Open Collections

UBC Library and Archives

In the company of my peers : implementation of RDA in Canada Cross, Emma; Andrews, Sue; Grover, Trina; Oliver, Chris; Riva, Pat 2014

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
494-CCQ_RDA_in_Canada_preprint.pdf [ 587.5kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 494-1.0077955.json
JSON-LD: 494-1.0077955-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 494-1.0077955-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 494-1.0077955-rdf.json
Turtle: 494-1.0077955-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 494-1.0077955-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 494-1.0077955-source.json
Full Text
494-1.0077955-fulltext.txt
Citation
494-1.0077955.ris

Full Text

 1  Title of article:   In the Company of My Peers: implementation of RDA in Canada   Short title:    In the Company of My Peers  Authors:    Emma Cross Cataloguing Librarian, Carleton University Library  Sue Andrews Principal Cataloguer, University of British Columbia Library  Trina Grover Catalogue Librarian, Ryerson University Library  Chris Oliver Co-ordinator, Rare and Original Cataloguing, McGill University Library  Pat Riva Coordinator, Monographs cataloguing section, Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec   Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank: Wendy Watkins, Jane Fry, Carys Carrington and Kevin Partridge at the Data Centre, Maps, Data and Government Information Centre, Carleton University Library for their invaluable advice and assistance in the coding and analysis of the survey data.  Thanks also to librarians and library staff members who answered our survey questions with such thoughtfulness and thoroughness.     2  In the Company of my Peers: Implementation of RDA in Canada   Introduction Canada is one of the original author countries of RDA: Resource Description and Access, the new standard that supersedes the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd Edition Revised (AACR2). Canada was also involved in the revision and maintenance of the earlier standard and has had representation on the international committee responsible for the content of both AACR2 and RDA. The committee’s current name is the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA (JSC).1 Canada’s delegate is a member of the Canadian Committee on Cataloguing and, for several decades, has also been a standards specialist from Library and Archives Canada (LAC), thus combining the two roles of representing the national library and the national cataloguing community.  As a country that used AACR2 in both English and French, the expectation in Canada has been that most libraries will transition over a period of time from the old standard, AACR2, to the new one, RDA.  Training, whether formal or informal, is the starting point for implementation of a new standard. When one looks at the implementation of RDA in Canada, there is a noticeable difference in the way training took place in the English- and French-speaking cataloguing communities.2 This article describes the differences in the training experiences within these two communities. In English Canada, training was not coordinated from a central point. There was some training organized and delivered by an ad hoc group of peers, but there were also individual, grass-roots initiatives to self-train using resources available on the web and elsewhere. In French Canada, the Canadian part of the team that translated RDA into French  3  became an authoritative source for the French-speaking cataloguing community and this team organized and delivered training in French.  Since the training experiences followed different patterns, the collection of data for this article also followed different paths. For information about the training and implementation experiences within the English-speaking cataloguing community, there was no definitive central source of information. Thus, three of the authors, Emma Cross, Sue Andrews, and Trina Grover, conducted a survey of libraries in English Canada. The initial findings of the survey are reported in this article. All French language training was coordinated by l’Association pour l’avancement des sciences et des techniques de la documentation (ASTED)3 and delivered by staff members of Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec (BAnQ).4 Thus, the data was logged in their records of training workshops and is summarized for this article. Though there are differences in the challenges that were identified in the two language communities, both communities have noted that the demand for in-person training outstripped available resources.  In the French-speaking cataloguing community, where much of the training originated from a central source, one challenge has been community involvement and an over-reliance on the central source to provide what is needed. In contrast, the English-speaking cataloguing community has moved forward using a combination of training methods and documentation and relying on peers to provide support. In this community, several respondents to the survey expressed the desire for an identifiable central source for training, documentation and best practices in Canada. Thus, perhaps the ideal lies somewhere between the approaches used in these two communities.    4  Canadian Context When one sets out to implement a new cataloguing standard in Canada, it means implementation in a context shaped by certain important features of the country. The two features of greatest relevance are Canada’s population density and its identity as a bilingual country. Canada is one the largest countries in the world in terms of geographic area, but has one of the lowest population densities. If one compares with United States, Canada has a population of approximately 35 million people in a space of 9.98 million square kilometres, while the United States has a population of approximately 315 million in a space of 9.63 million square kilometres.  The population of Canada is not evenly distributed throughout the country but tends to congregate along the southern border. This has advantages for those Canadian library staff who find themselves in closer proximity to colleagues, but presents serious challenges for those who work in the northern parts of the country. Even along the southern edge of the country, there are still huge distances between population centres.  The distance from Halifax, Nova Scotia to Vancouver, British Columbia is 4,430 kilometres by air and over 5,000 kilometres by road.  In this age of Internet and web services, distance should not matter.  Given the financial exigencies and the cuts in library budgets, many library staff rely on web documents and web presentations to acquire theoretical and practical knowledge. However, as seen during RDA implementation, there remains a firm preference for person-to-person transmission of knowledge, whether through conferences, pre-conferences, or training workshops.    5  Canada is a country that is officially bilingual. It has an Official Languages Act that promotes and protects English and French as Canada’s official languages, ensuring respect and equal status for both languages. In addition, the province of Québec also has provincial legislation that promotes the official status of French in areas of provincial jurisdiction.  Bilingualism is not only an important principle, but also a daily reality.  Canada’s national library, Library and Archives Canada (LAC), must operate and offer all its documentation and services in the two official languages simultaneously because it is part of the federal government and is subject to the Official Languages Act.  Provincial institutions are sometimes bilingual (such as in New Brunswick) but many are unilingual depending on provincial legislation (French in Québec, English in most other provinces, such as Ontario).  Non-government institutions adopt one or the other as their language of operation, but many institutions in Canada choose to be bilingual (such as the University of Ottawa).   For the cataloguing community, bilingualism has an impact both on the language of communication in the workplace and on the language of cataloguing. In many libraries, documentation, standards, training, presentations, etc., must be offered in both languages, and in Québec, must be offered in French.  