Megan:
I think you have it absolutely right.
One of our big problems with making a transition to RDA is that we do
not yet have tools to manage our data using RDA, and so it's difficult
to visualize how the different approach to data will change what
catalogers do (and what libraries do, which is part of the issue).
We will need different skills to do the work (not just cataloging, but
planning, training, etc.), and a better basic understanding of what's
going on outside of libraries in regards to bibliographic data. Sadly,
those who see only the downside of this change are not seeing the
opportunities for personal and professional growth that come along with
it, though clearly you do!
Regards,
Diane
On 4/11/11 12:29 PM, Megan Curran wrote:
As a newer librarian, I have a bit of a different point-of-view when
it comes to RDA. It seems like the goal of RDA is to bring libraries
into web-based data description in a real way. I don't think
cataloging should necessarily be easier for librarians to perform, but
it should provide information that is more easily retrievable and
meets the needs and heightened expectations of our patrons. So if RDA
makes cataloging more difficult (I'm not sure if that's the case, I
think once catalogers master the new rules it'll just become the new
routine), isn't that a good reason why we need skilled catalogers to
perform the work? Sounds like job security to me. There's no way to
predict the future so I'm not saying 100% that that's how it will
shake out, but I think it behooves us to adapt as a profession to the
current and possible future information environments.
If any of you are attending the Medical Library Association meeting in
Minneapolis next month, I'll be doing a presentation on explaining the
broad concepts of RDA and FRBR to technical services staff and
non-technical services librarians, if you'd like to come listen.
Thanks,
Megan Curran
Head of Metadata & Content Management
Norris Medical Library
University of Southern California
2003 Zonal Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90089-9130
megan...@usc.edu <mailto:megan...@usc.edu>
323-442-1134
>>> Guy Vernon Frost <gfr...@valdosta.edu> 4/11/2011 9:19 AM >>>
I concur… very nice summation. Change needs to occur, but it seems to
me it’s going in the wrong direction too.
Guy Frost, B.M.E., M.M.E., M.L.S., Ed.S
Catalog Librarian/Facilitator of Technical Processing
Associate Professor of Library Science
Odum Library, Valdosta State University
Valdosta, GA 31698-0150 Depository 0125
229-259-5060 ; FAX 229-333-5862
gfr...@valdosta.edu <mailto:gfr...@valdosta.edu>
*From:* Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] *On Behalf Of *Billie Hackney
*Sent:* Monday, April 11, 2011 11:58 AM
*To:* RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
*Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Every time I see a discussion about how hard FRBR is to understand
(which it is), how difficult the RDA Toolkit is to use (which it
is), and the fact that RDA will actually increase the amount of work
we have to do to each bibliographic record (which it does), I get more
and more discouraged. Cataloging as a profession has been gasping for
breath. It desperately needed to become simpler, more transparent,
and more attractive to library school students, easier for management
to understand. Instead, it seems to me that the opposite is
happening, and at the worst possible time. It seems to me that our
leaders are taking us over a cliff, and they keep explaining to us why
what they're doing is very, very important, as we're plummeting to the
ground.
This is my own personal opinion as someone who has been cataloging for
twenty years -- not that of my employer.
Billie Hackney
Senior Monograph Cataloger
Getty Research Institute
1200 Getty Center Drive, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, CA 90049-1688
(310) 440-7616
bhack...@getty.edu
