Re: discard decisions Gaele Gillespie 02 Jul 1991 22:05 UTC
Since I've had some trouble today getting replies thru to the discussion list on the 1st try, I'm not sure if this one ever made it. If it did and this proves to be a "repeat", I apologize for the duplication. (GGILLESP@UKANVM) ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- In response to T. Sanders' June 9th inquiry about discard decisions: At the University of Kansas Libraries, decisions on discards are part of the overall retention decision process, so they are searched on OCLC and entries are added to the serials system once the retention decision is made by a bib- liographer. We receive so many unsolicited, unidentified titles on a continuous basis that it just makes sense to capture information and get it on the system so that the initial indentification process doesn't have to be repeated each time a subsequent issue arrives in Serials Receiving. Those things that are identified as part of a Serials Dept. paid subscription or standing order are set up by the Serials Acquisitions unit staff according to predefined guide- lines -- and some of these may become discards if the bibliographer of record does not want them added to the collections, and then the entries are simply updated with the proper discard information. Those things that are identified as NOT part of a Serials Dept. paid subscription or standing order are sent to the Acquisitions Dept. (Exchange & Gifts unit), where a brief, provisional record is set up on the serials system (based on Serials Dept. guidelines and according to mutually-approved procedures devised cojointly w/ the Acq. Dept.) Again, the records for titles that receive an ultimate retention decision of "discard" are edited by the appropriate staff in the Exchange & Gifts unit. Discard records are made up of: a brief bib record (country, lang., freq./reg., beg. date, enc. lvl. in the FF and 022, 1XX/245, 260, 310, 362 in the VF); and a brief holdings record (FF: check-in type, rec/acq. code, meth/acq code, retn. code, Ord. #/ord. date if linked to a paid order in the Serials Dept. or an exch/gift order in the Acq. Dept.; VF: 852, 5XX, 9XX --local order, note, and claims fields, including a note which reflects who made the discard decision and when). In some very exceptional cases, noninteractive issue records MAY be created (in order to have a history of issues rec'd. and when). In all cases, these records DO NOT display in the online catalog. However, what we call the "reference holdings screen" (a display screen for staff that transliterates the MARCese into English) reflects: Title, Imprint, First/Last Date, Freq., ISSN, Rec/Publn. Status, Location (e.g., Serials Department - Serials Receiving); Call No. (the standard "No Call #"), the standard, system- supplied note, "For holdings, inquire at Serials Department - Sreials Receiving , Location Notes (e.g., "Discarded upon receipt"), and General Notes (e.g., "Decision to discard made by _Bibliographer's Name_ on mm/dd/yy.") As part of the identification/retention decision process in both the Serials Dept. (Serials Acq. unit) and the Acq. Dept. (Exch & Gift unit), letters are written for those things earmarked as "discards" in an attempt to persuade the source to cease mailing them to us. It is because this is not always success- ful that the immediate creation of brief entries on the serials system are so beneficial. Later on, should someone submit a purchase request for a title that is set up as a "discard", the basic record is already on the system (with its history intact) and can easily be upgraded to a new-order record. Since we've been on our new system and have beefed up or otherwise clarified our discard records, bibliographers have found them useful, and we've been able to "save" titles/issues from being discarded once Bibliographer A realizes that several years ago Bibliographer X made the decision to discard a title which is now very important to retain. And, of course, records from the old system were converted to the new system with inherent errors intact, so we've been able to save titles that were initially miscoded as "discards". Altho I was able to do so in a previous position in a smaller library, there is NO WAY I can personally review every unidentified item that comes in thru Serials Receiving. However, the heads of the Serials Receiving and Serials Acquisitions units alert me whenever an especially problematic situation arises. Also, we and the Acq. Dept. have put a lot of effort into rationalizing our co-joint procedures so that the identification, bibliographer review, and records creation processes work more smoothly. It may SEEM like a lot of work for items that are "...just going to be discarded", but with our title base & the number of unsolicited titles/issues we receive on a continuous basis, the decision to create discard records has proved to be a sound one.