In terms of producing cataloguing records, libraries in Canada will use English and/or French as the language of cataloguing, the language used to communicate bibliographic and authority data.   A full implementation of RDA in Canada required the translation of RDA into French.  Full implementation of RDA by Library and Archives Canada required the availability of RDA in both official languages.  Availability of RDA in French was an essential prerequisite for implementation in most libraries in Québec, as well as a number of libraries elsewhere in  6  Canada that offer French-language or bilingual catalogues.  The project to translate RDA was completed through the partnership of ASTED, BAnQ, LAC, and the Bibliothèque nationale de France. The translation of RDA began in fall 2010 and was published in the RDA Toolkit May 14, 2013 and in print June 2013 (see separate article in this issue on the French translation).  Canadian implementation of RDA was positively affected by an event outside the country. In 2008, the three American national libraries decided to do an official test of RDA “to assure the operational, technical, and economic feasibility” of implementing the new standard.5 The national libraries of Great Britain, Australia and Canada agreed to wait for the test to be completed so that the national libraries of the four countries could fulfill their goal of coordinated implementation, a goal they first agreed upon in 2007.6 The lag in implementation time was a benefit for Canada because it allowed time for the completion of the French translation and allowed all of Canada to begin implementation together at the same time. During the implementation of AACR2, French implementation lagged behind English implementation because of the time required to translate and publish the standard and its updates. With RDA, the French- and English-speaking cataloguing communities were able to begin implementation at the same time.     Training and implementation in the English-speaking cataloguing community The Canadian Library Association (CLA) and individual library associations at the provincial and regional level provided some training opportunities by sponsoring RDA programs  7  or sessions. However, by 2010, it was apparent that few or no resources were available for developing a centrally organized national RDA training program for the English-speaking cataloguing community. The size of the country and its population density presented challenges for face-to-face exchange of expertise. Even with the use of web technologies, the number of people with RDA experience was limited.  Canadian libraries used a variety of strategies to acquire the knowledge required to implement RDA and to train their staff.  The results of the survey of English Canada indicate a heavy reliance on web documentation but also on face-to-face presentations, such as conference sessions, workshops, invited speakers, etc. Canadian libraries took advantage both of Canadian resources and those made available by other countries.  During RDA development, the Joint Steering Committee maintained a list of RDA presentations at its website,7 many with links to the documents, thus providing sources of authoritative information about RDA. The list covers 2007 to 2011. Since then, the Library of Congress (LC) offered its own excellent training documentation, making it freely available to all on the Library of Congress’ website.8 The Program for Cooperative Cataloging followed suit9, after a recommendation in the Report and Recommendations of the U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee10 about ensuring greater community involvement.  Canadian libraries have taken advantage of these US initiatives and of the documentation of other countries implementing RDA. The process of acquiring and sharing RDA knowledge has been greatly facilitated by the possibility of accessing authoritative and up-to-date documents quickly. Webinars, wikis, RDA-L, and other electronic forms of communication have also been very useful tools.    8   Documentation was an important starting point, but a group of Canadian librarians were hearing from peers that there was a need for training opportunities within Canada, and a desire for training material specifically designed for a Canadian library context.  An ad hoc group was formed and it went on to acquire the name Pan-Canadian Working Group on Cataloguing with RDA.  Formation of the Pan-Canadian Working Group on Cataloguing with RDA In 2009-2010, some members of CLA’s Technical Services Interest Group (TSIG)11 began discussing RDA implementation and training. During this period of time, a small group within TSIG carried out a survey of Canadian libraries to assess the level of awareness of RDA and to gather information about preferences for training methods.12  The purpose of the survey was to collect information in order to make informed decisions about the content and delivery of training in Canada. The results confirmed expectations and helped the group move to the next stage: discussing RDA training with library associations, colleagues, and members of the Canadian Committee on Cataloguing. A training outline was created and shared via Google Docs, which was new at the time and unfortunately also blocked by some institutions, such as government libraries.  A call was put out for volunteers and the response was encouraging. The initial call resulted in replies from an additional six cataloguers from across the country who were willing to develop content and six who were willing to act as advisors. This extended group included front-line cataloguers as well as cataloguing managers, which gave the group a range of different experiences, and familiarity with different formats and content types.    9   The working group developed some original modules but also made use of the work already done by the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress had created several series of modules as they went through the test period and then as they began implementation and training of all their staff. They provided free access to these modules at their web site.13 It was the first definitive set of training materials and it was a key element in RDA training because it demonstrated how to implement RDA in a MARC 21 environment.14 Since RDA was developed as a content standard, independent of any particular encoding schema or communication format, the recording of RDA elements using MARC required some interpretation. These modules provided important guidance for the practical application of RDA instructions within the context of creating MARC 21 bibliographic and authority records.  The working group kept hearing from frontline cataloguers that the tool they most wanted was a quick checklist or “cheat sheet.” It was clear that cataloguers wanted to know what to do on an operational level, but the group felt strongly that an introduction and explanation about the “why” was useful and necessary to help cataloguers get oriented to the way that RDA works. It was felt that this deeper understanding of the principles and structure of RDA would pay off in improved efficiency later on.  A plan began to take shape, which included: 1. Creating an outline with "chunks" of content that should be included in a comprehensive orientation to RDA; 2. Asking cataloguers who had kept up with developments and were  known to have good teaching/presentation skills to sign up and commit to responsibility for the content; 3. Partnering with associations and institutions to run workshops across the country.  10  It was decided that the Canadian training curriculum would include information and discussion about the theoretical framework underlying RDA, as well as the ways in which RDA is an important step forward in our metadata future.15 Modules designed with the idea of allowing people to get records produced efficiently would follow the more theoretical, introductory modules.  