Roman S. Panchyshyn, Frank P. Lambert, Sevim McCutcheon
{"title":"Resource Description and Access Adoption and Implementation in Public Libraries in the United States","authors":"Roman S. Panchyshyn, Frank P. Lambert, Sevim McCutcheon","doi":"10.5860/LRTS.63N2.119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study surveyed the current state of knowledge about, and application or use of, Resource Description and Access (RDA) among American public library catalogers. In 2017, an online survey request was e-mailed to four thousand libraries for the person or persons most responsible for cataloging to complete the questionnaire. More than three hundred libraries responded. The data expose serious concerns with RDA adoption within the public library sector. While a majority of catalogers know about RDA, their working knowledge about it differs substantially depending on whether they work in rural or urban library settings. Regardless, 22 percent of respondants still had not heard of the RDA standard until completing this survey. While further training and educational opportunities (along with funds) for catalogers nationwide would help minimize this disparity, LIS schools also can play a role by educating more thoroughly the next generations of catalogers in this newer descriptive standard. Coming on the brink of a shift in the theoretical framework of the RDA standard, from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model to the IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM), public library catalogers risk falling even farther behind in their knowledge and competency with the RDA standard.","PeriodicalId":18197,"journal":{"name":"Library Resources & Technical Services","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Library Resources & Technical Services","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/LRTS.63N2.119","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
This study surveyed the current state of knowledge about, and application or use of, Resource Description and Access (RDA) among American public library catalogers. In 2017, an online survey request was e-mailed to four thousand libraries for the person or persons most responsible for cataloging to complete the questionnaire. More than three hundred libraries responded. The data expose serious concerns with RDA adoption within the public library sector. While a majority of catalogers know about RDA, their working knowledge about it differs substantially depending on whether they work in rural or urban library settings. Regardless, 22 percent of respondants still had not heard of the RDA standard until completing this survey. While further training and educational opportunities (along with funds) for catalogers nationwide would help minimize this disparity, LIS schools also can play a role by educating more thoroughly the next generations of catalogers in this newer descriptive standard. Coming on the brink of a shift in the theoretical framework of the RDA standard, from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model to the IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM), public library catalogers risk falling even farther behind in their knowledge and competency with the RDA standard.
本研究调查了美国公共图书馆编目员对资源描述与存取(Resource Description and Access, RDA)的知识现状、应用或使用情况。2017年,一份在线调查请求通过电子邮件发送给4000家图书馆,由最负责编目的人完成调查问卷。300多家图书馆做出了回应。这些数据暴露了公共图书馆部门对RDA采用的严重关切。虽然大多数编目员都知道RDA,但他们的工作知识却因他们是在农村图书馆工作还是在城市图书馆工作而大不相同。尽管如此,22%的受访者在完成这项调查之前仍然没有听说过RDA标准。虽然为全国编目人员提供进一步的培训和教育机会(以及资金)将有助于减少这种差距,但美国的学校也可以发挥作用,用这种新的描述标准对下一代编目人员进行更彻底的教育。RDA标准的理论框架即将从《书目记录功能需求》(FRBR)模型转变为国际图联图书馆参考模型(LRM),公共图书馆编目员在RDA标准的知识和能力方面面临着进一步落后的风险。
期刊介绍:
Library Resources & Technical Services (LRTS) is a peer-reviewed journal that takes a critical approach to the questions and challenges facing librarians and libraries with regard to: Collections Scholarly communication Preservation (including digitization) Acquisitions (including licensing and economic aspects of acquisitions) Continuing resources Cataloging (including descriptive metadata, authority control, subject analysis, and classification)