An investigation into cataloguers’ experiences with RDA

Abstract

Cataloguing has been undergoing significant transformation for the last several years in order to keep up with the changing world of digital technologies, dramatically increasing the number of resources to be catalogued and data to be managed in such a way that would satisfy library users’ needs and expectations. Cataloguers had to face a shift in thinking about bibliographic data and consequently a shift in practice to the new cataloguing standard of Resource Description and Access. This research investigated cataloguers’ experiences with using RDA and the current issues they encounter and discuss while RDA is still being reviewed and shaped. It also documented and explored their opinions and concerns regarding understanding of theoretical concepts behind RDA and the new Library Reference Model. The investigation took place in a virtual environment of two of the most popular listservs dedicated to cataloguing and, in this way, allowed a direct and immediate access to opinions expressed by cataloguers around the world. In order to explore their experiences, a qualitative, based on elements of grounded theory, content analysis of archive and most recent posts was conducted and compared with the literature on the research done in the initial period after RDA implementation. The research results indicated some strong divisions among cataloguers and different levels of understanding of the changes being introduced. It also showed a potential paradigm shift in cataloguing, professional knowledge and mental flexibility required of cataloguers. Moreover, the significant amount of learning that cataloguers have had to and will have to undertake in the nearest future, suggests an inordinately important need for adequate training and dialogue between them and the RDA Steering Committee that would be led in a more comprehensible way to enable those who call themselves ‘average cataloguers’ understand the model better and become confident, rather than confused, practitioners.

Keywords

Cataloguing cataloguing listserv FRBR FRBR-LRM RDA

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acedera

(2014) Are Philippine librarians ready for Resource Description and Access (RDA)? The Mindanao experience. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 52(6/7): 600–607.

Bianchini

Guerrini

(2016) RDA: A content standard to ensure the quality of data. Italian Journal of Library & Information Science 7(2): 83–99.

Coyle

Hillmann

(2007) Resource Description and Access Cataloguing Rules for the 20th century (RDA). D-Lib Magazine 13(1/2).

Ducheva

Pennington

(2017) Resource Description and Access in Europe: Implementations and perceptions. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. DOI: 10.1177/0961000617709060.

Dunsire

(2017) Update on RDA. Presented at the Update on RDA Meeting, Edinburgh, 4 August 2017.

Frederick

(2016) Libraries, data and the fourth industrial revolution (Data Deluge Column). Library Hi Tech News 33(5): 9–12.

Gemberling

(2016) FRSAD, Semiotics, and FRBR-LRM. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 54(2): 136–144.

Gorman

(2016) RDA: The emperor’s new code. JLIS.it 7(2): 99–107. Available at: https://www.jlis.it/article/view/11565 (accessed 14 August 2018).

Hider

(2017) A critique of the FRBR user tasks and their modifications. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 55(2): 55–74.

10.

IFLA (2016) The Statement of International Cataloguing Principles. IFLA. Available at: https://www.ifla.org/publications/statement-of-international-cataloguing-principles (accessed 24 September 2017).

11.

IFLA FRBR Review Group (2016a) World-wide review of the FRBR-Library Reference Model, a consolidation of the FRBR, FRAD and FRSAD conceptual models. FRBR Review Group. Available at: http://www.ifla.org/node/10280 (accessed 7 August 2017).

12.

IFLA FRBR Review Group (2016b) FRBR-Library Reference Model. IFLA. Available at: https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frbr-lrm/frbr-lrm_20160225.pdf (accessed 7 August 2017).

13.

IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (1998) Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records: Final Report. UBCIM Publications. New Series Vol. 19. München: KG Saur. Available at: www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr.htm (accessed 30 September 2018).

14.

International Conference on Cataloguing Principles (1961) IFLA international conference on cataloguing principles (eds Chaplin

Anderson

), Paris, France, 9–18 October 1961. London: Bingley.

15.