Thus, the training outline began with modules that provided context and background before getting down to the more practical modules on recording attributes of various entities and recording relationships between them. The outline concluded with an original module on the practical application of RDA for cataloguing different types of resources. The outline also included practical modules on copy cataloguing and navigating the RDA Toolkit In the end, the outline acted as a guide for the development of the modules that were needed for training rather than an actual plan to be used in training sessions.  Different sequences and different combinations of modules were used in actual workshops, depending on the available time and the audience. The modular approach ensured flexibility and proved to be very useful during the delivery of training (see Appendix 1 for a full list of the modules).   The group agreed that adding Canadian content – including examples of bilingual publications, British spelling, terminology, etc. used in Canada -- would make it easier for cataloguers to relate to the training material. Some of the modules integrated Thomas Brenndorfer’s "10 easy steps" as a way to orient cataloguers to RDA thinking and RDA’s basic structure.16  For the modules based on the Library of Congress’ training documents, the group requested permission to use and modify LC’s RDA training modules and their supplementary material. Those modules include a statement gratefully acknowledging this permission.  11   Canadians’ positive experience with the Serials Cataloging Cooperative Training Program (SCCTP) 17 influenced the decision to try a grass-roots, peer-based approach to RDA training.  The SCCTP model – separate modules with PowerPoint slides, speaker notes, and exercises with answers – also provided a structure for organizing the content. Guidelines for those creating the learning content were drafted, such as including a list of learning objectives and ensuring all documentation met accessibility guidelines. The working group recognized that face-to-face delivery would be possible on a limited level and the ultimate goal was to produce learning objects in various formats, including videos.    The expectation was that cataloguers would use the modules for self-study and some would use them to train their local staff. There was no capacity to have trainers travel to every major city for in-person training. Webinars were considered ideal since they could be streamed live and offer some interactivity, and also be recorded for viewing later. There were many affordable options available for recording webinars. However, it remained a challenge to identify a software license that would allow sharing among cataloguers in different institutions across the country.   The intention was to create re-usable learning objects. However, with invitations to present in-person workshops, the group decided to focus on content and exercises for these workshops and worry about webinars and video versions later. As the group discussed the possibilities of different formats, it became clear that the modules were created for use in an interactive workshop and they would not translate to a virtual experience very well.  The group promised to consider creating an online course later on that would be based on these modules but geared for online viewing.    12   It was agreed that the modules and accompanying documents would be posted online and made freely available under Creative Commons licensing.  A roster of recommended trainers was created, recognizing that the working group really had no control over who decided to use the modules to provide RDA training, and could only make recommendations when asked. To maintain updated training documentation and make it easily available, a wiki platform was chosen and the wiki was called “rdacake”. The name was inspired by a cake.  In the summer of 2010, two members of the group attended  the June 28th meeting of the Committee on Cataloging: Description & Access during the annual conference of the American Library Association. During this meeting, a RDA cake was served to celebrate the launch of the RDA Toolkit, hence the name of the wiki. RDACAKE can also be understood to mean RDA CAnadian Knowledge Exchange. It is hoped that the documentation and modules will eventually move to a content management system administered by the Canadian Library Association. Regardless of its location, the intention is to make the content available to anyone, not just CLA members.18     The group continued to develop the modules and began to deliver workshops at various conferences across the country, and at special events organized by institutions or associations. In February 2012, several group members participated in a RDA pre-conference workshop for the Ontario Library Association (OLA). In OLA’s announcement, the name “Pan-Canadian Committee on Cataloguing" appeared, devised by the OLA program committee. The group was surprised but liked the idea of “pan-Canadian.” Since the working group had no formal affiliation with the established Canadian Committee on Cataloguing, the name was adjusted by  13  substituting “Working Group.” Since then, the group has been known as the Pan-Canadian Working Group on Cataloguing with RDA.  There have been challenges with this approach of reliance on a group of peers. The foremost challenge has been to encourage involvement while also ensuring quality control of the content and the teaching. There are some informal controls, but there is no definitive central source of authority to approve the content or ensure that modules are up to date. It is up to the individuals to keep their modules in step with RDA changes, MARC 21 developments, changes in practice in the community, etc.  Recognition of the amount of time required to deliver the individual modules also proved to be a challenge. Two-day workshops are ideal but expensive and many managers reject the idea. Based on the experiences of the group members, it is important to schedule time for interactive exercises because it encourages discussion and questions, and helps individuals get over the anxiety that such a major change provokes in staff. But it also lengthens the training time.  In-person training workshops are labour intensive and expensive, in terms of resources and time. Also, each member of the group had limited ability to take time from work to present multiple workshops. Thus, even with many opportunities to present the modules in person, the working group recognized that it had only trained a small fraction of the cataloguers in the English-speaking cataloguing community. The group also recognized that it was not the only source for training. There are many other ways to learn about RDA and how to use it in day-to-day cataloguing. Members of the working group decided it was time to conduct a survey to discover how extensively RDA has been adopted in English Canada, and what training methodologies had been used.  14   Survey Methodology This article includes preliminary findings of the survey conducted in the English-speaking cataloguing community in fall 2013. Statistics are based on 50 responses which constitute a 54.3% response rate from the sample. The research project, conducted by Emma Cross, Sue Andrews, and Trina Grover, was approved by the Research Ethics Boards at Carleton University, the University of British Columbia, and Ryerson University. The survey sample was based on the TSIG members’ list and was supplemented to create a sample balanced by region and sector. The research study specifically surveyed English language institutions in Canada. The survey consisted of ten questions (see Appendix 2 for complete survey), with space for written comments and was completed by email and telephone interviews. Surveys were coded using SPSS software and lengthy written comments were summarized during data coding. In order to maintain confidentiality, responses were compiled without recording the names of individuals and institutions. Data was aggregated by province, region or sector only when there were sufficient responses to ensure a particular institution could not be identified.   Survey Results Of the 50 libraries who have so far responded to the survey, 10% reported full adoption, 56% partial, and 34% reported that they had not yet adopted RDA.  Of the libraries who have not yet adopted, 76.5% reported that they did plan to adopt in the future and 64.7% indicated that they planned to provide RDA training for their staff.  