RDA: The New Era of Resource Description and Access Richard Sapon-White, Instructor Syllabus for Fulbright Grant at University of Warsaw1 DescriptionOn March 31, 2013, the Library of Congress will no longer create bibliographic orauthority records using the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules. Instead, the library andmany others in the U.S. and around the world will be transitioning to ResourceDescription and Access (RDA). RDA is the first major change in cataloging rules inmany decades, predicted to make information search and retrieval in libraries, digitalrepositories, and other information resources better and more user-friendly.This course will begin by examining the foundations of RDA, starting with thebibliographic framework provided by Functional Requirements of Bibliographic Records(FRBR) and Functional Requirements of Authority Data (FRAD). Most of the coursesessions, however, will be devoted to reading recent peer-reviewed journal articles onRDA and its expected impact on library cataloging and metadata creation. Discussion ofthe conceptual framework and the implementation process will be highlighted.The course will be taught in American seminar style, i.e., with emphasis on student-leddiscussions on articles in the current library literature. All students will be expected toread the articles and be prepared to discuss them each week in class. Students will beassessed on the quality of their oral presentations and discussion leadership as well as awritten research paper and in-class participation.The language of instruction will be English.2 ObjectivesBy the end of the course, students should have a thorough understanding of thefoundations, structure and function of RDA. Students’ choice of articles will determinethe specific topics covered in the course. Learning objectives may include, but are notlimited to: a. understanding of FRBR and FRAD and their relationship to RDA b. the ability to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of RDA c. understanding the structure of RDA and the RDA Vocabularies d. the ability to read primary library literature critically e. improvement of oral and written presentation skills in English3 Topical Outline
The first two sessions will include a brief review of the history of cataloging codes, an overview of FRBR and FRAD, and the RDA development process. Topics covered in the class beyond the first two sessions will depend on the research articles chosen by students. Please see the supplementary texts and readings for potential articles for discussion.4 Course Work Students will be expected to attend all class sessions, read assigned articles, and participate in class discussions. After the first two class sessions conducted by the instructor, students will be giving brief presentations and leading discussions for the remainder of the semester. Emphasis will be placed on critically evaluating the readings in class discussions as well as working on presentation and writing skills. A written report on the topic of the presentation is due three weeks after the presentation or by the last regular class session, whichever comes first. Late submissions will be marked down. The report needs to be at least 5 pages long, 1.5- line spaced, in 12-point Times New Roman font, and cite three sources from the professional library literature.5 Grading Presentation 40% Written Report 40% Class participation 20%6 Required Texts (on reserve in the library) Oliver, Chris. Introducing RDA: A Guide to the Basics. Chicago: American Library Association, 2010. Coyle, Karen. RDA Vocabularies for a Twenty-First Century Data Environment. (Library Technology Reports, vol. 46, no. 2) Chicago: American Library Association, 2010.7 Supplementary Texts and Readings (will be supplied by the instructor) Biella, Joan C., and Heidi G. Lerner. 2011. "The RDA Test and Hebraica Cataloging: Applying RDA in One Cataloging Community." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 49, no. 7/8: 676-695. Bloss, Marjorie E. 2011. "Testing RDA at Dominican Universitys Graduate School of Library and Information Science: The Students’ Perspectives." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 49, no. 7/8: 582-599
Bowen, Jennifer. 2008. “Metadata to Support Next-Generation Library ResourceDiscovery: Lessons from the Extensible Catalog, Phase 1.” Information Technology& Libraries 27, no. 2: 5-19.Coyle, Karen, and Diane Hillmann. 2007. “Resource Description and Access (RDA):Cataloging Rules for the 20th Century.” D-Lib Magazine 13, no. 1/2.www.dlib.org/dlib/january07/coyle/01coyle.html.Cronin, Christopher. 2011. "From Testing to Implementation: ManagingFull-Scale RDA Adoption at the University of Chicago." Cataloging &Classification Quarterly 49, no. 7/8: 626-646.Curran, Mary. 2009. "Serials in RDA: A Starters Tour and Kit." SerialsLibrarian 57, no. 4: 306-323.Glennan, Kathryn P. 2012. “The Development Of Resource Description & AccessAnd Its Impact On Music Materials.” Notes. Vol. 68, Issue 3: 526-534.Hawkins, Les. 2011. "Content Type, Media Type and Carrier Type: MARC 21Fields Related to Resource Description and Access." Serials Review 37,no. 3: 205-206.McCutcheon, Sevim. 2011. "RDA Testing in Triplicate: Kent StateUniversitys Experiences with RDA Testing." Cataloging & ClassificationQuarterly 49, no. 7/8: 607-625.Hider, Philip. 2009. “Library Resource Categories and their Possible Groupings.”Australian Academic & Research Libraries. Vol. 40, Issue 2: 105-115.IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records.Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records: Final Report. Sept. 1997, asamended and corrected. http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf.Knowlton, Steven A. 2009. “How the Current Draft of RDA Addresses theCataloging of Reproductions, Facsimiles, and Microforms.” Library Resources &Technical Services. Vol. 53 Issue 3: 159-165.Miksa, Shawne D. 2009. “Resource Description and Access (RDA) and NewResearch Potentials.” Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science &Technology 35, no. 5: 47-51.Patton, Glenn E., ed. Functional Requirements for Authority Data: A ConceptualModel. (IFLA Series on Bibliographic Control 34). Munich: K.G. Saur, 2009.RDA Toolkit. http://www.rdatoolkit.org/.
Seikel, Michele. 2009. "No More Romanizing: The Attempt to Be LessAnglocentric in RDA." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 47, no. 8:741-748.Shadle, Steve. 2006. “FRBR and Serials.” Serials Librarian 50, no. 1 & 2: 83-103.Shieh, Jackie. 2011. "Participation in the U.S. RDA Test Program HelpedTransform Work Habits at George Washington University Libraries."Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 49, no. 7/8: 647-654.Wacker, Melanie, Myung-Ja Han, and Judith Dartt. 2011. "Testing ResourceDescription and Access (RDA) with Non-MARC Metadata Standards."Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 49, no. 7/8: 655-675.Whittaker, Beth M. 2007. “DACS and RDA: Insights and Questions from the NewArchival Descriptive Standard.” Library Resources & Technical Services. Vol. 51Issue 2: 98-105.Young, Jennifer B., and Valerie Bross. 2011. "Results of the CRCCInformal RDA Testing Task Force." Cataloging & Classification Quarterly49, no. 7/8: 600-606.