Journey to Single BIB

1. Journey to Single BIB Jane Anne Carey Metadata Resource Management Librarian University of Florida Libraries jacarey@ufl.edu Catalog Management Interest Group January 8th, 2011

2. The Journey to Single BIB “I hold the world but as the world, A stage, where every man must play a part” The Merchant of Venice, William Shakespeare

3. The Company of Players State University System Libraries of Florida (SUS or SUL) • Florida A&M University (FAMU) • Florida Atlantic University (FAU) • Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU) • Florida International University (FIU) • Florida State University (FSU) • New College of Florida (NCF) • University of Central Florida (UCF) • University of Florida (UF) • University of North Florida (UNF) • University of South Florida (USF) • University of West Florida (UWF)

4. The Technical Crew Florida Center for Library Automation (FCLA) “provides state-of-the-art, cost-effective information technology to assist the libraries of the public universities of Florida in their support of teaching, learning, research and public service. More specifically, implement and centrally support high quality computer systems that help the libraries acquire, manage and provide access to information resources.” http://fclaweb.fcla.edu/

5. The Stage Aleph, shared Integrated Library System (ILS) created by Exlibris Staff functions supported by FCLA include circulation, acquisitions, cataloging, course reserves and database maintenance. We are currently on Version 19 of the Aleph software.

6. The Producers Council of State University Libraries (CSUL) Composed of the Deans and Directors of the SUS Libraries and FCLA

7. The Directors Technical Services Planning Committee (TSPC) A committee created by the CSUL in 1995 to: Plan, create, and implement tools and processes for intellectual access to SUL Collections; analyze and assess current practices, policies, and procedures for technical services activities; recommend new and improved levels of service; coordinate with other CSUL committees on issues of mutual interest; advise the CSUL regarding trends in technical services.

8. The Play The Journey to Single BIB – Phase 1 – 2010 An exciting adventure tale full of danger, committees, surprises … and tedium

9. Pre-production timeline Since early 2008 subcommittees TSPC have discussed the possibility of having a shared bibliographic record architecture and sent forward a report to that effect to the CSUL in August of 2008.

10. Points in favor of a single bibliographic record: • Unmediated borrowing can be instituted (Uborrow). • Simplification of shared storage maintenance. • Possibility of shared authority work. • Shared database maintenance. • A smaller bibliographic database. • Full and partial updates of discovery tool will be much faster and more efficient. • Record displays in the discovery tool will be cleaner since minor variations in headings will be eliminated that now lead to apparent duplication of name and subject fields.

11. Points against having a single bibliographic record: • Loss of some local data – particularly Special Collections • Loss of local autonomy in catalog construction. • Greater need for coordinated database maintenance. • Proprietary records will require special handling and may require considerable vendor negotiation and in some cases extra money expended in order to include them in a statewide database. • There has not been a statewide standard for cataloging. This has led to divergent cataloging practices, the consequences of which are now manifested in the current union view record. Permanently merging the records would mean that there would be no way to fix some of these problems.

12. Pre-production timeline On the strength of that report, CSUL created the Single Bibliographic Record Task Force (SBTF) to investigate the steps needed to create an effective merged ILS.

13. Pre-production timeline They in turn created the Single Bibliographic Pilot Project (SBPP) composed of the chairs of the catalog departments of the three largest libraries (University of Florida, Florida State University, and University of South Florida) and representatives from FCLA

14. Pre-production timeline In the spring of 2010, TSPC formed the Statewide Standards for MARC Records Advisory Group to draft guidelines for cataloging in a shared bibliographic environment. Representatives were from UF, FSU, USF, UCF, NCF, and FCLA. The final draft was submitted in June 2010 and was finalized in September 2010.

15. Out of Town Tryouts - SBU In May 2010, under Phase 1.1, FCLA created a test catalog (SBU) of the merged records of the three largest libraries. At each library, catalogers familiar with serials and special collections materials looked at it to gauge the results. A second merge in November opened the field to more investigators.

16. Bib Tag Options - SBU 1. If not found add it, only one tag from latest record kept, no duplicates, for non-repeatable fields. 2. All unique tag content is kept, all have $5 added. 3. All unique tag content is kept, no $5s added. 4. None kept, drop all occurrences. 5. Use longest field. 6. Use most complete field (008)

17. Dictionary of Scientific BiographyOCLC # 00089822 • 2600 $a New York, $b Scribner $c 1970-1990 $5 FU • 2600 $a New York, $b Scribner $c [1970-1980] $5 FTS $5 FU • 2600 $a New York, $b Scribner $c [1970- $5 FTaSU • 300 $a 14 v. $b illus. $c 29 cm. $5 FU • 300 $a 16 v. $b illus. $c 29 cm. $5 FTS • 300 $a v. $b illus. $c 29 cm. $5 FTaSU • 300 $a 18 v. $b illus. $c 29 cm. $5 FU

