or separate is the question… Some (librarians) think that one record for the various formats for one title leads to confusion. Others say that separate
> records are the way it should be, especially if there is some variation in either of the formats of the title. So we all have our opinions. But what about the user ? Is it really confusing to view one record which has multiple formats or does it make it simpler for the user to fetch ?
> Should Internet resources be added to the print record for the same work, or should have their own records ?
> Some colleagues such as the University of California have apparently
> decided to place electronic on one record with the print.
> Not established rules… While we have read little in the literature about the work record
> concept since the Toronto meeting, that seems to be what is sought in
> combining text and computer file in one record.
> Patrons are certainly
> served by having all holdings of a serial combined, but other advantages of
> combining formats in a single record seem to have other solutions, such as
> a note in each format record recording the existence of the other, as
> already mentioned.
> CONSER
> established a working group to recommend treatment of electronic resources.
> The full text of the working group recommendations, 'Single or
> Separate Records: What's Appropriate and When' is available at this web
> site:
> http://wwwtest.Library.ucla.edu/libraries/cataloging/sercat/conserwg/
>  
> This excerpt provides the proposed criteria for cataloguing electronic titles on a single record versus on a separate record.
> Here is LC's guidelines about Cataloging Electronic Resources :
> http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/elec_res.html
>  
> Here is University of California's Task Force on Electronic Resources report on
> cataloging of electronic resources :
> http://tpot.ucsd.edu/Cataloging/HotsElectronic/tfer.html
>  
> Classification of Internet Resources is online at:
>  http://slc.bc.ca/mac/net.htm
>  
> But very few libraries have the staffing to do original or
> copy cataloging for all the electronic resources that we would like to
> include in our catalogs, particularly if most of the work has already been
> done when the tangible resource was catalogued.
>  
> Conclusion :
>  
> It seems evident that until North American Librarians create indexed,
> browsable, classed files, and educate patrons in their use, the effort to
> assign class numbers to materials not requiring a call number for shelf
> placement will not appeal to some cataloguers. If it is wished to assign
> multiple class numbers and suppress them from public view as Charley
> suggests, than a MARC field for that purpose in needed in both MARC21 and
> in local systems. The two tags which have been so used are 089 and 699.
>  
> In the meantime, it will primarily be those libraries who have other
> uses for class numbers (such as collection development, bibliography
> production, and SDI services) which will assign classification numbers to
> Internet resources.
>  
> The present examples of single records for text and electronic resources
> are not composite records. Even with the addition of an 007 (physical
> description fixed fields) for the electronic resource, they are records for
> the print or other tangible form, with the electronic version noted. To be
> a combined record, there would have to be a compound gmd, e.g., "[text &
> computer file]", a second 300 with an smd such as "website", and a
> differing title for the computer file in 246 with identifying $i
> information. The 530 (additional physical forms available note) and 740
> (added entry for related or analytical title) imply that the computer file
> is a related work, which in fact it is. One could equally well add the 530
> and 740 to each of the separate records for the differing formats.
> Considerable further development is required to have a "work" record
> covering two or more manifestations. As has been suggested, there seems
> little reason to single out Internet resources for single record treatment
> with print versions, while other physical formats receive separate records.
>  
> But as long as patrons can tell from the holdings screen what volumes.
> are held and where they are, then that's what really matters…
>  
> 6) I also found some informations about a conference whiwh is about to be held in Austin : the ER&L10 Conference :
> Here is the website of the conference :
>  
> http://www.electroniclibrarian.org/ocs/index.php/erl/2010/schedConf
>  
> One of the topics of the meeting will be the problem of work flows, in the context of the integration of e-resources in libraries :
>  
> Relationships Inside the Library
> Many organizations have seen an "organizational shift," a change in work flows and management, to properly staff and manage e-resource in their libraries while other institutions have incorporated electronic resources work throughout the library just as work with print in distributed. How have workflows and personnel decisions changed? What type of leadership has helped create change? Where do we still need to open communications?
> * Workflows 
> * Leadership and collaboration
> * Collaborative relationships in e-resources delivery to users
> * Communications: intra-departmental communication, collegial and managerial communication issues.
> * Preparing personnel for change
> Kind regards,
>  
> Christine Mannaz / Michel Micraira
> Bibliothèque nationale de France
> Département sciences et techniques
>   
>  		 	   		  
> _________________________________________________________________
> Téléchargez Internet Explorer 8 et surfez sans laisser de trace !
> http://clk.atdmt.com/FRM/go/182932252/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>   