(Apologies for cross posting)
The Library of Congress, the National Agricultural Library, and the
National Library of Medicine are pleased to issue a statement from the
Executives of the three libraries regarding the /Report and
Recommendations/ /of the U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee/ on the
implementation of /RDA---Resource Description & Access./ This statement
and the Executive Summary of the Committee's /Report and
Recommendations/ are being issued to allow interested parties sufficient
time to review prior to the upcoming Annual Conference of the American
Library Association in New Orleans, June 23 -28. The full /Report and
Recommendations /will be available prior the ALA Annual Conference on
the Testing Resource Description and Access Home Page:
http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/
An executive summary of the report is available now at:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/tsd/cataloging/RDA_report_executive_summary.pdf
The cover statement by the executives of LC, NAL, and NLM included below
is also available as a PDF file at:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/tsd/cataloging/RDA_Executives_statement.pdf
*Response of the Library of Congress, the National Agricultural Library,
and the National Library of Medicine to the RDA Test Coordinating Committee*
*/June 13, 2011/*
//
/Introduction/
When the Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control issued its
report, /On the Record/, on January 9, 2008, it introduced the findings
with these observations:
The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative,
decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based. Its realization
will occur in cooperation with the private sector and with the active
collaboration of library users. Data will be gathered from multiple
sources; change will happen quickly; and bibliographic control will be
dynamic, not static. The underlying technology that makes the future
possible and necessary----the World Wide Web----is now almost two
decades old. Libraries must continue the transition to this future
without delay in order to retain their significance as information
providers.
Most of the recommendations in the report call for changes in the
current bibliographic control system that will move libraries toward
this desirable future. One recommendation--3.2.5--was notable in that
it called for a suspension of work underway on RDA. The Working Group
suggested that further development work on Resource Description and
Access (RDA) be suspended until a business case had been articulated,
benefits demonstrated, and there had been better testing of FRBR
(Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) as it relates to RDA.
Work on RDA had been underway for several years, so a decision to
suspend it could not be made lightly. In March, Deanna Marcum,
Associate Librarian for Library Services at the Library of Congress, who
had commissioned the Working Group, convened her counterparts from the
National Agricultural Library and the National Library of Medicine to
discuss the entire report, but specifically asked for collaboration on
the response to the recommendation on RDA (3.2.5). After careful
deliberation the three national library executives issued a joint
statement on RDA.
The three principals from the three national libraries----Deanna Marcum,
SheldonKotzin, and Peter Young----accorded special consideration to
RDA, as it was the only international standard that had been developed,
and all agreed that whatever else one might think about the future of
bibliographic control, it would surely be an international endeavor.
They noted "RDA is an important international initiative that has been
underway and is one that requires continued collaboration with our
international partners who have joined with the United States in a
global initiative to update bibliographic practices to make library
resources more accessible and useful to users."
The Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine, and the
National Agricultural Library concluded that a thorough and rigorous
test of RDA was needed to answer questions about whether or not it
should be further developed and implemented. The three institutions
pledged to design jointly the test of the tool, to involve a broad
spectrum of the user community in carrying out the test, and to
disseminate the results of the test widely. The test was meant to
include an articulation of the business case and a cost analysis for
retraining staff and re-engineering cataloging processes necessitated by
a new code.
They also agreed to an optimistic resolution that if there were a
decision to implement RDA, implementation would not occur before the end
of 2009. They did not fully appreciate how involved the development of a
reliable test methodology would be, and the unavoidable delays that
would occur in issuing RDA.
/The RDA Test/
//
The three libraries named staff to work on the test methodology, to
carry out the test, and to make recommendations to the agencies'
executives based on the results. Perhaps the most important decision was
that the three agreed that they would make a joint decision whether or
not to adopt RDA.
On June 9, 2008, the members of the U. S. RDA Test Coordinating
Committee met for the first time. The dedication of the members of the
group cannot be adequately described (see below for " List of U.S. RDA
Test Coordinating Committee Members"). They met regularly--sometimes
weekly--to develop all of the criteria that would be used to make a
final recommendation. They enlisted twenty-six partners (including the
three national libraries) that represented many types and sizes of
libraries as well as archives, book vendors, systems developers, library
schools, and consortia. They carried out the test and analyzed the
results over a period of several months.
//
/Recommendation/
The most challenging task was to turn the test data into a single
recommendation for the three national libraries. There was no clear,
easy answer. RDA presents complicated issues for all libraries. *In the
final analysis, the RDA Test Coordinating Committee recommended that the
national libraries adopt RDA with certain conditions and that
implementation will not occur before January 1, 2013.*
/Statement from the Executives of the Three National Libraries/
Simon Liu (NAL), Sheldon Kotzin (NLM), and Deanna Marcum met on May 24,
2011 to review the report and to reach agreement on a response. They
agreed on the great importance of the work the Coordinating Committee
had accomplished, and they expressed deep appreciation for the
investment each member made to the overall effort.
The official statement is:
"We endorse the report, with the conditions articulated by the
committee. Even though there are many in the library community who would
like to see a single "yes" or "no" response to the question should we
implement RDA, the reality is that any standard is complicated and will
take time to develop. We also recognize that the library world cannot
operate in a vacuum. The entire bibliographic framework will have to
change along the lines recommended in the report of the Working Group on
the Future of Bibliographic Control. The implementation of RDA is one
important piece, but there are many others that must be dealt with
simultaneously. We especially note the need to address the question of
the MARC standard, suggested by many of the participants in the RDA
test. As part of addressing the conditions identified, LC will have a
small number of staff members who participated in the test resume
applying RDA in the interim. This will allow LC to prepare for
training, documentation, and other preparatory tasks related to the
further development and implementation of RDA.
The conditions identified by the Test Coordinating Committee must be
addressed immediately, and we believe that the Committee should continue
in an oversight role to ensure that the conditions are met. We have
discussed the Committee's recommendations with the Library of Congress
Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control. We will continue
to work closely with the Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic
Control to think about the overall direction of bibliographic control
and the changes that are necessary to assure that libraries are in the
best position to deliver twenty-first century services to users.
We believe that the long-term benefits of adopting RDA will be worth the
short-term anxieties and costs. The Test Coordinating Committee quite
rightly noted the economic and organizational realities that cause every
librarian to ask if this is the time to make a dramatic change in
cataloging. Our collective answer is that libraries must create linkages
to all other information resources in this Web environment. We must
begin now. Indefinite delay in implementation simply means a delay in
our effective relationships with the broader information community."
List of U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee Members: /Committee
Co-chairs/: Christopher Cole, National Agricultural Library, Jennifer
Marill, National Library of Medicine (January 2011--), Diane Boehr,
National Library of Medicine (Acting: June 2010-December 2010),
Dianne McCutcheon, National Library of Medicine (2008-May 2010),
Beacher Wiggins, Library of Congress; /Committee Members/: Barbara
Bushman, National Library of Medicine, Michael Esman, National
Agricultural Library, Judith Kuhagen, Library of Congress (December
2010--), Susan R. Morris, Library of Congress, Regina Romano Reynolds,
Library of Congress, Tina Shrader, National Agricultural Library,
Barbara B. Tillett, Library of Congress.
