This article describes in detail the management of a Resource Description and Access (RDA) implementation process by an academic library that was an early adopter of RDA. It identifies the necessary decisions to be made and discusses the rationale behind these decisions during the implementation process. This information can benefit other libraries with managing their local RDA implementations. The authors examine the business case behind implementation from various perspectives such as administrative support, training, documentation, establishment of local procedures and costs. It aims to help cataloging/technical services/metadata managers understand the scope of the process and the impact it will have on their libraries.

Understanding the Why: A Case Study in Managing the RDA Implementation

Knowledge organization standards are important community artifacts that set forth agreed upon specifications and protocols, and though they may appear neutral they have been shown to harbor specific perspectives. These perspectives are often covert but hold implications for the ways in which knowledge is conceptualized, organized, and represented. Values are deeply held preferences for ways of acting and ways of being, and represent an effective lens for examining the perspectives embedded in societal practices and artifacts. To date, however, knowledge organization standards have not been approached through formal value analysis. This study addresses this gap through an examination of the influential library standard Resource Description and Access (RDA), specifically focusing on what values are present within this standard, how these values are communicated, and how they are recognized and responded to by practitioners. To address these questions, a qualitative, exploratory, multiphase study was conducted, utilizing value and rhetorical analyses of the text of RDA as well as open-ended interviews with RDA practitioners focused on their interpretations of the document. Findings show that RDA upholds its design principles through the expression of principles-based values and values associated with user needs, communicated through a set of routine structures such as directives and conditionals. In their usage of RDA, catalogers place greater emphasis on values associated with users and their perspectives, and see access as the most important value within this standard. At the same time, the relative absence of asserted community values such as privacy and autonomy illustrates the challenged nature of human values in knowledge organization standards. Findings from this study demonstrate the integral nature of values in standards, and position value analysis as a useful methodology in the critical study of standards in all domains. For the knowledge organization and cultural heritage communities, this work reveals the ways in which standards and their enactments serve to mediate key community values. In raising questions about the role of human values in knowledge organization standards, this study also contributes to ongoing discussions of information ethics and professional values. Values in Knowledge Organization Standards: A Value Analysis of Resource Description and Access (RDA)

/pdf/values-in-knowledge-organization-standards-a-value-analysis-4lsgu0b0k6.pdf

Values in Knowledge Organization Standards: A Value Analysis of Resource Description and Access (RDA)

This study examines the current state of knowledge about Resource Description and Access (RDA), the new cataloging standard, among Ohio public library catalogers Data were collected through an online survey from a representative sample of these catalogers While a majority of catalogers know about RDA, their working knowledge about it is minimal There are major differences in this knowledge based on geographic location of Ohio catalogers and educational attainment The authors propose further training and education opportunities for Ohio catalogers Further similar research is needed to determine if this lack of knowledge of the new descriptive standard among public library catalogers is a national challenge

Resource Description and Access and Ohio Public Libraries

Libraries are looking for a better way to encode and share their data. Christensen's disruptive technologies theory provides a framework for evaluating linked data and thinking about future uses of library technology. Because of its lack of use and technical weaknesses, linked data is not yet poised to emerge as a disruptive innovation. It has the potential, however, to become disruptive and should be explored first in spin-offs that supplement library data or provide access to other electronic content. Library systems under development should focus on remaining nimble and open to unforeseen future technologies and uses.

The Disruptive Qualities of Linked Data in the Library Environment: Analysis and Recommendations

IntroductionRDA: Resource Description & Access is a new cataloging code that has been developed as a replacement to Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2). The development of RDA marks the first major catalog code revision in more than 30 years in the English-speaking library community. While RDA is backward-compatible with most AACR2 instructions, its instructions have been reworked to align more directly with the new conceptual model for bibliographic control as developed in Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR). As a practical application of the FRBR model, RDA is intended to provide a flexible and extensible framework that is easily adaptable to accommodate all types of content and media within rapidly evolving technology environments, while also producing well-formed data that can be shared easily with other metadata communities in an emerging linked data environment (IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, 1998).Many RDA-related questions have arisen in the cataloging community over recent years. Questions include key areas of difference between RDA and AACR2, comparison between RDA and other metadata standards, impact on encoding standards such as Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), end-user considerations, and practitioners' views on the new cataloging code (Tosaka & Park, 2013). At this point, however, the most critical question in the field may be how catalogers and paraprofessionals can prepare themselves for RDA implementation. A successful transition from AACR2 depends first and foremost upon how easily and smoothly practicing catalogers and metadata creators can learn and apply the new cataloging code effectively. This transition may be even more challenging in the changing cataloging department environment today. Comparing transitions to AACR2 and RDA, Inter (2011) wondered, for example, how the cataloging community could best train the army of paraprofessional copy catalogers that handles the bulk of daily cataloging production in most technical services departments, and whether RDA implementation might be hindered by this ongoing process of deskilling in the cataloging profession.A number of studies were initially conducted-mostly by national library organizations-to survey practitioners' views on RDA training when the new cataloging code was published for official release in June 2010 (Tosaka & Park, 2013). The primary goal of this study was to replicate these earlier studies and evaluate practitioners' preparation and expectations about professional training on the eve of RDA implementation. Using nationwide online survey data, mostly drawn from cataloging and metadata librarians in U.S. academic libraries, we sought to investigate prevailing levels of preparation among cataloging and metadata practitioners, perceived readiness to implement the new cataloging code, and perceived areas of training topics and types of continuing education resources needed to support the successful transition from AACR2.Overview of Past RDA SurveysThe implementation of AACR2 in the early 1980s sparked controversies in the U.S. library community that were once described as the "war of AACR2" (Martell, 1981). By contrast, the reception of RDA arguably has not reached the same level of criticism and acrimony. The official release of RDA was followed by several surveys designed to gather information about catalogers' views on the technical, operational, and financial implications of its implementation. These results threw much needed light on how practitioners in the field felt about RDA costs and benefits and how those issues could be better addressed in preparing a smooth transition to the new cataloging code (Tosaka & Park, 2013).U.S. National Libraries RDA TestIn early 2009, the three U.S. national libraries announced a joint plan to test RDA and conduct a systematic review of its operational, technical, and economic implications. …

/pdf/rda-training-and-continuing-education-needs-in-academic-5g60b88cki.pdf

RDA: Training and Continuing Education Needs in Academic Libraries.

This study examined the preliminary training that has occurred and will occur in the future, as well as the perceptions of cataloging department heads toward RDA (Resource Description and Access) in American academic libraries. Previous research indicates that the successful adoption of new cataloging rules relies on the strength and elements included in the training offered to and required of individuals in the library cataloging community. This study found that many of the essential components for RDA training have been included in preliminary training. Now that a decision has been made by the Library of Congress, this study identified room for improvement in some areas of RDA training prior to adoption.

Elyssa M. Sanner

Papers

Preliminary training for RDA: A survey of cataloging department heads