Adjusting Cutter Numbers: Executive Summary Draft ( JANUARY 11, 1995)
I. THE CHARGE
The Cataloging Policy Advisory Council (CPAC) was charged with studying the existing copy cataloging shelflisting procedures in order to assess whether it is feasible to eliminate the procedure of reviewing and adjusting the cutter number when producing copy cataloging records. A change in this procedure will reduce processing time and costs.II. BACKGROUND ON THE EXISTING SHELF LISTING POLICY
The existing call number policy for shelf listing is to review all call numbers in order to verify: 1) the uniqueness of the cutter numbers; 2) the proper fit of the alphabetical order; and; 3) to apply the local practice.It is assumed that it is important to keep the call numbers unique. Strict alphabetical order under main entry on the shelves is in question and has to be studied. Local practices have been identified and they also need to be compared with the national standards and practices. If the local practices differ significantly from the national practices, their value should be assessed.
Some examples of the differences between local and national practices:
1)Translation:
It is the practice that whenever LC does not provide a special scheme for translations, the OSUL follows its own scheme. In a book titled the Middaq Aally by Najib Mahfuz, for example, the cutter number for a translation from Arabic to English was changed in the OCLC record from:
OCLC PJ7846 A46 Z4813 to
OSUL PJ7846 A46 Z481
2) Biography and autobiography:
OSUL policy for items for which LC slides the second cutter is to follow what is already established in the shelflist. In most cases this requires the addition of third cutter for main entry, but a few places in the shelflist will follow LC and use the sliding second cutter. If nothing has yet been established in the shelflist, OSUL policy is to add the third cutter. For example: In class P, where tables VIIIa and IXa apply, OSUL prefers Z5 for autobiography and Z8 for biography and criticism. If there are several autobiographies, Z52, Z53, etc. are used. Z8 is to be followed by cutter number for author of the biography or criticism. For example, the cutter number in the OCLC record for a biographical work on James Albert Michener was changed from:
OCLC PS3525 I19 Z73 to
OSUL PS3525 I19 Z8 C5
In this case the cutter number "Z73" in OCLC record was changed to "Z8" and the third cutter "C5" was added for the author of the biography
. 3) Criticism:
It is OSU practice to add "18" to the cutter number for works that are criticism of another literary author's works. For example: the cutter number of a work by John Kings on James Albert Michener's Centennial was changed on OCLC record from:
OCLC PS3525 I19 C434 to
OSUL PS3525 I19 C418
4) Selections:
It is OSUL local practice to add "17" to the cutter number if the book is a selection of an author's particular work. For example: the cutter number of a Selected Prejudices of Henry Louis Mencken was changed on OCLC record from:
OCLC PS3525 E43 P912 to
OSUL PS3525 E43 P817
III. METHODS
In order to address the points raised in the charge, the CPAC produced a list of questions which was sent to The Cataloging Policy Board (CPB). CPB devised a survey and asked copy cataloging to gather data over a period of one week. Only monographic records were included in the study.Information gathered by the survey can be grouped into four general categories:
1. Class, language, date of publication, location, record type, or record level in which the cutter number was adjusted or not adjusted.
2. Presence of the call number
3. Type of cutter number.
4. Reason for adjusting the cutter number.
. A total of 1,046 survey sheet were gathered. Results of the survey were loaded into the EXCEL spreadsheet. The SAS statistical package was used to analyze the data and produce statistical tables.
IV. THE DISTRIBUTION AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE
The tables in appendix "A" outline the distribution of the sample. A brief look at the Tables reveals that the sample is representative of the entire population of books cataloged in a year. The sample includes books from all languages, in all location libraries, dates of publication, and source of cataloging (e.g. DLC, member copies, etc.).
V. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA:
As I mentioned before, the size of the one week sample was 1046 records. The statistics indicate that there were 694 records (66.34%) that fit the shelflist with no adjustment to a cutter number. 288 records (27.53%) were adjusted to fit the shelflist alphabetical order and 64 records (6.11%) were adjusted to fit OSUL cataloging local practices.In analyzing these data, six questions were addressed on the distribution of changes and additions to the cutter. If the cutter number is no longer adjusted, we want to see if there are particular areas that will be effected and if some exceptions should be considered.
1) In which class was the cutter adjusted and what was adjusted?
