Very interesting study, to which I would like to add a few comments.

Your study seems to show that use of the BSR reduces the number of subject
headings per record and thereby saves a considerable amount of time (ca.
25% for your sample).  This is great news for administrators, but the
advantage to users is not so clear.  What we need next is a study that
will take the additional cost of a full record and determine whether that
extra work increases the discovery and selection of the resource by users.
 Difficult, but I think not impossible.

Second, in order to reflect more accurately the sorts of things that
original catalogers deal with, there should probably be more humanities
and less scientific materials and more foreign language materials.  It is
difficult to know whether these different materials would have
significantly different savings from using the BSR record as opposed to
the Full record.  Perhaps in literature and not in history?

Thanks for sharing this and for providing good documentation.

-- 
Laurence S. Creider
Special Collections Librarian
New Mexico State University
Las Cruces, NM  88003
Work: 575-646-7227
Fax: 575-646-7477
[log in to unmask]

On Wed, July 7, 2010 5:05 pm, D. Brooking wrote:
> I gave a brief talk at ALA about a small time test of the BIBCO Standard
> Record "floor" that was done at the University of Washington Libraries.
> Here is the url for a more complete description of the test:
>
> http://staffweb.lib.washington.edu/committees/CPC/bsr
>
> This was just one test at one institution, so we would like to see if
> others
> could do their own tests of the BSR and share their results.
>
> If you have any questions, please email me or Joe Kiegel, [log in to unmask]
>
>
> ************
> Diana Brooking             (206) 685-0389
> Cataloging Librarian       (206) 685-8782 fax
> Suzzallo Library           [log in to unmask]
> University of Washington
> Box 352900
> Seattle WA  98195-2900
>