18. But I didn’t come today… Correcting legacy problems: • OCLC reclamation project - Since 2009, UF has been working with OCLC on a reclamation project to match UF records to holdings on OCLC’s WorldCat • BIB tags – since January 2010 UF staff have been working on a project to clean-up incorrect record tags

19. Act 1: OCLC reclamation project OCLC processed over 3,392,000 records 89% were reconciled 375,000 unresolved

20. Act 1: OCLC reclamation project • =LDR 00331nam 2200157K 4500 • =001 002987355 • =004 UFAPM9211001 • =005 20071024162800.0 • =008 021008q19501959xx\\\\\\\\\\\\00000\\\\\d • =035 9\$aAPM9211$bUF • =049 \\$aFUG{dollar} • =099 \\$a39h12717 • =245 00$aLITTLE RED RIDING HOOD. • =260 \\$c1955. • =951 \\$lFUG

21. Act 1: OCLC reclamation project

22. Act 1: OCLC reclamation project Serial Solutions (97 records) – Ignore - should not have been included in OCLC reclamation OCLC dup (110) – Print OCLC # on BIB and Microfilm OCLC # on Holding – most prints suppressed – download microfilm record Circ created (1,080) – Ignore – will be corrected when item cataloged NTIS (1,107) – Mark as provisional Suppressed (1,223) – Spot check then ignore – never should have been included CarP (3,391) – Aleph service to determine if OCLC numbers – bring in new records – future project to catalog remaining. ETD (3,791) – ETD experts in Main Campus and Health Center added OCLC numbers to all and updated OCLC

23. Act 1: OCLC reclamation project Marchive (6,320) – Ignore the 83% suppressed and future staff project on the rest No Hol (14,568) – Ran a Global Change service in Aleph to Suppress the BIBs English Short Title (26,351) – Probably ignore – still checking on status Congressional Info Service (29,751) – Microfiche not requested – discussion with the Legal Information Center as to whether to suppress all the records 18th C Collections (120,061) – Probably ignore – still checking on status Undefined (167,297) – Find out how many are suppressed – then run an Aleph service get a picture of which have OCLC #s, ticklers TKR, and Location

24. Act 2 - BIB Tags University of Florida: 1,787 tags with associated records • 924 under 20 records • 461 under 1,000 records • 300 under 100,000 records • 75 under 1,000,000 records • 27 over 1,000,000 records

25. Remember those Tag options? 1. If not found add it, only one tag from latest record kept, no duplicates, for non-repeatable fields. 2. All unique tag content is kept, all have $5 added. 3. All unique tag content is kept, no $5s added. 4. None kept, drop all occurrences. 5. Use longest field. 6. Use most complete field (008)

26. Act 2 - BIB Tags 855 tags correct: • 246 under 20 records • 278 under 1,000 records • 240 under 100,000 records • 65 under 1,000,000 records • 26 over 1,000,000 records

27. Act 2 - BIB Tags 932 found to be incorrect Staff corrected 710 tags: Individual records – 1800 records with 635 tags Global changes – 1,183,064 records with 75 tags 222 tags left to be handled by UF staff or FCLA

28. Act 2 - BIB Tags Examples of strange tags: • 02823 • 033 1 • XXX14 • A Se • KR1 • 008C: • .S84 • ??? • 019## • 041(? • UFCOP • UFSCI • UPD • V40 Why can’t they type TKR? • TKE • TKP • TKR$$ • TKR@@ • TKRo • TKR1 • TKR31 • TKRR • TKS • TKT • TLR • TRK

29. Act 2 - BIB Tags FCLA Global Changes: Finished: Tag 2600 – 1,408,168 records FCLA removed 1st indicator 0

30. Act 2 - BIB Tags FCLA future changes: 100, 110, 111 – change 2nd indicator to blank 100, 600, 700 – change 1st indicator from 2 to 1 700, 710, 711 – change to blank any 2nd indicator not 2 Possible changes: 730, 740 – change to blank any 2nd indicator not 2 440 – change to 4901 & 830 0?

31. Finale “A little work, a little playTo keep us going—and so good-day!” Trilby George du Maurier

32. Coming Attractions Phase 2 - 2011 • Items - linked correctly • Use of the Aleph clients to edit bib, holdings and items • Union and SUL catalogs based on the shared bib. records • Permissions - merged into one file • Ability to run cataloging Services, Aleph reports • Acquisitions workflow (services/reports) • Batch Loading • Merged Authorities • Circulation functions • UBorrow • Reserves • Analysis Data Warehouse and ARROW reports • Test merge of all 11 databases • Upgrade Aleph to version 20