Quick overview

All posts still in progress. If you have additions you want to suggest, please let me know in the comments or on twitter @schomj.

Thursday, September 19, 2013

Cataloging Assessment Bibliography


Full disclosure – this one is mine!
Schomberg, J. (2016). Examination of Cataloging Assessment Values Using the Q Sort Method. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 54(1), 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2015.1072864  
From the abstract “The intent of this project was to identify whether there is a gap between catalogers’ personal values related to cataloging assessment and their perceptions of their institutions’ values”

Research presented here is divided into the following categories: Quality control, Efficiency and production, Cost, Workflows/Organizational structure, Workplace culture, Usability, Training and development, Administrative, Other

Quality control
o   BalaguĂ©, N. (2009). Auditing the library's quality system. Library Management 30(4/5), 286-294. DOI: 10.1108/01435120910957940
o   BalaguĂ©, N. and J. Saarti. (2009). Benchmarking quality systems in two European academic libraries. Library Management 30(4/5), 227-239. DOI: 10.1108/01435120910957896
o   Brownell, E. (2014). Report of the ALCTS Technical Services Workflow Efficiency Interest Group Meeting, American Library Association Annual Conference, Chicago, July 2013. Technical Services Quarterly, 31(2), 179-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2014.875385
o   Fairclough, I. (2012). The effective use of e-mail lists and other projects to improve bibliographic data quality. Catalogue & Index, (169), 37-43.
o   Fairclough, I. (2013). Collaborative Initiatives in Error Handling and Bibliographic Maintenance: Use of Electronic Distribution Lists and Related Resources. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 51(1-3), 265-290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2012.719074
o   Khurshid, Z. (1997). The application of TQM in cataloguing. Library Management, 18(6), 274-279.  http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=858855
o   Kim, D. S. (2010). Using the balanced scorecard for strategic operation of the cataloging department. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 48(6-7), 572-584. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2010.496305
o   Kim, Y., Kim, E.-J. and M.G. Chung. (2010). A Six Sigma-based method to renovate information services: Focusing on information acquisition process. Library Hi-Tech 28(4), 632-647. DOI 10.1108/07378831011096286 
o   Mitchell, E. (2013). Assessing the value of metadata in information services. Technical Services Quarterly 30(2), 187-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2013.759828 Highly recommend -js.
o   Petrucciani, A. (2015). Quality of library cataloging and value of (good) catalogs. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 53(3-4), 303-313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2014.1003669 “Libraries are the social institution, the only social institution, having responsibility for the control, organization, communication, and preservation of information about the published output of human knowledge and expression. … Maybe it is better to do our own work (well), and not to ape (without much success) what others (mostly commercial operators for mass markets) already do.”
Radio, E. (2016). Semiotic principles for metadata auditing and evaluation. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 54(2), 117-135.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2015.1133750
o   Reeb, R. (1985). A quantitative method for evaluating the quality of cataloging. Cataloging and Classification Quarterly, 5(2)  http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J104v05n02_03
o   Schultz-Jones, B., Snow, K., Miksa, S., & Hasenyager Jr., R. L. (2012). Historical and Current Implications of Cataloguing Quality for Next-Generation Catalogues. Library Trends, 61(1), 49-82. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=80160905&site=ehost-live
o   Theimer, Sarah H. (2013). All metadata politics is local: Developing meaningful quality standards. In Jung-Ran Park, Lynne C. Howarth (ed.) New Directions in Information Organization (Library and Information Science, 7) Emerald Group, 229-250. DOI: 10.1108/S1876-0562(2013)0000007015
o   Susan L. Tsui and Carole F. Hinders, "Cost-Effectiveness and Benefits of Outsourcing Authority Control," Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 26, no. 4 (1999): 43-61. doi:10.1300/J104v26n04_04.  
o   Van Kleek, D., Langford, G., Lundgren, J., Nakano, H., Jai O'Dell, A. & T. Shelton. (2016). Managing bibliographic data quality in a consortial academic library: A case study. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 54(7), 452-467.
Efficiency and Production
o   Benaud, C.-L., Bordeianu, S. and M.E. Hanson. (2000). The quantification of cataloging. Technical Services Quarterly 17(3), 13-31.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J124v17n03_02 Abstract:point system to document cataloging output. The system measures cataloging production, cataloging support activities, and generic work activities” and allows for creation of a truly flexible work schedule.
o   Charbonneau, M. D. (2005). Production Benchmarks for Catalogers in Academic Libraries. Library Resources & Technical Services, 49(1), 40-48. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=502941583&site=ehost-live 
o   Dragon, P.,& Sheets Barricella, L. (2006). Assessment of technical services workflow in an academic library: A time-and-path study. Technical Services Quarterly, 23(4), 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J124v23n04_01
