Better, Faster, Stronger
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.53n4.261Abstract
The University of Denver’s Penrose Library implemented a consolidated cataloging and archives processing unit for all materials, taking advantage of the structure, workflow design, and staff resources that were already in place for library-wide materials processing: acquisitions, cataloging, binding, and stacks maintenance. The objective of Penrose Library’s integrated approach was to efficiently create metadata that allow searches based on subject relevance rather than on collection provenance. The library streamlined archives processing by integrating digital content creation and management into the materials processing workflow. The result is a flexible, sustainable, and scalable model for archives processing that utilizes existing staff by enhancing and extending the skills of both experienced monographs catalogers and archivists.
References
Anne Gilliland-Swetland, Enduring Paradigm, New Opportunities: The Value of the Archival Perspective in the Digital Environment (Washington, D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources 2000) (accessed June 1, 2009)nLibrary of Congress, : Encoded Archival Description, www.loc.gov/eadnMark A. Greene, Dennis Meissner, '“More Product, Less Process: Revamping Traditional Archival Processing,”' American Archivist 68 no. 2 (2005): 208-263nPam Hackbart-Dean, Christine De Catanzaro, '“The Strongest Link: The Management and Processing of Archival Collections,”' Archival Issues: Journal of the Midwest Archives Conference 27 no. 2 (2002): 125-36 Christine Weideman, “Accessioning as Processing,”
American Archivist
, no. 2 (Fall/Winter 2006): 274–83; Matt Gorzalski, “Minimal Processing: Its Context and Influence in the Archival Community,”
Journal of Archival Organization
, no. 3 (2008): 186–200nChris Prom, Scott A. Schwartz, '“A Unified, Standards-Compliant System for Describing Archives and Manuscript Collections”' (2004) (accessed June 1, 2009)nWilliam E. Landis, '“Nuts and Bolts: Implementing Descriptive Standards to Enable Virtual Collections,”' Journal of Archival Organization 1 no. 1 (2002): 81nElizabeth Yakel, '“Encoded Archival Description: Are Finding Aids Boundary Spanners or Barriers for Users?”' Journal of Archival Organization 2 no. 1 (2004): 63-78 Lisa R. Coats, “Users of EAD Finding Aids: Who Are They and Are They Satisfied?”
Journal of Archival Organization
, no. 3 (2004): 25–39; Wendy Duff and Penka Stoyanova, “Transforming the Crazy Quilt: Archival Displays from a Users’ Point of View,”
Archivaria
(1998): 44–79nJennifer Schaffner, The Metadata is the Interface: Better Description for Better Discovery of Archives and Special Collections,
Synthesized from User Studies
(2009) (accessed June 1, 2009)nIbidn Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (Ottawa: Canadian Library Assn. 2002) London: Charter Institute of Library and Information Professionals; Chicago: ALAnDavid Banush, '“Stepping Out: The Expanding Role of Catalogers in Academic Libraries and Academic Institutions,”' Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 45 no. 3 (2008): 81-90 Joan M. Gregory, Alice I. Weber, and Shona R. Dippie, “Innovative Roles for Technical Services Librarians: Extending Our Reach,”
Technical Services Quarterly
, no. 4 (2008): 37–47n Descriptive Policies and Practices Manual (Denver: University of Denver Penrose Library 2007)nDublin Core Metadata Initiative, http://dublincore.orgnSociety of American Archivists, Richard Pearce-Moses, A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology (2005), www.archivists.org/glossary/index.aspnLibrary of Congress, METS: Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard, www.loc.gov/standards/metsnUniversity of Virginia Library, Electronic Text Center, Text Encoding Initiative Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange (P4), http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/standards/tei/teip4/index.htmlnGreene and Meissner, “More Product Less Process.”nAndrea Rosenbusch, '“Are Our Users Being Served? A Report on Online Archival Databases,”' Archives and Manuscripts 29 no. 1 (2001): 50nDigital Library Federation,
Digital Library Federation/Aquifer Implementation Guidelines for Shareable MODS Records
, version 1.1, (Mar. 2009), http://wiki.dlib.indiana.edu/confluence/download/attachments/24288/DLFMODS_ImplementationGuideLines.pdfnElisabeth Betz Parker, Graphic Materials: Rules for Describing Original Items and Historical Collections (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress 1982)
Chicago Manual of Style
, 15th ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago, 2003)n
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC-BY-NC 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after it has been accepted for publication. Sharing can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
