Technical Services Program Review
Blue Ribbon Committee
Working Group - Cataloging Revisits
February 1, 2001
Additions to the report:
- difficult to nail down procedures
- serendipitous items and issues were not addressed by report. There are things that bounce around and end up on someone's desk to solve. It is not always consistent whose desk it ends up on.
possible solution - training on handle situations
- not mentioned about electronic resources - no systematic URL checking; 856 field additions should be in report; cataloging not receiving paperwork to create or add records
- online documentation exists but does not cover all categories - monographic analytics, global maintenance
- processing - daily TCR reports - does not identify levels of staff, time spent on workflow
- have we clarified to library staff the concept of the Help Desk - what it does and does not do; not clear on purpose of Help Desk. Many things show up at the Help Desk without following established procedures
- rename Help Desk - sometimes confuse with ITD Help Desk; name it to reflect what you do
- global catalog maintenance - this will undergo radical change because structure of database may change
- does report identify who does clean up of monographic records - this is not clear from the report (local and global database - whoever knows how to do it does it)
- page 17, TCR's - rebarcodes - is this still done? will create new barcodes of old number or create new TCR; CATM then picks it up on TCR report and makes link
- there are lingering retrospective TCR's, especially in special collections, University College TCR
- revisits - clarify what the procedures are
- all serials in University College are revisit work - transfers, adds, withdrawals
Observations:
- lack of training and need for training
- one unit does not understand what another unit does
- not taking into account others who should be involved, the need to consult others who may be aware or have knowledge of issues
- flow charts don't flow - there is a lot going on; reflection that all doesn't flow smoothly; revisits are so broad it is hard to embrace the entirety
- revisits must deal with other campuses
- adds process - should be straight forward - why are faculty catalogers doing this? Curious about how this process is managed. [sometimes materials are not sort coded correctly; some ILS searching not being done in Acquisitions; training needed]
- are selectors searching the system before making selections? do selectors have access to series titles? [extra material may come in with a piece that was ordered (but not expected); should Acquisitions be the contact with selectors]
Parking Lot:
- supersede law books, page 29 - flyer indicates what should be done; delegate responsibility and clarify procedures; working group is recommending a PIT to work on this.
- creating and publishing documentation online; not all issues and procedures have been documented
- TSD web page - can be a barrier to finding information (this comment can fall under Do Differently discussion)
- clarify how many copies of a title we want or can have; this varies from branch to branch; confusion on MRF's about what to do, how many to add
- look at changes processes for authority control (as an interim before new system); once we know what we want to do begin interim steps
- title replaced with microfilm which has multiple titles on it that are now new and on same reel; can be a selectors issue for deciding whether titles should be cataloged
What must be or can be done differently?
- get more trained help
- supersedes - pull old materials off shelf and get them back to be processed correctly; suggestion that TSD take on this responsibility; or better cooperation with stacks staff
- take paperwork (slips) more seriously - gifts, withdrawals, etc.; does not seem that a lot of thought goes into filling out forms; filling out and interpreting forms
- overflow shelving - splitting up sets; sometimes difficult to find materials when they need to be retrieved
- consider having Acquisitions do monograph adds in ILS
- how will we handle reports with the new ILS? A lot of questions about how we can or will handle authority control issues; discussions just getting started. Improvements can be made in process
- can we move away from paper statistics? will the new system have ways of gathering and collating statistics?
- did any working group discuss bibliographic notification reports? This is not a workflow we need to deal with. Serials do show up so we know there has been a change. Would be time consuming to start dealing with this.
- have a conversation division wide or library wide about where to focus energy, take advantage of online system. Come to an agreement - be on the same page.
|
|
|
© 2001 University of Maryland Libraries
Last Revised: Feb. 5, 2001
|