o   Fletcher, P. and R. M. Peck. (2013). Cataloging on receipt for monographs: Merging Cataloging and Acquistions functions at UCLA. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 51(1-3), 129-138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2012.731679 
o   McCain, C.,& Shorten, J. (2002). Cataloging efficiency and effectiveness. Library Resources and Technical Services, ]46(1), 23-31. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=502886573&site=ehost-live
o   Mugridge, R. L. and Poehlmann, N. M. (2015). Benchmarking as an assessment tool for cataloging. Technical Services Quarterly 32(2), 141-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2015.998465 From the abstract: “The authors developed a survey that gauged the respondents' use of benchmarking, their goals for benchmarking, and how they applied what they learned to make improvements.”
o   Practice, Power, and Promise of Archival Collections Assessment. (2012). RBM: A Journal of Rare Books, Manuscripts, & Cultural Heritage, 13(2), 100-112. From the abstract: “assess their special collections with the goal of reducing cataloging and backlogs, exposing existing collections and acquiring new ones… enables institutions to make decisions on how to serve the needs of users, allocate available resources and acquire funding”
o   Carrie Preston, “High Speed Cataloging Without Sacrificing Subject Access or Authority Control: A Case Study,” in Radical Cataloging : Essays at the Front, ed. K. R. Roberto (Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Co., 2008).
o   Tomlin, N. and Kandarasheva, I. (2014). Ready or not? : An assessment of shelf-ready materials management practices in US academic libraries. Library Resources & Technical Services 58(3), 152-167. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=97294510&site=ehost-live From the abstract: “Survey questions addressed topics such as the volume of shelf-ready materials, perspectives on shelf-ready expansion, the effect of local cataloging practices on shelf-ready services, the amount of cataloging and processing errors, and quality control.”
Cost
o   Charbonneau, M. D. (2005). Production Benchmarks for Catalogers in Academic Libraries. Library Resources & Technical Services, 49(1), 40-48. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=502941583&site=ehost-live  
o  Doran, C. & C. Martin. (2017). Measuring success in outsourced cataloging: A data-driven investigation. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 56(1), 1-11. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01639374.2017.1317309
o   Kont, K. (2015). How Much Does It Cost to Catalog a Document? A Case Study in Estonian University Libraries. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 53(7), 825-850. doi:10.1080/01639374.2015.1020463 From the abstract: “This article reviews the relevant literature to provide an overview of different cost accounting methods suitable for the measurement of the cataloging process. Then, through a case study conducted among Estonian university libraries, the TDABC approach was used to analyze the activities of cataloging process in two university libraries.”
o   McCain, C.,& Shorten, J. (2002). Cataloging efficiency and effectiveness. Library Resources and Technical Services, ]46(1), 23-31. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=502886573&site=ehost-live
o   Mitchell, E. (2013). Assessing the value of metadata in information services. Technical Services Quarterly 30(2), 187-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2013.759828 Highly recommend -js.
o   Siguenza-Guzman, L., den Abbeele, A. V., & Cattrysse, D. (2014). Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing Systems for Cataloguing Processes: A Case Study. Liber Quarterly: The Journal Of European Research Libraries, 23(3), 160-186. From the abstract “original and copy cataloguing are analysed through a case study to demonstrate the applicability and usefulness of TDABC to perform cost analysis of cataloguing processes”
o   Stalberg, E., & Cronin, C. (2011). Assessing the Cost and Value of Bibliographic Control. Library Resources & Technical Services, 55(3), 124-137.
o   Walker, C. H. (2011). Cost and value of bibliographic control. A report of the heads of technical services in large research libraries interest group ("big heads"), american library association annual conference, washington, DC, june 2010. Technical Services Quarterly, 28(2), 184-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2011.546264
Workflows/Org structure
o   Canepi, K. (2007). Work analysis in library technical services. Technical Services Quarterly, 25(2), 19-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J124v25n02_02
o   Guay, B., Bloch Shapiro, R., & King, D. (2014). Management of E-Resources Cataloging Workflows at the University of Maryland, College Park. Journal Of Library Innovation, 5(2), 29-51. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lxh&AN=99435159&site=ehost-live “This article will inform metadata services departments about the management of constantly changing electronic resources cataloging workflows and also discuss cataloging workflow as it pertains to Electronic Resources Management System (ERMS) development.”
o   Yue, P. W. (2013). Transforming Technical Services: A case study at the University of Nevada, Reno Libraries. Technical Services Quarterly 30(3), 253-265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2013.785774 Highly recommend – js.