Some had definite plans and dates for implementation, and some did not. Some cited lack of time and resources to make the change  15  at this moment, and others, the need to wait for their integrated library system (ILS) to be able to handle RDA data. The most frequent use of RDA was for monographs and sound recordings, followed closely by serials. Of the partial adoption libraries, the most frequent difference was between original and copy cataloguing, as 34% of the respondents reported that copy cataloguing in RDA was well underway, but original cataloguing in RDA was not fully implemented. Just under a quarter of the libraries (24%) reported using and creating hybrid records. The most frequently reported sources of records were Amicus (56%), WorldCat (46%), and Library of Congress (42%).  The most frequently used RDA training methods were as follows: conference/preconference session (74%), reading books and articles (64%), using RDA training materials on the LC website (62%), using an RDA webinar (60%), sending staff to presentations on RDA organized by a library association (48%), and monitoring RDA related listservs and blogs (48%) (see Table 1 for complete listing). Only 16% of libraries reported using different training for original versus copy cataloguers. More than half (60%) reported also providing background information and/or training for non-cataloguers in departments such as reference, acquisitions, systems, and administration.  Just over three quarters of the libraries (76%) had heard of the Pan-Canadian Working Group on Cataloguing with RDA. Of the libraries reporting that they had heard of the Working Group, 57.9% had used Pan-Canadian training materials and 42.1% had participated in RDA training presented by a Pan-Canadian trainer.  16   Survey comments revealed some additional information of interest, and complemented the answers to the survey questions. Large libraries (especially academic) were further along in their adoption of RDA and were the most positive about the results and benefits of the new standard. Libraries who were members of consortia tended to be slower in their adoption, due to the need for cross-library policy decisions and reliance on centralized training initiatives that were taking some time to coordinate and develop. Public libraries expressed the greatest concern over the loss of the general material designation (GMD), mostly tied to the need for new ILS record displays to convey content and carrier types in a user-friendly manner to patrons. Some of the challenges echoed by all types of libraries were the difficulty in getting used to navigating the RDA Toolkit, and the absence (thus far) of a Canadian source of policy decisions.  An opportunity embraced by all types of libraries was the training of colleagues in non-cataloguing departments to recognize and appreciate the benefits of RDA records as they began to appear in online catalogues.   17    Rate of adoption by region in English Canada (see Table 2)   18  Analysis of preliminary data revealed that libraries in northern Canada (Northwest Territories, Nunavut and the Yukon) had by far the highest rate of non-adoption with 80% of libraries in the region not adopting RDA. Non-adopting libraries in the North reported that distance was a problem for them, making it difficult to co-ordinate with other institutions in the region and expensive to send staff to RDA training events. Several libraries expressed a longing for a national training program organized by LAC to help them access the training and information that they needed to implement RDA and mitigate some of these costs.19 In addition, libraries in the region reported limited resources and thus RDA was not a priority for them when they had other more pressing demands such as maintaining opening hours to meet the needs of their patrons and adding resources to the library collection. Finally, libraries in this region also reported that they were not seeing RDA applied to records for northern-produced and northern-specific publications so it did not seem urgent to adopt RDA right away.   19   The second highest rate of non-adoption was found in the Atlantic region (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador) at 55.6%. Non- 20  adopting libraries in the Atlantic region reported a similar pattern of issues preventing them from adopting RDA including lack of time and lack of resources, particularly, lack of staff available to work on RDA implementation.    Libraries in the West (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia) had the highest rate of partial adoption of RDA at 75%. This was followed by the Central region (specifically Ontario20) at 56.3%. It appeared that these libraries were in a position to be able to employ a variety of strategies to train staff and manage the complexity of a hybrid record environment. The highest rates of full adoption of RDA appeared in the West (15%) and Atlantic Canada (11.1%). However, it was not possible to discern identifiable trends without further analysis of the data collected.    Rate of adoption by sector in English Canada (see Table 3) Analysis of preliminary data revealed that university libraries had by far the highest rate of partial adoption of RDA at 75%. University libraries also had the second highest rate of full adoption of RDA at 12.5% and the lowest rate of non-adoption, also at 12.5%. Thus, Canadian university libraries were the furthest along in their adoption of RDA, reported fewer problems and, as noted earlier, were generally the most positive about the benefits and potential of the new standard.   21   Surprisingly, Canadian college libraries had the highest rate of non-adoption of RDA at 62.5%. Analysis of written comments revealed that college libraries in a number of provinces  22  worked in consortial environments. This seemed to result in slower implementation of RDA as decisions about training and implementation were more complex and involved the co-ordination of member institutions. One college noted that it was frustrating to have to wait for central policy and training from the consortium before they could start cataloguing with RDA. Non-adopting colleges also reported limited staffing in cataloguing and technical services. College libraries also reported a fairly low rate of partial adoption of RDA at 37.5% and there were no reported cases of full adoption in this sector.   Public libraries reported partial adoption of RDA at 58.5%, non-adoption at 35.3%, and full adoption at 5.9%. Canadian government libraries reported a high level of non-adoption of RDA at 50%. They also reported the highest level of full adoption of RDA at 25% but had a much lower rate of partial adoption, at 25%. Special libraries reported 50% non-adoption of RDA and 50% partial adoption.  Further analysis of data and written comments from public, government and special libraries will be necessary to understand the factors which influenced these patterns of adoption.     Training and Implementation in the French-speaking cataloguing community As mentioned in the section on the Canadian context, availability of RDA in French was an essential prerequisite for the implementation of RDA in most libraries in Québec.  The  23  training context was quite different in English and French Canada. For the English-speaking cataloguing community, RDA was first published in 2010, with implementation following in 2013. For the French-speaking cataloguing community the timeframe was compressed, with publication of RDA in French and implementation happening in the same year, 2013. This imposed an additional constraint on the training context.   