REPORT ON THE
SLAVIC CONTRACT CATALOGING
PILOT PROJECT
Executive Summary
Head, Cataloging Department
The Ohio State University
From: Magda El-Sherbini
Head, Monograph Cataloging
April 1, 1994
REPORT ON THE SLAVIC CONTRACT CATALOGING PILOT PROJECT
I. Introduction:
Several factors were involved in the decision to conduct a pilot project to send 100 books in Slavic languages to OCLC for original cataloging. In April of 1993, the Slavic language original cataloger resigned. Since then, no original cataloging of Slavic language materials has been done.
There is a backlog comprised of more than 25,000 titles in various Slavic languages and in various formats, including books, serials and microforms. The Ohio State University Libraries faces critical budget uncertainties as well as migration to a new online system (OhioLINK).
Nevertheless, the Cataloging Department maintains the responsibility to make these materials available to scholars. Therefore, we decided to send 100 Slavic titles from the backlog to OCLC TechPro, a reputable and nearby vendor of bibliographic services, for original cataloging to explore the viability of contract cataloging as a means of doing original cataloging.
We selected 100 titles at random from the backlog. To guide OCLC TechPro in the cataloging, we wrote detailed cataloging specifications that conformed to national standards and local practices and discussed these specifications with the OCLC project manager to assure the specifications were clear in their intent.
II. Evaluation of the Pilot Project on Three Dimensions
We identified three dimensions of critical importance to determining whether contract cataloging is a viable alternative to performing original cataloging in‑house.
These three are: A) the quality of the records produced by the vendor; b) the comparative costs for each method (catalog in‑house or outsourcing); and c) the utilization of Cataloging Department members' expertise in cataloging.
A) Testing the quality of records produced by the vendor.
During the process of cataloging by OCLC TechPro, we developed a test for determining the quality of records. Also, we specified criteria and developed a quality scale to measure the quality of records produced by OCLC.
We divided the evaluation process into three parts, to cover all the fields in the bibliographic records. Each part was evaluated by personnel with the requisite knowledge of the language, subject and/or cataloging rules.
We defined two types of errors.
1) We deemed errors occurring the fields in the records such as author, title and subject, which are used to access the record in the online system as critical.
2) We deemed errors occurring in fields in the record used to record information about the book as non‑critical because the information used to find the cataloging record in the catalog is in the access fields mentioned above.
In addition to the categorization of errors, a priori quality were set at 95% (for critical errors) and 90% for non‑critical errors) for determining the overall acceptability of records.
Critical errors:
The highest percentage of errors occurred when the uniform title field (240) was found to be lacking. The second highest percentage of critical errors occurred in the lack of sufficient subject headings. For two records, the OSUL subject analyst felt that further subject headings were needed in order to reflect the content of the books. In addition, typographical errors were found in one uniform title.
The uniform title as an access point is very important to OSUL patrons and we believe the quality can be brought up to an acceptable level through specific instructions to OCLC. In the case of translations, OCLC TechPro should search the OCLC database to find the original record and use that as a basis for creating a new record. This will ensure the uniform title is added to the record. In the case of subject headings, we believe that we can also instruct OCLC to provide an average of three subject headings per record to ensure adequate access by subject.
Non‑critical errors:
The highest percent of non‑critical errors occurred in the note fields for translations and can be corrected as mentioned above through specific instructions to OCLC. The second highest percentage of errors were typographical errors in various fields. Missing or misplaced diacritic also were found. We have mentioned to OCLC that they should improve their quality in transliterations and pay particular attention when placing diacritics.
The purpose of sending this pilot project to OCLC was to help both OCLC and OSUL understand each other's needs in original cataloging. OCLC TechPro designs their cataloging on the customer's needs. Sending a sample was helpful to further define cataloging specifications and it resulted in OSUL suggesting specific actions for OCLC.
B) Comparative Costs
In determining the costs of having a book cataloged by OCLC TechPro, we included the in‑house costs of handling and sending the books to OCLC in addition to the per book charge by OCLC. In determining the OSUL costs, we included the cataloger's salary as well as the costs for handling the books in‑house. The cost for OCLC TechPro cataloging is $31.64 per title as compared to the cost for OSUL of $56.32.
There are a number of reasons that we have higher costs than OCLC, including a shortage of equipment in the Cataloging Department and the wide range of responsibilities beyond cataloging that are handled by each monograph cataloger.
C) The utilization of Cataloging Department members' expertise in cataloging.
Professional original catalogers spend approximately 75% of their time on cataloging responsibilities, including original cataloging as well as complex problem solving, policy development, call number assignments, enhancing bibliographic records, policy development and national cataloging projects (NACO).
From this pilot project we have determined that we can confidently send individual books and serials to a vendor such as OCLC for acceptable cataloging. However, for complex bibliographic problem‑solving and related activities, the OSUL overall cataloging program still requires the in‑house expertise as is maintained in the Cataloging Department. In addition, the Cataloging Department requires appropriate language and subject expertise in the Department, or alternatively, access to such lang and subject expertise elsewhere in the Library.
III. Conclusion
Contract cataloging is a viable means of obtaining cataloging records for specific materials, in this case books in the Slavic languages. On the first dimension, the quality is acceptable with two exceptions, and in these specific cases where it is not, we believe the quality can be brought up to an acceptable level through specific instructions to OCLC.
The second dimensions shows the cost is less than OSUL's cost. On the third dimension of OSUL's need for in‑house cataloging expertise, the Cataloging Department is able to maintain sufficient cataloging and language expertise within the Department to handle complex problem solving and description of these materials while consulting as needed with the Slavic Studies collection manager for subject and bibliographic history of individual titles.
Therefore, we propose a one-year contract with OCLC for the cataloging of approximately 80 titles per month for FY 1994/95. During the year, there will be continuous sampling and monitoring of titles sent for cataloging to OCLC. The project will be evaluated as to the quality and cost of the cataloging and a decision made at that time on whether to continue sending books to OCLC for cataloging.
In acknowledgement, this report could not have been completed without the generous assistance from many members of the Cataloging Department at the Ohio State University and the OSU Slavic Center and East European Studies and its director. I personally would like to thank each and everyone who voluntarily participated in this study.
Back to Internal Reports
Back to Cataloging Department Homepage