I know you've compiled your results, but it sounds like you'll still be
able to factor straggling data in, so I hope this info will help.
1) Cornell does have high-level paraprofessionals with language and/or
subject expertise doing BIBCO cataloging. In Central Technical Services,
our largest processing unit, there are 8.5 FTE paraprofessional original
catalogers, and 7.5 FTE academic staff original catalogers.
2) We do in-house training and send staff to outside training sessions,
depending on availability and need. We have a BIBCO and a NACO trainer on
staff, so that helps.
Thanks for pulling this information together.
At 03:25 PM 10/1/01 -0700, you wrote:
>I have two questions that I would like to have input on from other
>1) How many of you have paraprofessional catalogers doing some of
>your BIBCO cataloging?
>(Lest anyone think that I have an axe to grind about this, one way or the
>other, let me just state: I think this is an institutional decision that
>on a lot of factors. It is not something that I think the PCC should be trying
>to "legislate" in any way. I am simply trying to get a sense of what
>current reality is for BIBCO libraries.)
>2) If you do have paraprofessionals doing BIBCO cataloging, do you
>rely on in-house training for MARC, AACR2, subject analysis, and
>classification? Or do you send staff to training sessions provided by
>I have personal knowledge of BIBCO workflows at four different libraries,
>all of which have paraprofessionals contributing BIBCO records. In my own
>library, all of our high level paraprofessional catalogers contribute BIBCO
>records, both full and core, original and upgraded. The training that they
>have received in general cataloging concepts and tools has largely been
>provided in house.
>Head, Catalog Dept.
>University of Oregon
Head of Cataloging
Central Technical Services
Cornell University Library
110D Olin Library
Ithaca, NY 14853
[log in to unmask]