DOCUMENT RESUME ED 111 376 IR 002 430 AUTHOR Schoenung, James G. TITLE The Ohio College Library Center: An Overview. Report No. 1. INSTITUTION Michigan Library Consortium, Detroit. PUB DATE Jan 74 NOTE 47p.; :or related documents see IR 002 431 and 432 EDRS PRICE MF-$0.76 HC-$1.95 Plus Postage DESCRIPTORS *Cataloging; College Libraries; Costs; DataBases; Interlibrary Loans; *Library Automation; Library Cooperation; *Library Networks; Library Technical Processes; *On Line Systems; Program Descriptions; Regional Libraries; *Shared Services; Union Catalogs IDENTIFIERS OCLC; *Ohio College Library Center ABSTRACT The Ohio College Library Center (OCLC) isa nonprofit computerized library processing center operatingout of Columbus, Ohio. Six years after its incorporation, OCLC isnow mainly in the business of operating a shared catalogingsystem and producing catalog cards designed to meet the needs of eachof its member libraries. OCLC also maintainsa union catalog of its member libraries as a byproduct of this service.Its data base crows at the rate of about 1,000 records per day, both Library ofCongress (LC) MARC records and the original cataloging done bymember libraries. Catalogers in OCLC's member libraries, using theircomputer display terminals, can call up records in catalog cardformat by imputing LC number, author, or title. Recordscan be modified online to meet local needs. This report further describesOCLC in terms of the basic cataloging process, the system's advantages anddisadvantages, and the costs to and responsibilities of participating libraries. Appendixes outline planned OCLC subsystems andLC's MARC and RECON projects. Sample OCLC printouts are included. (Author/SL) *********************************************************************** Documents acquired by ERIC include many informal unpublished * materials not available from othersources. ERIC makes every effort * * to obtain the best copy available. nevertheless, itemsof marginal * * reproducibility are often encountered and thisaffects the quality * * of the microfiche and hardcopy reproductionsERIC makes available * * via the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS). EDRS isnot * responsible for the quality of the original document.Reproductions * * supplied by EDRS are the best thatcan be made from the original. *********************************************************************** V MICHIGAN LIBRARY CONSORTIUM '-Report THE OHIO COLLEGE LIBRARY CENTER: AN OVERVIEW U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION &WELFARE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEENREPRO- DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATIONORIGIN ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILYREPRE SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTEOF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY BY James G. Schoenung A Wayne State University January, 1974 V TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 1-4 II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION III. HISTORY AND ORGANIZATION 4-5 IV. OTHER CONSORTIA AFFILIATED WITHOCLC 5-6 V. SHARED CATALOGING SYSTEM 6-8 VI. UNION CATALOG INFORMATION 8-10 10 VII. ACCESSIONS LISTS VIII. THE OCLC DATA BASE 10-13 13-15 IX. WORKING WITHTHE CRT AND MARC PORMAT X. ON-LINE EQUIPMENT AND SEARCHING 15-17 XI. ADVANTAGES OF PARTICIPATINGWITH OCLC 17-19 XII. DISADVANTAGES OF OCLC 19-21 XIII. RESPONSIBILITIES AND STANDARDSREQUIRED BY OCLC 21-22 XIV. WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES? 22-23 XV. REPLICATION OR CONTRACT 23 XVI. ON-LINE VERSUS OFF-LINE CARDPRODUCTION 23-24 XVII. ASSESSING COSTS 24-27 XVIII. APPENDIX I - PLANNED OCLC SUBSYSTEMS 28-32 XIX. APPENDIX II - MARC AND RECONPROJECTS 33-35 XX. APPENDIX III - CRT ANDKEYBOARD 36-37 XXI. APPENDIX IV - SAMPLE OCLCCATALOG CARDS 38-39 XXII. FOOTNOTES 40-43 XXIII. SUGGESTED READING 44 -1- INTRODUCTION This report, written over the past sixweeks at the request of the Michigan Cooperative Executive Committee, grew outof the Conference on Michigan Academic Library Cooperation held,. in Lansing onNovember 14-15, 1973. At that libra- meeting it was apparent that moreinformation was needed if Michigan Conse- ries were to become involvedwith the Ohio College LibraryCenter. quently I have tried to present abroad background picture of whatOCLC is prospects--and how doing--its history, problems,accomplishments, and future in with the Center. we might be affectedif Michigan libraries decide to tie preju- ThOugh I have attempted to keep it asfactual as possible, I am certain dices have slipped in. Having worked with this system forapproximately fifteen months at Drexel University inPhiladelphia, I can not but be enthusi- pUt astic over the Center's achievements. Wherever possible I have tried to For those of you who have extraneous information infootnotes or an appendix. For others, I been following the literature, someof this may be routine. hope it answers some questionsand raises still more. A short bibliography of suggested reading is found atthe end. