Statewide Cataloging Best Practices

Introduction

In 2022, a statewide LSTA-funded project commenced to gather information on Wisconsin public library cataloging processes in an effort to create and apply standards to provide a seamless experience for Wisconsin patrons; to make cataloging more consistent through the development of a baseline of best practices and standards; and prepare for a potential state-wide shared discovery layer. Eight Wisconsin public library systems collaborated on the project, with fourteen participating in the data-gathering portion. The final report and executive summary outlines key takeaways from the 2022-2023 grant.

The Statewide Bibliographic Standards Committee was formed based on recommended next steps from the 2022-2023 LSTA Cooperative Cataloging grant report findings to improve discovery. The recommendation recognizes the end-user benefits of standardizing and sharing cataloging practices. The committee will focus on the grant recommendations and be responsible for identifying and addressing barriers, and developing, maintaining and updating shared documentation. 

These best practices aim to set baseline recommendations for bibliographic description in general, promote consistent practices for Wisconsin public libraries, and encourage the evolution of standard practices across the state.

Intent

The recommendations from the Statewide Bibliographic Standards Committee are meant to enhance user experience. They are considered Best Practices which are recommended to follow, but not considered requirements. The Committee has worked collaboratively to identify efficient guidelines.  

ILS and Discovery Layer Differences

Within the scope of the Statewide Bibliographic Standards Committee and the 2022-2023 research phase of the LSTA grant, it became evident that there are numerous instances where tools in use at libraries, namely different ILS and discovery layers/OPACs, dictate the need for additional or alternative practices in order to assist in patron discovery. For example, while not considered a current best practice, several discovery layers in use by Wisconsin public library systems require the use of GMD (General Material Designation) in the title field. Until there is a statewide shared discovery layer or ILS, these practices will continue.

Scope

This document provides general and format-specific guidelines for the fields that should  be included in bibliographic records, whether copy cataloging from a bibliographic utility or creating records locally. The guidelines can help catalogers select the most appropriate records to export to their local database as well as enhance them for optimal discovery.

This document does not include best practices for creating or maintaining digital collections, kits and library of things. It is recommended that libraries use official RDA guidance, when possible, and remain aware of updates.

RDA guidance is included in Appendix (B) and is subject to change. Libraries should use official RDA guidance, when possible, and remain aware of updates.

Authority Control

All library systems and their member libraries are encouraged to perform authority control for name, series, and subject access points. Authority control is necessary to ensure the access point is in compliance with the preferred form in the authority files maintained by the Library of Congress and other thesauri. Accurate authority work improves searching for users in the ILS and Discovery layers. Authority control can be, but does not need to be, coupled with use of authority records imported from accessible authority files into the local ILS from a third-party cataloging utility or subscription service. 

Use of Single Multi-volume vs. Separate Bibliographic Records

Wisconsin public libraries should advocate for the best cataloging solution for optimal local patron discovery and access. When determining whether to use split or shared bibliographic records, library systems should consider the following:

• Patron and staff ease of use for discovery, sense-making, accessibility, check out, and holds. For example, circulation loan policies or hold capabilities may make it more or less patron-friendly to split up sets of materials whether multi-format or same format (i.e. sets of phonics books, TV series, movie combo packs.) All libraries using a shared catalog should circulate multi-disc sets the same way for optimal patron ease of use.
• Capabilities and display limitations of the discovery layer, OPAC, and catalog app. 
• Accurate description of the circulating item(s) attached to the bibliographic record and desire for more or less specificity as to content, size and edition of an item. Split or individual records for each release may allow greater detail such as noting supplementary content only included in specific editions, but may not be necessary as long as the bibliographic record includes descriptive fields for all formats represented by the items attached to it. If it cannot, those items should be on a separate bib record.
• Internal cataloging capacity including access to a cataloging utility such as OCLC.