The range of adjustment in the main entry was between 5% and 55%. In most classes, the cutter was adjusted to fit the shelflist alphabetical order. However in class P, especially PQ, PC, PL, PN, PQ, PR, and PS, most of the adjustments occur because of OSUL local practices. These local practices are: to follow the OSUL translation tables and to add the third cutter, the criticism or the biography number. There was no major adjustment in the personal, geographical, and topical cutter except in class P which was adjusted to follow OSUL local practices.
2) In which languages was the cutter adjusted and what was adjusted?
The changes occur across all languages without focusing on a particular language. The range of changes in the main entry cutter was from 3% to 55%. Most of the changes were made to follow the OSUL local practice. For example, in the English language records 23% were adjusted to add the translation, third cutter, biography, or criticism cutter number.
In Chinese language materials, 55% were adjusted because the LC classification was modified frequently. As a result, adjustment was made to group materials together under same subject headings with the same old classification number (Personal headings, geographic and topical headings). Another reason is that for many of the Chinese materials the main entry started with the letter "Ch". This required consultation of the shelflist to fit the cutter number. About 50% of the Chinese records required cutters because they are based on member copy, with various local cutter practices. The same applies to Japanese language materials, where 24% of the records were adjusted to accommodate local practices and proper order.
The remaining changes for cutter occur to fit the shelflist alphabetical order. In terms of geographical and topical cutters, there are no major changes or additions to the cutter number except to fit the shelflist alphabetical order.
3) For which imprint dates was the cutter adjusted and what was adjusted?
Proportionally, older materials (e.g. before 1979) require more adjustment than the post 1990 imprints. For example, in materials dated before 1979 the adjustment occurred in 43% of the records. In examining these records, it was discovered that majority of them are in the English language, in class PS and in the TRI (Theater Research Inst.) location. In materials post 1979, the adjustment was made in 57% of the records cataloged in this sample. Most of these adjustments occurred without focusing on particular locations, classes, or languages.
The study indicated that no major changes were made in topical and geographical cutter in any date of imprint.
4) In which location was the cutter adjusted and what was adjusted?
The changes in cutter happened across all location libraries. The range of changes in the main cutter was from 4% to 80%. Some locations required many changes. For example, changes were made to 80% of records for the books housed in the East Asian Studies, for the reason stated in question number 2.
The second highest percentage of changes (78%) happened in the records located in the TRI library. The reasons for these changes is that the books cataloged for TRI are plays, which fall into the literature category, in which the cutter number is frequently adjusted to fit the OSUL local practice. Another reason for frequent cutter changes is the age of materials. Since many of the TRI materials are old and cataloged much earlier, existing cataloging records call for modification of the cutter number to fit the shelflist order. For example: A cutter number of a play authored by Mabel Margaret Cowie Clark was changed on the OCLC record from:
OCLC PR6005 L32 H4 to
OSUL PR6005 L36 H4
The reason for changing the author number is that the author number was established earlier in the OSUL shelflist as "L36". This practice explains why the percentages of adjusting the cutter number in class PS (47%) in the personal cutter and in the pre-1979, (43%) books were relatively high.
The third highest percentage of changing the cutter occurred in the material located in the MAP room. The reason is that most of the cutter numbers for map records had single digits and in order to make room for additional digits, the cutter number was expanded. For example, the cutter number of a map was changed in OCLC record from:
OCLC G876 L3 to
OSUL G876 L34
In this case the cutter number fits the shelflist order, but another digit (4) was added to expand the cutter number for future titles starting with the letter "L".
In 50% of the books housed in the Music library the cutter number was changed. The reason was that in the past, in addition to the composer number, the Cataloging Department used another cutter by the title of the book. Later, the policy of shelflisting changed and we no longer used the second cutter. This had an adverse impact on the shelflisting process, requiring fitting a single cutter into a double cutter number. No major changes were needed for the geographic and the topical cutter numbers.
5) In which record type was the cutter adjusted and what was adjusted.
Record source tables indicate that most of the changes in the cutter number were made for records supplied by member libraries (29%), followed by records provided by Library of Congress (17%). There are no major changes in the geographic and topical cutter numbers.
6) In which record level was the cutter adjusted and what was adjusted?
There were changes in all record levels, but records which are encoded as levels "L" (which is a tapeload from RLIN to OCLC) and "7" (which is minimum level cataloging done by the Library of Congress) had the majority of the changes in the cutter number (33%). These were done to fit the shelflist order. Changes to records encoded level "I" (full LC record) were done to follow local practice.
