Resource Description and Access Adoption and Implementation in Public Libraries in the United States

IF 0.6 4区 管理学 Q3 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Library Resources & Technical Services Pub Date : 2019-04-24 DOI:10.5860/LRTS.63N2.119
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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国公共图书馆的资源描述和获取采用与实施
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。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Library Resources & Technical Services
Library Resources & Technical Services INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
20.00%
发文量
25
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)
期刊最新文献
Core Competencies for Cataloging and Metadata Professional Librarians: Assessment of Community Use and Recommendations for the Future of the Document Evaluating Purchase Plans for Niche Collecting Areas The Work in Question Book Review: Making the Most of Your ILS: A User’s Guide to Evaluating and Optimizing Library Systems Book Review: Taxonomies: Practical Approaches to Developing and Managing Vocabularies for Digital Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1