Theology Cataloging Bulletin Vol. 24, No 3 • May 2016 3-2 Section 3 Fundamentals of Cataloging ONLINE: RDA vs AACR2 for DVDs OhioNet Focus on the issues, fields, and elements to be considered when cataloging DVDs and streaming video resources. Understand how RDA impacts DVD cataloging. Discuss provider neutral standards. July 19, 2016 $65 https://www.ohionet.org/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=322 Beyond the Basics: Cataloging DVDs, Blu-ray discs, and Streaming Videos Library Juice Academy Learn the primary differences between RDA and AACR2; how to handle multiple production companies, distributors, and dates; and identify the preferred sources of information for audiovisual resources. August 1-26, 2016 $175 http://libraryjuiceacademy.com/135-AV-formats.php Fundamentals of Cataloging ONLINE: RDA vs AACR2 For CDs OhioNet Learn how RDA impacts CD cataloging and streaming audio resources. Discuss provider-neutral standards for electronic resources. August 2, 2016 $65 https://www.ohionet.org/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=323 Introduction to Subject Headings ABLE Course A basic course in understanding the purposes of subject headings, their types and forms, and how subdivisions are used. A helpful introduction for staff who are knew to assigning subject headings. Anytime FREE http://libraries.idaho.gov/files/able/able6/player.html Submitted by Leslie Engelson, Metadata Librarian Waterfield Library, Murray State University SELECTED ARTICLES FROM CURRENT LIBRARY JOURNALS Adamich, Tom. "BIBFRAME, Libhub, and Linked Data Catalogs." Technicalities 36, no. 1 ( January 2016): 16-18. Bernstein, Steven. "MARC Reborn: Migrating MARC Fixed Field Metadata into the Variable Fields." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 54, no. 1 ( January 2016): 23-38. Brown, Christopher C., and Erin Elzi. "Revisiting the Cataloging of Free Internet Resources at the University of Denver." Interlending & Document Supply 44, no. 1 ( January 2016): 31-36. Corbett, Lauren E. "Linked Data Advice Anyone? (Who Uses Google?)." Technicalities 36, no. 1 ( January 2016): 1-7. Davis, Jeehyun Yun. "Transforming Technical Services." Library Resources & Technical Services 60, no. 1 ( January 2016): 52-65. Johnson, Bruce, Derek Rodriguez, and Susane Ross. "Meeting User Needs With Cataloger`s Desktop, a Library of Congress Custom Search Application." Online Searcher 40, no. 2 (March 2016): 10-14. http://www.infotoday.com/ OnlineSearcher/Articles/Features/Meeting-User-Needs-With-Catalogers-Desktop-109493.shtml Laskowski, Mary S. "When Good Enough Is Not Good Enough: Resolving Cataloging Issues for High Density Storage." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 54, no. 3 (April 2016): 147-158. Mitchell, Erick T. "Library Linked Data: Early Activity and Development." Library Technology Reports 52, no. 1 ( January 2016): 5-33. Perdue, Katherine. "Bringing our Internet Archive Collection Back Home: A Case Study from the University of Mary Washington." Code4lib Journal no. 31 ( January 28, 2016): 6. http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/11131 Theology Cataloging Bulletin Vol. 24, No 3 • May 2016 3-3 Section 3 Schonfeld, Roger C. “Will the Monograph Experience a Transition to E-only? Latest Findings.” April 4, 2016. https:// scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2016/04/04/an-e-only-monograph/ Shrauger, Kristine J., Cara Mia Calabrese, and Peter Spyers-Duran. "ILL Data Drives Technical Services Projects." Technical Services Quarterly 33, no. 1 ( January 2016): 14-22. Submitted by Anna Appleman, Cataloger John Bulow Campbell Library, Columbia Theological Seminary TESTIMONY From One at a Time to All at Once: Streamlining the Withdrawal Process For weeding projects at Buswell Memorial Library at Wheaton College in Illinois, the Resource Description (RD) department previously withdrew items one by one, deleting each by hand and dealing with problems as they arose, a process that took up a significant amount of time. Using batch capabilities in OCLC Connexion Client and an upgrade in the Voyager ILS, staff learned how to streamline the withdrawal process and free time for other tasks. The previous withdrawal process began with subject librarians leaving carts of weeded items in the RD area or turning books on their spines in the stacks. Most weeding projects were scheduled during the summer, but carts would filter in during other times if librarians needed to weed in preparation for a departmental review. This could create cart shortages and required RD staff to handle withdrawals on others' schedules. Communication was haphazard, and RD staff didn't always know if a cart of books was there for withdrawal or some other purpose. The department hired a student assistant to handle the summer projects, but books could sit for weeks while waiting for withdrawal, which caused cart overflow in staff areas and created problems if someone was looking for a specific item on one of the carts, since no shelf locations were changed for any of the items. After gathering books to be withdrawn, the next step was to withdraw the items from the ILS. Each item in Voyager has three components — the bibliographic record, the holdings record, and the item record — and each of these needed manual examination according to this process: 1. Scan the barcode of an item to retrieve an item record. 2. Retrieve the corresponding holdings and item records. 3. Delete the item record. 4. Delete the holdings record. 5. Copy the OCLC accession number from the bibliographic record, paste it into OCLC Connexion Client, and remove holdings from OCLC. 6. Delete the bibliographic record. 7. Repeat until done. This was the process for simple withdrawals, but frequent exceptions lengthened the process. If a holdings record is connected to a purchase order, it cannot be deleted, requiring manual changes to the record and suppression from public view, which in turn prevents the bibliographic record from being deleted. If the library has multiple copies in multiple locations, but not all copies are weeded, that requires yet another process. Various other exceptions involve different procedures. In June 2015, our consortium upgraded from Voyager 7.2.5 to 9.1.1, providing numerous enhancements to Pick and Scan, a batch editing function. With this upgrade, we could now upload a text file of barcodes into Pick and Scan to run batch deletion, and we used this opportunity to rework other parts of our withdrawal workflow as well. To minimize the backlog of carts that would appear every summer and throughout the year, we notified the subject librarians that we would no longer accept carts or turned-over books. Instead, they were to compile a spreadsheet or text file of barcode numbers for weeded items and e-mail it to our central RD e-mail address to open a request in our ticketing system, which alleviates the haphazard communication problems. The RD ticket manager assigns the ticket to the appropriate staff member, who runs the barcode list through Pick and Scan to assign it an item statistical category (essentially a tag) of Pull to Withdraw.