VI. SOME GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND SUMMARY:
In the entire sample of 1046 records, the cutter numbers were accepted as is in 694 records (66%) . In 288 records (27.53%) the cutter numbers were adjusted to fit the shelflist alphabetical order, and in 64 records (6.11%) the cutter numbers were adjusted to fit the OSUL local practices. The following paragraphs will provide some explanations and examples of changing the cutter numbers to fit the shelflist order, and to follow local practices.A) Changing the cutter to fit the shelflist order:
As mentioned before adjustments to the cutter numbers occurred in 288 records across classes, languages, locations, and levels of cataloging. These cutters were adjusted to keep the books on the shelves in alphabetical order and to facilitate browsing by the patrons.
Some examples of changing the cutter to fit the shelflist alphabetical order are:
OCLC LB 2825 B428 OSUL LB 2825 B39
OCLC LB 2825 B434 OSUL LB 2825 B4
OCLC LB 2825 B44 OSUL LB 2825 B44
OCLC LB 2825 B55 OSUL LB 2825 B5
OCLC LB 2825 B678 OSUL LB 2825 B67
OCLC LB 2825 B722 OSUL LB 2825 B73
These six examples were taken from the shelflist card catalog to examine how the cutter number was changed in OCLC records and why. In all examples quoted above, the cutter numbers found in the OCLC records corresponded to those in the shelf list. No adjustments were required.
Adjusting cutter for alphabetical order does not always produce desired results. Despite the efforts by the Cataloging Department, strict alphabetical order is not always achieved. Some books are not in order due to changes in the shelflist procedures and limitation of the old on-line system (LCS) in dealing with complicated cutter number (e.g. when the cutter number is more than three digits).
B) Changing the cutter number to follow OSUL local practices:
We also examined 64 records (6.11%) in which the cutter numbers were adjusted to fit the OSUL local practice. Although OSUL follows the Library of Congress cataloging practices, it has also established other local practices. Some of them have been established to meet the limitations of the old LCS system and are listed in the old LCS manual, while other practices have been established for no discernible reason.
Comparison of OSUL local practices and the Library of Congress' practices indicates that the OSUL does not follow completely LC practices. For example OSUL does not cutter for collected prose works, polyglot language publications, periodicals, society publications and serials. In cuttering for separate works, autobiography and general works, OSUL uses its own cutter numbers. In general works, OSUL adds a third cutter for the main entry.
OSUL established its own translation numbers by modifying and expanding the Library of Congress cutter numbers. OSUL also expanded the use of the LC translation tables. The Library of Congress did not expand the translation numbers, because in some classification schedules translations are designated with the caption By language A to Z, and the date. In these cases, one should cutter for the specific language by using .E5 for English, .F7 for French, etc. Example for translation:
The cutter number changed on OCLC records for an English language translation of Erich Maria Remarque's work from:
OCLC PT2635 E68 I513 to OSUL PT2635 E68 I513
In other cases, the OSUL has also established another local practice that differs from other libraries, particularly the Library of Congress. If the book is a part of something, or an adaptation, the OSUL adds ".x17" to the cutter number. If the book is a work of criticism, they add ".x18" to the cutter number.
Example for a criticism:
The cutter number was changed on OCLC record for Erich Maria Remarque by Richard Arthur Firda:
OCLC PT2635 E68 I5 to
OSUL PT2635 E68 I518
Although the number of records in which the cutter numbers have been adjusted for local practice is very small, it takes much time to determine if the book requires cutter change or addition. Also it takes time to change/add/delete a number from the cutter to accommodate the local practices. Since the LC practice of adapting uniform standards seems to satisfy their users, it seems reasonable to assume that this practice can be employed at the OSU Libraries.
VII. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM OTHER LIBRARIES
Additional information was gathered through an informal survey of other libraries, posted to the AUTOCAT listserv. The following questions were asked:1. How do you ensure that the call number for each title is unique?
2. Do you review every call number to fit the shelf list order, or do you accept call numbers as they are on the bibliographic record?
3. If you don't do shelflisting, what is the impact on the access to the book by patrons?
Seven libraries responded to the questions. In regard to the first question, one library mentioned that they add a digit to the OCLC call number to make it unique; two respondents indicated that they check the shelf list to make each title unique, while four indicated that they accept the call number as it is.
In regard to the second question, four libraries don't review every call number. One library reviews call numbers only for literary works. Two libraries review all books to fit the shelf list order.
In reference to the third question, some librarians indicated that the importance of shelf listing varies from class to class. In literature, for example, alphabetical order may be important, whereas in the sciences, date of publication is more important than alphabetical order.