JSC RDA (2014) Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA: RDA Discussion list. Available at: http://www.rda-jsc.org/archivedsite/rdadiscuss.html (accessed 11 December 2018).

16.

Kelley

(2016) Possible major changes afoot in the world of RDA. Technicalities 36(3): 14–17.

17.

Kozinets

(2010) Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. London: SAGE.

18.

Kuhn

(1970) Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd edn. London: University of Chicago Press.

19.

Lambert

Panchyshyn

McCutcheon

(2013) Resource Description and Access and Ohio Public Libraries. Public Library Quarterly 32(3): 187–203.

20.

Lubetzky

(1960) Code of Cataloging Rules: Author and Title Entry. An Unfinished Draft for a New Edition of Cataloging Rules. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.

21.

McGarry

Yee

(1990) Cataloging Conference Proceedings: A survey and comments. Library Resources and Technical Services 34(1): 44–53.

22.

Martell

(1981) The war of AACR2: Victors or victims? Journal of Academic Librarianship 7(1): 4–8.

23.

Maxwell

(2014) Maxwell’s Handbook for RDA: Explaining and Illustrating RDA: Resource Description and Access using MARC21. London: Facet.

24.

Moulaison

(2015) The expansion of the personal name authority record under Resource Description and Access: Current status and quality considerations. IFLA Journal 41(1): 13–24.

25.

Obille

KLB

(2012) AACR2 to RDA: A paradigm shift? Journal of Philippine Librarianship 32: 1–12.

26.

Park

(2009) Metadata professionals: Roles and competencies as reflected in job announcements, 2003–2006. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 47(2): 145–160.

27.

Park

Marion

(2009) Cataloging professionals in the digital environment: A content analysis of job descriptions. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60(4): 844–857.

28.

Perez-Lizano

(2016) Implementing Resource, Description, and Access in a time of change in the small academic library. Technical Services Quarterly 33(4): 353–370’

29.

Pickard

(2013) Research Methods in Information. 2nd edn. London: Facet.

30.

Randall

(2011) RDA: End of the world postponed? The Serials Librarian 61: 334–345.

31.

RDA Board (2016) Strategic priorities 2015–2020. RDA Steering Committee (RSC). Available at: http://www.rda-rsc.org/rdaboard (accessed 7 August 2017).

32.

Riva

Žumer

(2015) Introducing the FRBR Library Reference Model. In: IFLA world library and information congress, Cape Town, South Africa, 15–21 August 2015, pp. 1–7. IFLA.

33.

Saldaña

(2009) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

34.

Sanchez

(2011) RDA, AACR2, and you: What catalogers are thinking. In: Sanchez

(ed.) Conversations with Catalogers in the Twenty-First Century. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited, pp. 20–70.

35.

Sheridan

Butcher

(1979) A comparison between short and full entry catalogues at the City University Library. Catalogue and Index 53: 3–5.

36.

Slowinski

(2004) Reinventing Corporate Growth. Gladstone NJ: Alliance Press Management.

37.

Sprochi

(2016) Where are we headed? Resource Description and Access, Bibliographic Framework, and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records Library Reference Model. International Information & Library Review 48(2): 129–136.

38.

Standing Committee of IFLA Cataloguing Section and ISBD Review Group (2011) ISBD: International Standard Bibliographic Description. Berlin: De Gruyter Saur.

39.

Strader

(2017) From user tasks to user services: Placing the functional requirements for bibliographic records models into a larger framework. Technical Services Quarterly 34(4): 347–368.

40.

Tennant

(2007) Will RDA be DOA? Library Journal 132(2): 25–25.

41.

Tennant

(2017) Data designed for discovery. OCLC Research. Available at: http://hangingtogether.org/?p=5869 (accessed 9 August 2017).

42.

Tosaka

Park

(2013) RDA: Resource Description & Access – A survey of the current state of the art. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 64(4): 651–662.