Workplace culture
o   Benaud, C.-L., Bordeianu, S. and M.E. Hanson. (2000). The quantification of cataloging. Technical Services Quarterly 17(3), 13-31.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J124v17n03_02 Abstract:point system to document cataloging output. The system measures cataloging production, cataloging support activities, and generic work activities” and allows for creation of a truly flexible work schedule.
o   Benaud, C.-L., Steinhagen, Elizabeth N. and Sharon A. Moynahan. (2000). Flexibility in the management of cataloging. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 30(2-3), 281-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J104v30n02_08
o   Emily Drabinski, “Queering the Catalog: Queer Theory and the Politics of Correction,” The Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy 83, no. 2 (2013): 94-111.
o   Herrera, G., Cheng, D. T., Leslie, J., & Harry, T. (2006). Technical services cataloging and database maintenance assessment. Technical Services Quarterly, 23(3), 51-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J124v23n03_04
o   Hope A. Olson, “Patriarchal Structures of Subject Access and Subversive Techniques for Change,” Canadian Journal of Information & Library Sciences 26, no. 2/3 (2001): 1-29.
o   Hope A. Olson, “Sameness and Difference: A Cultural Foundation of Classification,” Library Resources & Technical Services 45, no. 3 (2001): 115-122. http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/gleazer/462_readings/olson_2001.pdf
o   Hope A. Olson and Rose Schlegl, “Standardization, Objectivity, and User Focus: A Meta-Analysis of Subject Access Critiques,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 32, no. 2 (2001): 61-80.
 o  Sassen, C., Welch, R. and Loafman, K. (2016). Assessment of cataloging services in an academic library. Technical Services Quarterly 33(1), 23-41.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2015.1093820 Abstract: "Personnel in Public Services and in Cataloging and Metadata Services were surveyed to determine how they rated the importance of various cataloging services, and to gauge their satisfaction with these services."
Usability
o   Elhard, K. C. and J. Qiang. (2004). Shifting focus: Assessing cataloging through focus groups. Library Collections, Acquisitions and Technical Services 28(2), 196-204. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1464905504000260
o   El-Sherbini, M., & Chen, S. (2011). An Assessment of the Need to Provide Non-Roman Subject Access to the Library Online Catalog. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 49(6), 457-483. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2011.603108
o   Hider, P. and K.-C. Tan. (2008). Constructing record quality measures based on catalog use. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 46(4), 338-361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639370802322515
o   Stalberg, E., & Cronin, C. (2011). Assessing the Cost and Value of Bibliographic Control. Library Resources & Technical Services, 55(3), 124-137. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=62969817&site=ehost-live
o   Wilson, V. (2015). Catalog users “In the wild”: The potential of an ethnographic approach to studies of library catalogs and their users. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 53(2), 190-213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2014.980022 From the abstract “Beginning with a discussion of the applied ethnographic method and its current usage within the field of Library and Information Science research, this article will assess methods that have traditionally been applied to studies of catalog users and present the case for the potential of an ethnographic approach for future catalog evaluation and design.”
o   Zavalina, O. L. (2014). Complementarity in Subject Metadata in Large-Scale Digital Libraries: A Comparative Analysis. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 52(1), 77-89. doi:10.1080/01639374.2013.848316 From the abstract “compares free-text and controlled-vocabulary collection-level subject metadata in three large-scale cultural heritage digital libraries”
o   Zhang, Y. and Salaba, A. (2012). What do users tell us about FRBR-based catalogs? Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 50(5-7), 705-723. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2012.682000 From the abstract: “draws from three user studies concerning FRBR-based catalogs: (1) user evaluation of three FRBR-based catalogs, (2) user participatory design of a prototype catalog based on the FRBR model, and (3) user evaluation of the resulting FRBR prototype catalog”
Training and development
o   Cabonero, D. A., & Dolendo, R. B. (2013). Cataloging and Classification Skills of Library and Information Science Practitioners in their Workplaces: A Case Analysis. Library Philosophy & Practice, 21. From the abstract: “Case analysis was used to five practicing librarians who graduated with the degree Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Library Science and Bachelor of Library and Information Science from the College of Teacher Education, Benguet State University (BSU).”
o   Park, J., Yuji, T., Maszaros, S., & Caimei, L. (2010). From Metadata Creation to Metadata Quality Control: Continuing Education Needs Among Cataloging and Metadata Professionals. Journal Of Education For Library & Information Science, 51(3), 158-176.