Training workshops  In contrast to the peer-organized and grass-roots approach to training in English-speaking Canada, the initial phase of French-language RDA training emerged from the RDA translation project. Drawing from the experiences and advice of the Pan-Canadian Working Group, a training program was devised to meet the perceived needs of Québec libraries. The first step was to design a half-day session on preparation for implementation, offered in November 2012 in Montréal and Québec City (total of 85 people attended). This covered background on RDA, a demonstration of the RDA Toolkit, overview of the two conceptual models, Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD), MARC 21 changes related to RDA, system implementation check-lists, and discussion of training to be offered. The actual RDA training was offered either as a one-day essentials workshop or in a more extensive two-day format. The two-day workshops were held in computer labs where each person had access to the RDA Toolkit throughout the course, allowing participants to practice with the RDA Toolkit itself during exercises or to just follow along in RDA. Both courses covered description and the construction of access points as applicable in general to all resources, as well as specific  24  information for print monographs. A longer variant of the two-day workshop was delivered in-house at BAnQ in a series of six half-day sessions. A total of 1153 PowerPoint slides were created (including sessions, exercises, answer keys and quizzes). Some corrections and updates were made to the training materials once they had been actually used a few times and to refresh time-sensitive information.   The training modules were translated and adapted for a French-language Canadian context by members of the BAnQ and LAC RDA translation teams (who were the only people with access to the authoritative translation files during the crucial period in which training was being prepared). All training was delivered by four BAnQ librarians who were members of the translation team. BAnQ and ASTED entered into a training agreement whereby ASTED handled registration and logistics, and BAnQ provided the content and training expertise. In addition to open sessions advertised by ASTED which were held in the larger markets (initially three in Montréal and two in Québec City), groups contacted ASTED to arrange sessions in specific locations.  Over a period of three months (March 15-June 18, 2013), seventeen workshops were given: seven one-day and ten two-day workshops. These were attended by a total of 387 people (181 for one-day and 206 for two-day sessions). In addition, 50 cataloguing staff were trained in-house at BAnQ between March 19 and April 11. Eight workshops were held in Montréal, three in Québec City, two in Brossard, two in Gatineau, one in Sherbrooke and one in Trois-Rivières. However, attendees also came from further afield, such as Rimouski and Sept-Îles to the East, Abitibi-Témiscamingue to the North; these smaller population centres would not have met the minimum group size to bring in a workshop. Although the target market of  25  the workshops was Québec, staff from some French-speaking educational institutions outside of Québec also attended (from New Brunswick and Ontario).  Many library sectors in Québec were well represented at these workshops: all the 15 French-language universities21, 16 out of 43 French-speaking CEGEPs,22 including all 5 French-language library technician  training programmes, many public libraries and 6 of the 11 public library services centres (Réseau-BIBLIO). The sessions also drew some people from school boards (5 of 60 French-language public school boards), private school libraries, museum libraries, hospital libraries, a few Québec government agencies, even some federal government agencies. The entire staff of the largest vendor of cataloguing records in Québec, Services documentaires multimédia (SDM), attended.23 The biggest gap seems to have been libraries in the private sector, such as companies, law firms, etc.   The workshops were geared to practicing cataloguers, offering a transition from AACR2 to RDA, but not basic training in cataloguing. Most participants were employed as cataloguing technicians and librarians, or were cataloguing or technical services managers, some were systems librarians, or faculty from CEGEP library technician programmes, although some other librarians attended for personal development. The participation of staff from three library ILS vendors was very welcome.  The two courses were each intended to be self-contained and complete, although aimed at different needs, not a sequence with pre-requisites. However, a small number of people who attended the one-day course then enrolled in the two-day course. As the two-day course in fact included most of the same slides used in the one-day course, the trainers were concerned that these attendees would become bored and frustrated, possibly disrupting others. This did not  26  turn out to be the case: those who attended both sessions felt that the repetition provided useful reinforcement which enhanced their learning. The individuals who made this choice knew their own learning styles well enough to use the opportunity appropriately.  Other learning opportunities in French Opportunities to learn about RDA or FRBR/FRAD in French prior to the 2012-2013 workshops series had been quite limited. As already noted, there was no opportunity to study the text of RDA in French prior to the training workshops as it was published in the RDA Toolkit only in May 2013. Only a handful of articles have appeared in Canadian French-language library journals, the earliest in 2009. Since its inaugural conference in 2009, the Congrès des milieux documentaires (held in Montréal) has had one or two sessions on RDA or related topics (such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records and the International Cataloguing Principles). The Québec Section of the Canadian Association of Music Libraries, Archives and Documentation Centres (CAML) has included an RDA update at its annual fall meeting since 2008.  There have been sessions at a few other conferences. Library schools and some library technician programmes have had guest speakers. The only full-day workshops offered were those in fall 2010 by the Conference des recteurs et des principaux des universités du Québec (CRÉPUQ) (approximately 150 attended the French sessions) and one general session offered by ASTED in spring 2011. Other sessions were held in Québec but in English (2008 IFLA pre-conference, 2009 CLA pre-conference). As is often the case, the university libraries were most aware and the 2010 CRÉPUQ workshops definitely had an impact on the level of preparation  27  and participation in formal training seen from the university sector. The French-language training modules, since they are still being offered in paying workshops, have not yet been posted publicly, limiting opportunities for self-study.  Supply and Demand for training No formal market survey was carried out prior to setting up the training programme and estimating the number of sessions to offer; informal contacts served to provide general estimates of potential attendees. A surprise and challenge was that the demand was far greater than these predictions, requiring many more additional sessions to be squeezed into an already hectic schedule. This put a strain on resources at ASTED as well as testing the trainers' endurance. However, it was always heartening to see the overwhelmingly positive reaction of the participants and their eagerness to learn RDA without delay. By June, with all scheduled sessions at capacity and a waiting list growing, it was clear that additional sessions had to be scheduled in the fall. A closed session was held in early November 2013 for the federation of private schools, attended by 34 people, six of whom were connected by videoconference. Two more workshops, one session each of the one-day and two-day workshops, were held in late November and early December 2013, bringing the total participants to 473 for the whole of 2013 (see Table 4 for the breakdown of participants by library sector). Depending on demand, further sessions may be scheduled for 2014.   In spite of this, certain segments of the Québec library sector remain under-served, such as CEGEPs and, particularly, public school boards; also remaining to be trained are the libraries in Québec government agencies, most of whom are members of the consortium Réseau  28  informatisé des bibliothèques gouvernementales (RIBG). Community interest is also strong for in-depth sessions on serials, non-print resources and authority records which have not yet been developed in French versions.     