We’re relatively small, too, but part of a large consortium.  We have one serials librarian, two catalogers, and one ERM librarian (me) working half time (when I’m not also trying to be the systems librarian). 

 

We have many aggregator databases, several consortially purchased, and there is absolutely no way we would even consider trying to catalog their content.  It’s just not sustainable.  We just keep pushing people to use our “find journals” feature (which is SFX) to search journals, even though we have print titles in the catalog.  Putting the print titles in SFX was a royal pain, but it was easier than trying to maintain aggregator lists in the catalog. 

 

Of course, this is all moot for us now, since we go live with Primo in 2 weeks.

 

Melissa Platkowski


Electronic Resources Librarian
David A. Cofrin Library
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay
2420 Nicolet Dr.
Green Bay, WI  54311-7001
P: (920) 465-2764
 
F: (920) 465-2136


platkowm@uwgb.edu

 

http://www.uwgb.edu/library

 

 

From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of kendall vance
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 4:14 PM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: [SERIALST] Aggregator Database - to catalog or not to catalog

 

We are weighing the relative merits of cataloging each of the titles that we currently have access to though our aggregator databases.  We already have an AtoZ solution (specifically, Ebsco AtoZ) to guide students to our e-journal content, but are considering duplicating this data in our catalog as well.

The reason is that, it appears, the existence of two separate search interfaces is proving confusing to our patrons. As it stands, we direct our users to the AtoZ search interface too locate a gived e-journal by title.  However, some users notice the "journals" search parameter in our catalog and become confused as to which place to search.  At the moment, we include in our catalog all print resources (of course) as well as those titles whose subscriptions include PRINT+ONLINE (as well as a few very small packages).

If we make this change, we will be adding ~60,000 titles, which will need to be painstakingly maintained, no small undertaking given the churn rate in our aggregators.  This will double the number of records in our relatively small collection  (and I am the totality of our serials dept.).

Thus, I would like to solicit your thoughts on the matter.  Is cataloging this long list of titles, volatile as it is, worth effort.  Do other libraries do this as a matter of course, or would this be an atypical practice on our part if we choose to pursue it.  And, if other are doing this, any tips/cautionary tales?

Thanks much, and would appreciate any an all feedback others might offer.

***********************************************
* You are subscribed to the SERIALST listserv (Serials in Libraries discussion forum)
* To post a message: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
* For additional information, see SERIALST Scope, Purpose and Usage Guidelines.
***********************************************

***********************************************
* You are subscribed to the SERIALST listserv (Serials in Libraries discussion forum)
* To unsubscribe, send an email to the server address: LISTSERV@LIST.UVM.EDU . Do NOT include a subject line. Type as an email message these two words: SIGNOFF SERIALST
* For additional information, see SERIALST Scope, Purpose and Usage Guidelines.
***********************************************