o   Park, J., & Tosaka, Y. (2010). Metadata Quality Control in Digital Repositories and Collections: Criteria, Semantics, and Mechanisms. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 48(8), 696-715. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2010.508711
o   Tosaka, Y., & Park, J. (2014). RDA: Training and Continuing Education Needs in Academic Libraries. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science, 55(1), 3-25. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lls&AN=93983863&site=ehost-live  From the abstract: “This study aims at gaining a better understanding of the current state and needs of RDA training among cataloging and metadata practitioners.”
o   Turner, A. H. (2014). RDA Training and Implementation at Duke University Libraries: Minimizing the Distraction. Journal Of Library Metadata, 14(2), 69-76. doi:10.1080/19386389.2014.909671 “a case study of training in and implementation of Resource Description and Access (RDA)”
Administrative
o   Chapman, J. (2012). Assessment 101. ALA Annual conference, Heads of Cataloging IG. http://www.academia.edu/3454423/Assessment_101
o   Chang-FitzGibbon, K. & J. Wang. (2017). In the spotlight: Technical services professionals in library-wide assessment. Technical Services Quarterly 34(2), 157-173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2017.1286845 
o   Dole, W. V., Liebst, A., & Hurych, J. M. (2006). Using performance measurement for decision making in mid-sized academic libraries. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 7(3), 173-184. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14678040610713138
o   Fischer, R., Lugg, R. and K.C. Boese. (2004). Cataloging: How to take a business approach. The Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances 17(2), 50-54. DOI 10.1108/08880450410536062
o   Miller, D. M. & Keenan, T. (2015). The time management study as a tool for new technical services managers. Library Leadership and Management 30(1) https://journals.tdl.org/llm/index.php/llm/article/view/7124  From the abstract “Time management studies are a simple tool for shedding light on work habits, time allocations, and labor expenditures. This is critical information for new managers, and can demonstrate whether priorities, assignments or workflows need to be redirected.”
o   Mugridge, R., & Poehlmann, N. M. (2015). Internal customer service assessment of cataloging, acquisitions, and library systems. OCLC Systems & Services, 31(4), 219-248. doi:10.1108/OCLC-12-2014-0037 From the abstract “The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that an internal customer service survey approach to assessment delivers many benefits to technical services and library systems units. Findings from such a survey provide the evidence needed to implement process improvements, conduct strategic planning and more. The survey used in this case study can be adapted by other libraries or library units to conduct assessment, gauge customer satisfaction and identify areas for process improvements.”
o   Mugridge, R. L. (2014). Technical Services assessment. Library Resources & Technical Services 58(2), 100-110. doi 10.5860/lrts.58n2.100 From the abstract: “This study was designed to explore assessment activities in Pennsylvania’s academic libraries. The author designed a survey to investigate whether technical services activities are assessed, how they are assessed, who is responsible for assessment, how the results of assessment activities are shared with others, and how those results are used to improve services or for other purposes.”
o   Sassen, C., Welch, R., & Loafman, K. (2016). Assessment of cataloging services in an academic library. Technical Services Quarterly, 33(1), 23-41. doi:10.1080/07317131.2015.1093820 From the abstract: “Personnel in Public Services and in Cataloging and Metadata Services were surveyed to determine how they rated the importance of various cataloging services, and to gauge their satisfaction with these services.”
o   Sierpe, E. (2004). Managing the information revolution: Library management, the control of prescriptive technologies, and the future of librarianship. Library Management (25)4/5, 177-182. DOI 10.1108/01435120410546059
o   Van Wyk, A.C. (1997). The development of performance indicators to measure cataloguing quality in the Technical Services Division of the Unisa Library with special reference to item throughput time.” Mousaion 15(2), 53-67. 
Uncategorized
o   Adamich, T. (2007). CE Cataloging and the school library as "Language set repository” using a MARC record for assessment. Knowledge Quest, 35(3), 56-62.
o   Flynn, M. (2010). From dominance to decline? The future of bibliographic discovery, access and delivery. World Library and Information Congress: 76th IFLA General Conference and Assemblyhttp://conference.ifla.org/past/2010/71-flynn-en.pdf
o   Flynn, M. (2011). From dominance to decline? The future of bibliographic discovery, access and delivery. Art Libraries Journal, 36(2), 33-36.
o   Panchyshyn, R. S. (2013). Asking the Right Questions: An E-Resource Checklist for Documenting Cataloging Decisions for Batch Cataloging Projects. Technical Services Quarterly, 30(1), 15-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2013.735951
o   Wong, E. (2012). Cataloging Then, Now, Tomorrow. American Libraries, 43(5/6), 52-54.