29  One factor leading to the underestimation of the demand was the thought that most of the larger libraries would view the workshops as a train-the-trainer situation, sending at most two or three resource people who would repeat the information in-house. This definitely did not happen: most cataloguing managers determined that it was more cost-effective to send their whole staff to the workshops, all together if possible, rather than delay their RDA implementation and ability to work with RDA copy while their resource people prepared to repeat the material in-house.  RDA Implementation at BAnQ BAnQ started cataloguing monographs (print and electronic) in RDA on April 4, 2013, the Cataloguing in Publication (CIP) programme implemented on April 15, serials (print and electronic) June 5, with other types of materials phased in during fall 2013. The monographs technicians were each assigned a primary resource librarian to assist them and review their first RDA records; the four trainers and one other librarian from the translation team served in this role, consulting each other as needed. Ideally follow-up meetings to discuss interesting cataloguing situations would have been held regularly in the first 3 months. However, the resource librarians were fully committed in meeting the external demand for training workshops, requiring BAnQ staff to be patient and self-reliant. Some non-cataloguing staff received training focused on the impact RDA would have on their work. The session for acquisitions staff concentrated on major differences from a staff mode point of view; another session focused on the OPAC and was geared to public services and collection specialists from special collections.   30    Post-Implementation Support Support has also been an issue for other libraries, but here some encouraging grass-roots peer-support initiatives have begun, now that RDA is available in French. The university libraries have created an expert group to work collaboratively on practices and answer questions. A Facebook group was developed by an academic librarian to encourage sharing and exchange of information; it now has over 300 members from all types of libraries. However, the Québec cataloguing community still lacks an association or focus that crosses type-of-library divisions, and the culture of sharing needs to be strengthened. For instance, contributions by librarians other than from BAnQ to the RDA francophone wiki (http://rdafrancophone.wikispaces.com/ ) are still extremely limited. Taking a leadership role in RDA implementation has been positive for BAnQ, which in the past has been less visible. The RDA Toolkit enables a new forum for sharing cataloguing decisions and tools with the French-speaking  cataloguing community, and there is community interest in having access to BAnQ's documentation on option decisions and policies, something BAnQ never offered in the past. The challenge will be to develop this material.  While post-implementation support has been an ongoing challenge and in-house documentation is still far from ideal, that French-language implementation of RDA took place at the same time as English-language implementation is something that was never achieved with AACR2 or any of its revisions.   31  Conclusion: opportunities and challenges of RDA implementation in Canada In the 2010 survey conducted prior to the start of RDA training,24 one of the conclusions was: In terms of training methods, it is no surprise that the most favoured type is in-person training, either one-on-one or in small groups. However, given the reality of a nation-wide implementation of RDA, one has to look at achievable training goals.  These training methods cannot reach a sufficiently large number of people within a concentrated period of time. One recurring concern in the survey results was the availability of training, both in terms of its accessibility and its cost.25  Three years later, there is still a preference for in-person training and there is still a concern about the availability of affordable training. Whether in the English or the French language communities, demand outstripped supply for in-person training.  In the survey results from the English-speaking cataloguing community, despite financial exigencies of the time, there was still a significant amount of in-person training: conferences, preconferences, presentations organized by library associations or by individual libraries, workshops with a trainer or one-on-one.  It is interesting to note that the trainers in the French-speaking cataloguing community had thought their workshops would be “train the trainer” workshops, but the preference among cataloguing managers was to send their whole staff to be trained, despite registration costs for these workshops. In the French-speaking cataloguing community, not only was the preferred method of training in-person, but also directly from the cataloguers with expertise.  In the 2010 survey, an area of particular concern was the role of web documents and webinars for training: The survey asked questions that included online training options, and the reason for asking was to judge the level of familiarity with online learning tools, and the degree to which online tools  32  might need to be adapted or designed to be suitable for the community. The survey revealed that there was a degree of experience in using online learning tools, and that respondents felt they did learn either adequately or well.  Webinars are still a fairly new method for training, and a quarter of the respondents had not experienced an interactive webinar (i.e. live and with audience participation) whereas most had experienced reading [online] documentation on their own.26  Three years later, webinars are considered a fairly normal way to receive training and RDA webinars have consistently drawn large crowds, including many participants from Canada. For the English-speaking cataloguing community, webinars and web documents have played a key role in RDA implementation. For librarians who can use English language documentation, there is a wide range of sources because RDA is an international standard; there are sources close to home in the United States and Canada, but also from other parts of the world, such as Great Britain, Australia, etc.  Even though conferences and preconferences are the predominant source of RDA training in Table 1, if one looks at all the sources that are web-based, one can see that web documents and web presentations have played a major role in RDA training.  In addition to webinars and video recordings, many other documents are available on the web, such as PowerPoints, exercises, explanatory Word documents, etc., and these have been important sources of information during RDA implementation. Even though the Pan-Canadian modules ended up being designed for use as part of interactive workshops, some survey respondents did mention using these modules as self-study tools or to present RDA training for their staff.  For the French-speaking cataloguing community, there were no sources of French language training documentation unless they created them. Canada is the first country to implement RDA in French. The French-speaking cataloguing community benefitted from a  33  centrally organized training initiative managed by ASTED and staffed by members of BAnQ. However, this community did not have the variety of online options from which to choose as the French-language equivalent of the training modules had not been issued. The members of the community who had deep RDA experience were the members of the translation team and they were the only source for authoritative training. The one advantage for the initial implementation phase has been that the bulk of the French-speaking cataloguing community is situated in Québec and mainly in the corridor between the cities of Gatineau, Montréal, and Québec where surface travel times between adjacent cities is only two to three hours. Thus, despite some travelling by the team, distances were not an insurmountable problem.   The biggest difference between the two language communities has been the way training was organized and delivered. In the French-speaking cataloguing community, most of the training originated from a central source, with ASTED managing the logistics of training, the BAnQ and LAC translation team preparing training material, and BAnQ providing staff members to deliver the training.  