March 2002 CURL/RSLP Collection Mapping Project Chris Bailey Acting Director Library Services University of Glasgow
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
March 2002
CURL/RSLP Collection Mapping Project
Chris BaileyActing Director Library
ServicesUniversity of Glasgow
March 2002
About CURL
• http://www.curl.ac.uk/• “…to optimise the combined
information resources and expertise of the CURL libraries, in partnership with relevant organisations, for the benefit of research scholarship…”
• “…the development of a national collection mapping strategy…”
March 2002
Concerns…
• Different communities, different approaches
• Inconsistent collection description
• Inconsistencies in retrieval
March 2002
OCLC/Lacey
• Automated collection analysis software
• Uses standard classification schemes• Maps to Conspectus headings• Analysis to title level• Institutional analysis• Consortial analysis
March 2002
RSLP
• CURL response to Circular 2000/3
• Proposal to co-fund a pilot project on collection mapping using iCas
March 2002
The Project
• Purpose• Partners• Process• Methodology• Preliminary Results
March 2002
Purpose
• Small pilot project• Evaluate the usefulness of the
methodology used • Provide a cross institutional
analysis to compare overlap and uniqueness
March 2002
Partners
• University of Edinburgh• University of Liverpool• Imperial College• University of Hull• SOAS• Natural History Museum
March 2002
Process
• Questionnaire to be submitted by each partner
• Test file supplied by each partner• OPAC upload to OCLC/Lacey• Data analysis by OCLC
…….approx 9 months in total………
March 2002
Methodology
• De-duplication• Records matched to WorldCat in
order to locate an LC classification• Conspectus analysis• Results provided on CD
March 2002
Results
• Sent 2,767,669 bibliographic records
• De-duplication – 2,707,696 records• 2,268,225 records analysed – 84%
March 2002
Results….
• Edinburgh – 78% analysis• Liverpool – 85% analysis• Imperial – 74% analysis• Hull – 99% analysis• SOAS – 92% analysis• NHM – 47% analysis
March 2002
Issues…
• Standard use of standard classification seems OK…
• Local adaptation of standard classification causes inconsistencies
• Issues relating to the standards….
March 2002
…watch this space!….
March 2002
March 2002
March 2002
March 2002
March 2002
March 2002
March 2002
March 2002
March 2002
Related Documents
