[yul-naco] NACO independence policies: revised draft

[Manon Theroux]

Dear NACO catalogers,

You might remember that the NACO Coordinating 
Committee sent out a document last month 
containing draft guidelines for "Yale policies 
for NACO independence." We are now sending out a 
second draft, which incorporates revisions made 
in response to feedback we received: 
http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/authorities/independence_policy.htm

The changes made to the last draft are listed 
below. Major changes include: a maximum 
acceptable response time for reviewing records 
(we have proposed that reviewers must respond 
within 2 weeks) and a change to the quantitative 
standards section to stipulate that the 90% 
acceptable rate applies to a consecutive sequence 
of records not all the records the person has 
ever submitted (this is what we had intended to 
say to begin with but we were not so good at expressing it!).

I hope everyone understands that these guidelines 
are not an attempt to make it more difficult for 
NACO catalogers to become independent. At heart, 
they are an attempt to make the review process 
more consistent (so that some people don't get an 
"easy" reviewer and some a "hard" reviewer, etc., 
leading to charges of unfair treatment) and an 
attempt to make sure that all heading types are 
being evaluated. Writing them forced us to think 
hard about what an "acceptable" record is and 
what kinds of quantitative and qualitative 
standards come into play when determining whether 
or not someone is ready to create records without 
review. As part of our research, we did a survey 
on the PCC discussion list to see what other 
libraries are doing; we were quite surprised to 
find out that many libraries do not allow anyone 
to become independent for NACO work (not a model we wanted to follow!).

Because we have proposed a minimum record number 
for each heading type, the total number of 
records needed to be fully independent is more 
than was specified in the Yale guidelines 
approved in 1996 (these guidelines specified "at 
least 50" records though it was very much at the 
discretion of the individual reviewer). On the 
other hand, we have dropped the accuracy rate from 95% to 90%.

Many thanks for the responses sent on the first 
draft; please feel free to offer comments on this 
revised draft as well, whether publicly or privately.

-Manon


====================================

General Comments:
-- added 3rd sentence in 1st paragraph
NEW: "If the overall quality of our records were 
to become unacceptable, our institutional 
independence could be revoked by the Library of Congress."

-- added new sentence in 2nd paragraph:
NEW: "The guidelines are intended to ensure that 
each cataloger is reviewed in a consistent and fair manner."

-- deleted final sentence:
OLD: "The guidelines below will not be applied 
retrospectively; catalogers granted independence 
in the past will not be asked to achieve independence a second time."
(note: still holds true we just don't need to say it in the policy)

Review Process
-- added new first paragraph:
NEW: "Reviewees may send no more than 10 records 
at a time (fewer than 10 is fine) and must wait 
until their reviewer has responded before sending 
another batch. Each batch may include a mix of heading types."

-- added new 2nd paragaraph:
NEW: "Reviewers must return the records to the 
reviewee within 2 weeks of receipt. If the batch 
contains a heading that is particularly 
problematic (and the reviewer has had to ask the 
NACO Coordinator to forward a query to LC), then 
the reviewer should return the batch minus the 
problematic heading and inform the reviewee that 
he or she may send another batch while the 
reviewer is waiting for the response from LC. 
Reviewers taking significant vacation or other 
approved release time should inform their 
reviewees and make interim arrangements as needed 
(e.g., asking reviewees to hold their headings or 
submit them to a designated temporary reviewer)."

-- deleted "learning phase" sentence
(see new paragraph in "Quantitative Standards" section)

Quantitative Standards:
-- revised 2nd paragraph entirely
OLD: "However, the number of unacceptable records 
should constitute no more than 10% of the total 
records submitted for that heading type. Thus, if 
a high number of unacceptable records have been 
submitted, it will take more than the minimum 
number of acceptable records to achieve independence."
NEW: "For each record type, the minimum number of 
acceptable records must be submitted 
consecutively and the number of unacceptable 
records within the sequence should constitute no 
more than 10%. For example, if a cataloger has 
submitted 60 personal name records in the last 
couple of months and 50 of the 60 records are of 
acceptable quality, the cataloger may be granted independence."

-- added new final paragraph:
NEW: "This system allows the reviewee to make 
mistakes during the initial "learning phase" 
without being penalized. Example: if a cataloger 
submits 20 unacceptable series records in her 
first two batches, learns from her mistakes, and 
then submits 25 acceptable series records, the 
first 20 records may be ignored and she may be granted independence."

Qualitative Standards
-- added new final paragraph:
NEW: "If the reviewee regularly reports duplicate 
authority records encountered in the LC/NAF, or 
discovers errors in existing authority records, 
the reviewer should interpret this as additional 
evidence that the cataloger is developing the 
qualitative expertise needed to function as an independent NACO contributor."

Major vs. Minor Errors:
-- revised 4XX in table:
OLD: "reference added but not needed"
NEW: "reference added but prohibited by rules"

-- revised 5XX in table:
OLD: "reference added but not needed"
NEW: "reference added but prohibited by rules"

--added new major errors under 781 in table (in 
case someone adds the field in a new NAR; we had only accounted for updates):
NEW:
Major: incorrect choice or form of subdivision
Major: incorrect indicator or subfield
Major: incorrect spacing, capitalization, or punctuation
Major: typo

____________________________________________

Manon Théroux
Authority Control Librarian
Catalog Department
Yale University Library
P.O. Box 208240
New Haven, CT 06520-8240

203-432-8376 (tel)
203-432-7231 (fax)
manon.theroux at yale.edu 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/yul-naco/attachments/20060313/09738a44/attachment.htm