As noted before, there were not many opportunities for this community to prepare for RDA implementation, and, in addition, external sources, such as documents available on the web, were primarily in English. Training is often organized by library associations who are expected to provide development opportunities for the profession. This particular training initiative may seem to be a relatively formal relationship between the library association and the community of experts, and this may be in part because the community of experts was a very small group, i.e., the Canadian part of the French translation team. The two had to work together. Also, the people who delivered training came from the same institution,  34  and so the institution quickly came to be identified as a central authoritative source on RDA implementation for the French-speaking community.   Among challenges identified in the French-speaking cataloguing community, there was demand for more training, but also a reliance on the central point to provide all aspects of training and then also post-training best practices and documentation. One of the biggest challenges in implementation is moving the standard from the community of experts into the community of cataloguers (as also seen in the recommendation of the U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee to involve the community). This is beginning to happen in the French-speaking cataloguing community as can be seen with the rapid growth of the Facebook group and the formation of an ad hoc group of universities to discuss implementation issues.   In the English-speaking cataloguing community, the survey shows that libraries had many choices in terms of training opportunities and training resources. A group of peers worked together to provide training resources that were adapted for a Canadian audience. Even with a wide range of resources available to Canadian libraries, the work of this peer group was appreciated and used by Canadian libraries to the point that the members of the group felt that demand was much greater than what they could supply. The group was formed in an ad hoc and informal way, but the relationships between the individuals were strengthened by their membership within the same national library association. Both the national and provincial library associations played important roles in organizing and creating opportunities for this peer group to deliver training.  While quite different-looking from the French equivalent, in essence, it has similar aspects in terms of reliance on the link between library associations and a group of experts.    35  The group working with the English-speaking cataloguing community is an informal group and cannot be a central authoritative source for RDA policies and practices. It is interesting that some survey respondents expressed a longing for a central, national source of cataloguing best practices and decisions. This is not to say that there will never be a central source. The intention was and is for LAC and BAnQ to share coordinated lists of core elements and policy statements made available within the RDA Toolkit in both official languages, thus providing a central authoritative source for both language communities.  This is very important to both institutions because of their shared responsibility for providing CIP to Canadian publishers.  The development of shared policy statements is proving to be slower than originally hoped because these statements are intended to reflect the decisions made during implementation which only began in April 2013.  The process of developing policy statements involves careful analysis of existing policies and practices: the policy statements issued by the Library of Congress and the Program for Cooperative Cataloging, the LAC AACR2 rule interpretations which reflect decades of decisions within evolving technological environments, BAnQ’s internal policy decisions, and a carefully considered examination of longstanding practices.   In one community, there has been greater reliance on a central source, with a less rapid development of peer involvement. In the other community, there has been reliance on a group of peers to deliver training, with a less rapid development of a central, authoritative source.  The two are essential aspects for a successful implementation and the challenge is achieving a balance between the two.   36  In both communities, in-person training has continued to play a significant role. But both communities recognize that demand outstrips supply. Thus, there’s a need to develop online, re-usable learning objects. But there’s also a need to develop expertise in adapting training material for the online environment. What is well-suited for in-person training may not automatically work in a webinar or as an online course. The next frontier for developing better training is learning how to take advantage of the online environment to offer training that is authoritative and engages peer involvement.                                                     1  The Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR was renamed the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA in 2007 during RDA’s development period.   2   For the purposes of this article, the English- and French-speaking cataloguing communities in Canada will sometimes be referred to as “English Canada” and “French Canada.”  3  There are two national library associations in Canada: Association pour l'avancement des sciences et des techniques de la documentation (ASTED) and the Canadian Library Association (CLA).   4  Formed in 2006, BAnQ combines the functions of a national library and a national archive serving the province of Québec, as well as including a central public library with a province-wide service mandate.  5   “About the U.S. National Libraries Test Plan for RDA,” U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee, accessed November 20, 2013. http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/about.html  6   “The British Library, Library and Archives Canada, the Library of Congress and the National Library of Australia to work together on implementation of RDA: Resource Description and Access,” Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA, last modified 22 October 2007, http://www.rda-jsc.org/rdaimpl.html.  7   “Presentations on RDA,” Joint Steering Committee for the Development of RDA, last modified 2 September 2011, http://www.rda-jsc.org/rdapresentations.html.  8    “Library of Congress RDA Training Materials,” Library of Congress, accessed November 20, 2013. http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/RDA%20training%20materials/LC%20RDA%20Training/LC%20RDA%20course%20table.html (Available through the Catalogers Learning Workshop, a training portal jointly maintained by the Library of Congress and the Program for Cooperative Cataloging.)   9     “RDA and PCC,” Program for Cooperative Cataloging, accessed November 20, 2013, http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/rda/RDA%20Resources.html.  37                                                                                                                                                                10 “Report and Recommendations of the U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee,” U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee, 9 May 2011, revised for public release 20 June 2011, http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/source/rdatesting-finalreport-20june2011.pdf.  11  TSIG was an interest group within the Canadian Library Association. Interest Groups were replaced with Networks in 2011 and this group is now known as the Technical Services Network (TSN).  12   The group was called the TSIG RDA Training Needs Assessment Working Group. The survey was never formally published but there is a summary written in 2010 by one of the group members: http://rdaincanada.wikispaces.com/Survey.  