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Ohio College Library Center(OCLC) is a not-for-profit, computerized Its purposes, as library processing centeroperating out of Columbus, Ohio. "...to establish, stated in the OCLC AmendedArticles of Incorporation, are li- maintain and operate a computerized,regional library center to serve the become a part braries of Ohio (both stateand private) and designed so as to to of any national electronicsnetwork for bibliographical communication; central develop, maintain and operate ashared cataloging program based upon a central catalog (inven store; to create,maintain, and operate a computerized -1- / /tory) of books and journals in the participating libraries; and to do such research and development as are necessary to accomplish and extend the con- "1 cept. Today, six years after its incorporation, the Center is mainly in the business of operating a 'shared cataloging' system and producing catalog cards designed to meet the needs of each of its member libraries.As a by-product of this service, it serves as a union catalog by providing a loca- tion symbol for each new title cataloged within the system, giving information concerning holdings of neighboring libraries to be used in book selection and avoidance of unnecessary duplication, and making available bibliographic in- formation that can be used in ordering.To date, it is unquestionably the most successful cooperative of its type, furnishing library personnel with cataloging data when and where they need it. OCLC's Director, Mr. Frederick G. Kilgour, has long been involved in li- brary automation activities. As Associate Librarian for Research and Develop- ment at Yale University, he was instrumental in starting the Columbia-Harvard- 2 Yale Medical Libraries Computerization Project back in 1961. Kilgour argues that computers can do two things for libraries: 1) save money and stabilize 3 costs and 2) increase services through personal attention. To demonstrate the financial savings that can be made, the Center's off- line card production system, which tasted about thirteen months, produced, over 440,000 catalog cards ready for filing with overtyped headings at an average cost of 10.6 cents per finished card.At the time this compared favorably with 4 the cheapest manual procedures of 23.6 cents per card. It should be kept in mind that these figures and all other cost figures cited are artificial in that they do not take into account the various state and federal monies that have gone into the development of the OCLC system. A more current figure for the on-line operation, shows that during the FY 1972/73, OCLC libraries cataloged 572,000 titles, producing nearly four million catalog cards, at a cost of -2- f. $2.02 per title for Ohio libraries and aslightly higher cost for libraries 5 outside of Ohio. According to Kilgour, a second advantageof a computerized system - -cus- computer's tomized services and greaterhumanization--results from the digital individual ability to treat individuals asindividual people and events as 6 the personal touch is :.e.i.arent events. From a technical services' viewpoint, cooperative in OCLC's present card productionsystem. A library joining the its catalog must submit an explicit profileshowing how that library wants make it possible to pro- cards to appear. Current options for card production combinations of duce cards for a single titlein about seven thousand usable for type and placement of elements. These cards are individually formatted or call number, include provisionfor four different indentions, upper-case hostof other tailored upper and lower-caseletters for subject headings, and a options to fit the needs of aspecific library. This flexibility, character- between such sys- istic of computer-based systems,is an important difference additional option requires a tems and traditionalmanual procedures where each 7 increases costs. The greater expenditure ofprocessing time and therefore in packs Center provides these cards infinal form, prefiled and alphabetized for immediate filing in alibrary's card catalogs. Even in OCLC is based on what mightbe termed a 'data utility' concept. country's most well- the late Sixties it wasclear that only a few of this library automation endowed universities couldafford to develop an integrated could afford the heavy initial in- program. However a cooperative like OCLC hardware, plus the talent and vestment in computerand telecommunications programming skills needed toimplement such a system. From the start Kilgour OCLC funded, contin- has shown exceptionaladministrative ability in keeping the Center relate to the uing research onprojected subsystems, and making