Guidelines for evaluation of Core Records

Model C: Information to be reported when communicating the efficacy of core level cataloging from the patron perspective.

Model C-A (draft by Elaine Yontz, April 16, 1999)

1. Type of library

• Public
• College
• University
• Special

2. Identify levels of cataloging compared

• Core level compared to full level original cataloging
• Core level compared to minimal level original cataloging
• Core level compared to full level and to minimal level original cataloging

3. Describe level of authority work completed for each level of cataloging compared

• No authority work
• Local authority work only
• Full NACO authority work
  • Number of headings over duration of experiment
• Full SACO authority work
  • Number of headings over duration of experiment

4. Describe the sample for each level of cataloging compared. (Samples should be comparable in size, subject, language, and span of dates of entry in local catalog)

• Sample size (number of titles)
• Format(s)
• Subject area(s)
• Language(s)
• Library classification scheme(s)
• Span of imprint dates
• Span of dates of entry into local catalog

5. Describe the unit of measure to be used in the comparison (Apply measure equally to both core and comparison level(s))

• Number of charges per title
• Number of browses per title
• Number of holds per title

6. Describe methodology of the comparison

• Duration of experiment
• How is data collected/reported?
• Other special conditions/activities/controls

MODEL C-B (Draft by Elaine Yontz, April 28, 1999)

1. Type of library

• Public
• College
• University
• Special

2. Describe the sample for each level of cataloging compared

• Sample size (number of titles)
• Format(s)
• Subject area(s)
• Language(s)
• Library's classification scheme(s)
• Span of imprint dates

3. Describe the methodology of the comparison

• Parts of record evaluated
• Author entries
• Title entries
• Uniform title entries
• Variant title entries
• Series information
• Notes
• Subject headings
• Comparison of users' perception of acceptability of records of different levels