Print

Print


Hi Suzanne,

You said: "I'm also not clear on what the indicators would be and whether a
490 is required if the series is traced as given on the item; it appears to
be optional, but the wording of the proposal is vague and ambiguous." 

I think it is simply a case of remembering which rules/standards tell us
what. Once 440s are obsolete, only 490s will be used for series statements. 
It is not up to MARC to tell us whether a 490 is required--AACR tells us
that a series statement is required if it is provided on a resource and MARC
simply tells us that (once 440 is obsolete) we will only use the 490 for a
series statement. If we then decide that it would be useful for our patrons
to be able to search for a particular series in a browse search, then we
need to add a series added entry, and use an appropriate 8XX field for that
series added entry, whether that series added entry is the same as the
series statement (in the 490) or is different. 

490 first indicator = 0 says this series statement does not need to be
browse indexed with an 8XX series added entry.

490 first indicator = 1 says this series statement is browsed indexed using
an 8XX series added entry.
 
After hearing with our own ears that the proposal to make 440 obsolete was
passed in the MARBI meeting at ALA in Anaheim, and after discussions with
other catalogers, a contact at LC, and a contact at OCLC, we are teaching
the new way; with only a nod to the old way--no more 440, start using 490
alone (if the series is not to be browse indexed--as we have already been
doing) and 490/830 (if the series is to be browse indexed--whether it is to
be indexed the same or differently).

We realize that this isn't *official* until the MARC Update #9 (October
2008) is published--which *might* just be done in Oct 2008 (instead of March
2009 as has been the previous pattern)--but this should not be a radical
change for anyone who has been treating series properly in the first place;
and it certainly is easier to teach!!

-------------
In our very first workshop of our cataloging series (where we are not yet
teaching cataloging--just explaining the general purpose of the most
commonly used MARC fields, especially for indexing and display purposes) we
simply say:

"The 490 field is used for a series statement, so it displays but is not
indexed. It contains the title of a series whether that title: 
	does not need to be indexed (0); or
	needs to be indexed (1)

If a series title needs to be indexed, then the 'heading' for the series
must be given as a series added entry in an 8XX field (already discussed
under 'Indexed fields').

We used to use the 440 field for both a series statement and a series added
entry (it was indexed and displayed). It will be made obsolete in late 2008,
and was so confusing for many catalogers that they have already stopped
using it in new records. However, 440 fields can still appear in some new
records (until the field is officially made obsolete) and will continue to
appear in old records that have not been updated (after the field has
officially been made obsolete). If you see a 440 in a record, just be aware
that it contains a series statement that is also indexed as a series added
entry. Which means that an 8XX series added entry is not needed in the
record, because the series title is already indexed in the 440.

At this point, the most important thing for you to know about the 490 field
is that it is NOT indexed."
--------------------
In our later workshops, especially the 4-day Book Blitz I--where we really
start teaching cataloging, we say:

"If you already know how to use the 440, you may continue to do so, if there
is a local need for you to do so. If, however, you are new to this topic, we
recommend that you immediately switch from using the 440, to using the
490/830 combination that we are about to explain."

Then, on Day 2 when we cover bibliographic descriptive fields 260-5xx, we
explain the AACR rule about transcribing the series statement exactly--and
show them how to enter the statement in a 490; and we say:
" Don't obsess about this 440 to 490/830 switch. It is a 'good thing'! You
will see many 440s in older records and will continue to see them in new
records for a long time (catalogers are often slow to adopt changes) It is
OK to leave 440s in records, as long as you know how to tell whether those
440s are correct." At which point we explain about the filing indicators and
verifying 440 headings in the LC authority file.

Then, on Day 3, when we cover the AACR rules for access points, we explain
how to use the LC Authority records in order to find established series
headings and decide on the appropriate 8XX fields to use for those headings
so as to provide them as as series added entries and say: 
" It is now much simpler to explain series treatment: we use 490 for all
series statements, and use an appropriate 8XX for all series added entries"
--------------------------
We also explain the LC Series Decision (aka LSD) and its implications, but
this has to wait until Book Blitz II (2 Days)
--------------------------
Finally, in Book Blitz III (2 Days), we discuss the impact of this decision
to make 440s obsolete on indexing and on authority control--basically no
impact, as long as the library has been following AACR rules for cataloging
and the correct MARC coding for the content all along.

I just realized how long this message has become--sorry about that. But I
hope that it is helpful.

Deborah
-----
Deborah Fritz
TMQ, Inc.
321-676-1904
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion List for issues related to cataloging & metadata education
& training [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Suzanne Stauffer
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 9:02 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [eduCAT] How are you teaching series?

I'm teaching the current use of 440 and 490/830. I have not seen any
official statement that the proposed change has been instituted, and the
MARC website has not been changed. I'm also not clear on what the indicators
would be and whether a 490 is required if the series is traced as given on
the item; it appears to be optional, but the wording of the proposal is
vague and ambiguous. 
 
It's difficult enough to understand one concept at a time; I don't want to
confuse them by teaching competing methods for handling the same concept,
particularly when one of them has not yet been finalized or released.
 
I'll save the proposed method for advanced cataloging.  
 
Suzanne M. Stauffer, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
School of Library and Information Science
Louisiana State University
275 Coates Hall
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
(225)578-1461
Fax: (225)578-4581
[log in to unmask]

________________________________

From: Discussion List for issues related to cataloging & metadata education
& training on behalf of Kamoji, Linda J
Sent: Mon 9/29/2008 6:51 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [eduCAT] How are you teaching series?



Hi. How are you dealing with teaching the series MARC fields for monographs?

Teaching the proposed abandonment of 440 and using 490 1 and 8XX only?

Teaching both the old (440) and the new ways?

Something else?

Thanks for any input.

Linda Kamoji
Indiana University Libraries
Cataloging manager and Adjunct Lecturer


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3481 (20080929) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com