[Eril-l] Detecting missing titles in vendor collection metadata

Wed Jan 2 11:12:40 PST 2019

One of the achievements I'm hoping will come out of the FOLIO project
eventually is an open-access shared knowledgebase that isn't
vendor-specific, so we all as a community can catch these kinds of
content/holdings problems and when we do, it benefits everyone, not just
the other customers of our particular knowledgebase product.  That's not
going to be the case in the first year or two of FOLIO, certainly, but it's
something to work towards.

Melissa Belvadi
Collections Librarian
University of Prince Edward Island
mbelvadi at upei.ca  902-566-0581
my public calendar
<http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=mbelvadi%40upei.ca&ctz=America/Halifax&mode=week>
Make an appointment <https://mbelvadi.youcanbook.me/> via YouCanBookMe

On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 12:24 PM J Siemon <jsiemon2002 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello, Kathleen,
> You asked " Do you mind my asking how you were able to detect the missing
> records?" [from the OCLC collection missing Sept 2018 titles from Oxford
> Scholarship Online]
>
> When I have free time (during semester breaks and summer), I will compare
> Knowledge Base data with data from vendors.  I use vendor spreadsheets from
> many sources.  The sales title-price lists are often the most current and
> complete.   Also I have checked vendor supplied back-end data, such as
>  vendor supplied MARC records, or vendor "support" supplied title lists.
> I've even screen scraped patron interface searches, and found titles not
> listed in the sales or back-end title lists.  I've used older entitlement
> lists kept by my library, checking for "perpetual" access, especially when
> my library has cancelled titles yet should have access to back issues.
>
> I usually select more expensive collections.  And I try to fix, or work
> with vendors to fix the problem, in a way that all libraries will receive
> the corrected data, when possible.
>
> Regarding software, I use Excel to compare different lists, and MARCedit
> to extract spreadsheets from bib records.  I've talked with others who use
> MS Access or OpenRefine.
>
> Overtime, as an ERIL community, we need to develop more systematic ways of
> monitoring and improving vendor and KB data.  In the five years I've been
> examining collection data, I've made progress on collections important for
> the libraries who employee me, yet there's a steep, trial-and-error,
> learning curve, and little written.
>
> (A significant problem which I've not had resources to tackle are journal
> previous titles when the vendor only supplies the current title.  One large
> vendor, Springer, only supplies current titles, and some other vendors
> too.  For example, the title Soviet applied mechanics =  Prikladnaya
> mekhanika (1966-1992) was picked up by Springer, and the title changed to
> International Applied Mechanics.  But Springer does not include "Soviet
> applied mechanics" in their metadata, so a patron with a footnote citation
> for an older article thinks our library does not have access; and even ILL
> for that article is difficult.  There are hundreds of Springer previous
> titles which are not discoverable.)
>
> Metadata for collections needs greater staffing, much discussion and
> cooperative work, and perhaps improved standards.   There's so much more to
> discuss, but I'll close with this quote from:
>
> Reengineering the Library: Issues in Electronic Resource Management,
> edited by George Stachokas. Chicago: ALA editions, 2018.
>
> "The development of community-managed knowledge bases is a very promising
> approach for the maintenance of an expanding volume of collection sites,
> eBooks, and other resources that are now taking a major portion of our
> acquisitions budget. …
> Libraries can be more successful in electronic resources management if
> they work toward the greater good. No single library or even a statewide
> consortium can meet the many demands of providing access to electronic
> resources. Libraries must be part of a larger initiative to combine our
> efforts a the national level, and preferably even at the international
> level." Richard Guajardo. p 56.
>
> All the best,
> Jeff Siemon, M.Div.,MLS  |  Assoc. Professor, Electronic Resources
> Librarian  |  Nicholson Library
> Anderson University  |  1100 E. Fifth St, Anderson, IN 46012 |
> josiemon at anderson.edu
> library.anderson.edu  |  www.linkedin.com/in/JeffSiemon
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 10:41:15 -0500
> From: Kathleen Folger <kfolger at umich.edu>
> To: J Siemon <jsiemon2002 at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org" <eril-l at lists.eril-l.org>
> Subject: Re: [Eril-l] OCLC collection missing Sept 2018 titles from
>         Oxford Scholarship Online
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAK6MXLXJKxz9FgOGrwe9Hd9wbJqo5WbR5VQmTqvrSZbhFbn1gg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Thanks very much for the message and the links to your presentations. I've
> been concerned about this issue as well, so I'm looking forward to delving
> into them.
>
> Do you mind my asking how you were able to detect the missing records? Do
> you have a process in place for comparing the number of records received to
> number of titles purchased? For the most part, we simply accept the records
> available and don't do a check to try to confirm we have records for every
> title included in a collection we've purchased. Often, especially for
> frontlist ebook packages, that information isn't even available from the
> publisher so we end up relying on our subject specialists or users to
> identify missing records. That's not a great strategy, so I'd be interested
> in hearing about ways others are trying to address the issue. Thanks!
>
> -Kathleen
> _________________________________________
> Kathleen M. Folger, Electronic Resources Officer
> University of Michigan Library
> 312 Hatcher North
> Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1190
> V:(734) 764-9375
> F:(734) 764-0259
> kfolger at umich.edu
> <kfolger at umich.edu>
>
> My pronouns are she, her, hers ? what are yours?
>
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 9:58 AM J Siemon <jsiemon2002 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > OCLC Knowledge Base collection Oxford Scholarship Online Religion =
> > OUP.osoReligion is missing the Sept 2018 Religion titles from Oxford
> > Scholarship Online, and three older titles.  OCLC and Oxford are both
> > excellent organizations, yet sometimes even reliable vendors make
> mistakes.
> >
> > This is a good example of a larger issue I've been discussing at
> > conferences for the last couple years.  Libraries need to devote
> > significantly more staff resources to reviewing collection metadata.
> > Libraries hire thousands of catalogers, who spend time reviewing MARC
> data
> > for *individual* titles.  I'm convinced that some of these people/staff
> > resources need to be reallocated to review the accuracy of *collection*
> > level data.  Book and journal budgets have shifted toward purchasing
> > collections of eResources (instead of individual titles).  Library
> staffing
> > needs to shift in a similar manner, toward reviewing and correcting
> > collection level metadata in addition to individual title data.  When
> > collection level data is wrong, tens, and sometime hundreds of e-books or
> > e-articles are not available to our patrons.
> >
> > I've contacted support staff at both organizations.
> > I don't know whether Oxford neglected to send this data or OCLC neglected
> > to load these titles.
> >
> > In any case more library staff need to be devoted to noticing these
> > collection level metadata issues, and trouble-shooting with vendors to
> make
> > the corrections.  See my article from the Charleston Conference, 2017,
> >  "You May Own It . . . But Can They Find It? A Panel Discussion: Part 3
> of
> > Panel Presentation: Collection-Level Cooperative Cataloging"
> > https://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284316663 or some of my presentations at
> > slideshare https://www.slideshare.net/jsiemon/presentations
> >
> >
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Jeff Siemon
> > _______________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> Eril-l mailing list
> Eril-l at lists.eril-l.org
> http://lists.eril-l.org/listinfo.cgi/eril-l-eril-l.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20190102/52198d46/attachment-0001.html>