VIII. DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
After discussion of the Adjusting Cutter Numbers report among the CPAC members, the group recommended that OSUL:1. Continue to adjust cutter numbers in class "P", for musicians in class "M" and for artists in class "N" to put new items in online shelflist alphabetical order.
2. In all other cases, accept complete call numbers as they appear on copy.
3. Add an "x" at the end of the cutter number to ensure that every item is given a unique call number within the OSU library system .
4. Add the date of publication for all materials if not presented in the call numbe.r
Examples: HD2345 C3x 1994
HC2456 C4 E4x 1994
IX. IMPACT ON THE USERS
1) The impact on the user's capability to browse successfully is expected to be minimal. Browsing involves a review of a large section of books and not searching for a specific call number or item. Our recent study revealed that changes made to cutter numbers (i. e, adding or deleting digits to fit OSU's alphabetical sequences) were minimal both in the frequency of changes made and the extent of any single changes. In other words, items on the same topic will continue to be in close proximity on shelves although sometimes out of strict alphabetical sequence. The existence of items that were properly classed but which lacked an adjusted cutter number doesn't prevent users from getting access to them. For example, the main entry Mason was cuttered HD 2345 M45 while Moore was cuttered HD 2345 M43, which means the book by Mason is shelved after the book by Moore instead of before.2) By making exceptions, the cutter number of books in class M, N, and P will retain consistent cutter numbering as much as possible given the existing shelflist.
3) The probability of duplicating call numbers is minimal because LC and other libraries are continuing to assign unique call numbers to new cataloging and OSUL will add an arbitrary "X" and the date of publication to all call numbers to distinguish them from numbers already in use.
X. IMPACT ON THE CATALOGING WORK FLOW
1) Reduction of the amount of time and number of processing steps when using existing bibliographic records from OCLC as the basis for cataloging a book.2) Exceptions for classes M, N, and P will result in special requirements on the work flow.
XI. DECISION AND IMPLEMENTATION
Recommendations from CPAC will be submitted to Jennifer Younger, the Assistant Director for Technical Services.APPENDIX A:
Distribution and characteristics of the sample:Table I indicates that the sample included all LC classes. Approximately two thirds of the sample was grouped in 4 classes, with the remainder distributed evenly among the rest of the classes. Class P is represented with the highest portion of the sample (34.1%), followed by class D (11.9%), class H (11.6%), and class B (10.3%).
Analysis of the distribution by language (Table II) indicates that the sample includes all languages currently acquired by the library. English language materials represent the highest number of record (57.5%), followed by Arabic language (7.4%), and Persian (6.8%)
The publication date table (Table III) follows expected patterns. The years 1990 to 1994 account for nearly 80% of the sample. The largest percentage of records in this sample is 1994 (33.3%),followed by 1993 (20.8%), 1992 (13.7%), and 1991 (8.2%). The significant percentage of older materials (8.9%) from the years 1872-1979 represents materials from the backlog, which were also included in the study.
Table IV shows that more than half of all books in the sample were cataloged for the Main Library (54.8%). The remainder of the sample is distributed fairly evenly among the remaining campus locations. Charvat comes in the second place as of number of books cataloged (6.6%). The third highest percentage is Business Library (4.1%), Education Library (3.7%), and Science Engineering Library (3.6%)
Table V indicates that the Library of Congress is the single largest source of copy cataloging. DLC record types represents the largest percentage (49.9%), Member record types takes second place (42.6%), and CIP record types (9.0%).
Table VI represents the distribution patterns according to the encoding level. Encoding level "blank", which is full level LC cataloging and represents the most complete record, indicates the largest percentage of records cataloged in this week (41.9%).Encoding level I, which indicates that the record was entered by an OCLC participating library and represents full or complete cataloging, occupied the second largest percentage (34.8%). Encoding level "8", Cataloging in Publication (CIP) which indicates that the cataloging information is printed in the published item and which also indicates that the CIP record is missing some information such as the physical description, represents the third largest percentage (14.1). Encoding level "M", which indicates less than full cataloging from member libraries added to OCLC from tape, represents a low percentage (6.3). Most of the encoding level "M" records lack the LC call number.
Table VII indicates that (93.4%) of books cataloged in this week have a call number. The majority of these records are DLC, with some being member library records and CIPs. The table also indicates that 6.6% of these records did not have a call number and the call number has to be assigned locally. Most of these records mentioned in the record level types are tape loaded from non-OCLC members and lack the call number.
Prepared by Magda El-Sherbini DRAFT: 1/11/95
Last revision: February 13, 1998.
Return to Technical Services Documentation menu.
Cataloging Department Home