13 These early training modules are archived at the Library of Congress’ website: http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/training_modules.html  14 “The MARC 21 formats are standards for the representation and communication of bibliographic and related information in machine-readable form.” Introductory statement from: The MARC 21 formats: background and principles. Revised November 1996. http://www.loc.gov/marc/96principl.html  15  Similar to the Library of Congress’ training program and also an approach encouraged by Hitchens and Symons: Alison Hitchens and Ellen Symons. “Preparing cataloguers for RDA training.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 47, no. 8 (2009): 691-707.  16   In: Thomas Brenndorfer. “The FRBR-RDA puzzle: putting together the pieces” (first presented at the Ontario Library Association Superconference, February 2011; also in Visualizing RDA for the 2011 CLA conference): http://rdaincanada.wikispaces.com/presentations ; print summary:  Thomas Brenndorfer. “RDA in ten easy steps,” last modified January 2011, http://rdaincanada.wikispaces.com/file/view/RDA+in+10+Easy+Steps.doc.   Brenndorfer also created a mapping of the RDA Content Types, Media Types, Carrier Types, and Units of Extent as they align to GMDs, and including related MARC 21 fixed fields.  This documentation proved very practical and helpful for training as well as for self-study: Thomas Brenndorfer. “GMD mapped to Content Type, Media Type, Carrier Type, and Unit of Extent,” RDA in Canada wiki, last modified September 5, 2012, http://rdaincanada.wikispaces.com/file/view/gmd_to_cmc_and_extent_20120905.docx.  17   “Serials Cataloging Cooperative Training Program,” CONSER (Cooperative Online Serials), last modified April, 12, 2011, http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/scctp/.  There is an article describing Canadians’ positive response to the SCCTP training model:  Elena Romaniuk. “Serials Cataloging Cooperative Training Program: the Canadian experience.”  Serials Librarian. 41, no. 3/4 (2002): 81-89.   18   At the time of writing the modules remain on the free wiki named RDA Canadian Knowledge Exchange (http://rdaincanada.wikispaces.com/Pan-Canadian+modules).   38                                                                                                                                                               19  The responsibility for training cataloguers throughout a country is not usually part of the mandate for a national library in the 21st century, but it is interesting to note the grassroots desire for such leadership.  20  Québec would normally be included in central region but these are preliminary results and to date no English language libraries in Québec were included in the survey.  21   The Conservatoire de musique et d’art dramatique du Québec, as a post-CEGEP educational institution, was included in the count of universities.  22   In Québec, the Colleges of General and Professional Education (CEGEP) offer 2-year pre-university programs and 3-year professional diploma programs at the post-secondary level.  23 SDM began implementation in July 2013 for monographs (announcement at SDM website: “SDM et RDA dès juillet 2013,” Services documentaires multimedia, July 2013, http://www.sdm.qc.ca/Nouvelles/SDM_RDA_juillet_2013.cfm  24   See footnote 12.   25   Chris Oliver. “Summary of the survey conducted by the TSIG RDA Training Needs Assessment.” August 25, 2010, page 29,http://rdaincanada.wikispaces.com/Survey.  26    Ibid, page 30.  Appendix 1 Training Modules from the Pan-Canadian Working Group on Cataloguing with RDA Providing context for RDA Copy cataloguing in an RDA environment Introducing RDA: Resource Description and Access Navigating the RDA Toolkit Cataloguing with RDA: recording attributes of manifestations and items Cataloguing with RDA: recording attributes of works and expressions, and recording primary relationships Cataloguing with RDA: recording attributes of persons, families and corporate bodies, and of place Cataloguing with RDA: recording relationships Cataloguing with RDA: practical application  39  Appendix 2 Research project: Implementation of RDA in Canada Questions for email and telephone survey Statement of privacy and confidentiality  To ensure confidentiality, responses will be compiled without recording the names of individuals or institutions. Data will be aggregated by province, region or sector only when there are sufficient responses to ensure a particular institution cannot be identified.   Pre-interview coding  Type of Library:  ⃝ university; ⃝ college; ⃝ public; ⃝ school; ⃝ government; ⃝ special; ⃝ vendor Province: Atlantic ⃝ New Brunswick; ⃝ Nova Scotia; ⃝ Prince Edward Island; ⃝ Newfoundland and Labrador,  Central ⃝ Ontario; ⃝ Quebec West ⃝ Manitoba; ⃝ Saskatchewan; ⃝ Alberta; ⃝ British Columbia  North ⃝ Northwest Territories; ⃝ Nunavut; ⃝ Yukon   1] Has your Library adopted RDA?  ⃝ Full adoption – all materials are catalogued using the RDA instructions. ⃝ Partial adoption or stepped approach (select all which apply) o Which formats are you cataloguing using RDA?   40  ○ Monographs, ○ e-books, ○ serials, ○ e-serials, ○ sound recordings, ○ video recordings, ○ government publications, ○ maps, ○ websites. Anything else ___________________   o Partial approach to bibliographic records? o Just content, media, carrier fields. o Anything else, please explain ____________________ o Difference between copy cataloguing and original cataloguing?    o Difference between languages? o Difference between modes of issuance?   o Difference between between current publications and older materials?   o Difference between between rare or manuscript and non-rare?    o Difference between bibliographic or authority records? ⃝ No, our Library has not adopted RDA (select all which apply) o Is your Library still using AACR2? o Will you be moving to RDA? o When will you be moving to RDA? Give approximate date (month, year). o Do you plan on providing RDA training? o How will you be providing RDA training? o What is your Library doing with the increasing number of RDA records?  2] How did your Library deliver or receive RDA training? (select all which apply)  o Sending staff to a conference / preconference session  41  o Presentation organized by a Library association o Attending presentation organized by your Library o Webinar  o Training modules from the Pan-Canadian Working Group on Cataloguing with RDA delivered by a trainer o Training modules from the Pan-Canadian Working Group on Cataloguing with RDA delivered in-house o Reading books/articles on RDA o Documents on the Joint Steering Committee website o Viewing presentations listed on the Joint Steering Committee website o Material from the Library of Congress website o Material from Association for Library Collections and Technical Services (ALCTS) a division of ALA o Professional journal  o Monitoring listservs, blogs o Receiving one-on-one instruction from colleague at work o Other _________________________________________  3] How many (percentage) Library cataloguing staff still need to be trained to catalogue using RDA?  _____________________ 4] Did your Library provide different training for original catalogers and copy  42  cataloguers?  o Yes o No  5] Will your Library be training non-cataloguers in RDA?    o No o Yes If yes, which Department are they in? ○ Acquisitions; ○ Interlibrary loans, ○ Systems, ○ Reference, ○ Administration Other, please specify ________________________________ 6] What have been the main challenges in delivering or receiving RDA training at your Library?        7] Have you heard of the Pan-Canadian Working Group on RDA?   43  o No o Yes If yes, have you used any training materials on the Pan-Canadian website? ○ Yes; ○ No Have you used any of the Pan-Canadian trainers? ○ Yes; ○ No  8] What are the main sources of copy cataloguing records for your Library?  o AMICUS o Library of Congress o World Cat o Other, please specify ________________________________________________  9] Which vendors are you getting records from? (Bibliographic and authority records)   10] Conclusion Is there anything else about RDA implementation at your Library that you would like to add?   Thanks very much for participating in this survey.  Created: June 11, 2013; updated: July 20, 2013 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.494.1-0077955/manifest

Comment

Related Items