Tag Archives: Expert Community Experiment

OCLC’s Expert Community Experiment Update

This announcement was just posted by Glenn Patton:

I wanted to call OCLC-CAT readers’ attention to recent updates to the Expert Community pages on the OCLC web site (http://www.oclc.org/us/en/worldcat/catalog/quality/expert/default.htm).  The pages have been updated to clarify that, following the conclusion of the experiment last August, the functionality remain in place.  Activity has continued to be strong over the past 4 months:

August 2009             19,890 replaces

September 2009  20,854 replaces

October 2009            23,794 replaces

November 2009   18,600 replaces

The recording of the Wrap-up webinar is also available on the updated pages.  If you didn’t get a chance to participate in one of the live sessions, click on “Recorded web sessions” in the navigation bar on the left and select “Expert Community Wrap-up Webinar” from the list.

If you would like to track your own institution’s statistics, log on to OCLC Product Services Web (http://psw.oclc.org/) and select “download records and reports”.   Select the report, “OCLC Product Code Detail Usage Report”.  You can either display the report or download it.  To track your Expert Community replace activity, look for the product code, ONT6390.  Statistics are available for July through October of this fiscal year as well as for February through June of last fiscal year.  November data should be available in the next few days.

On behalf of my OCLC colleagues, thanks again for your support of the Expert Community.

Glenn E. Patton

Director, WorldCat Quality Management



Leave a comment

Filed under cataloging, OCLC

OCLC’s Expert Community Experiment Ends

It has just been announced. OCLC’s wiki-like experiment has ended.

Glenn Patton reports:

This past Saturday, August 15th, marked the previously announced end of the six-month Expert Community Experiment.  My OCLC colleagues and I have been very pleased with the results of the experiment.

Here’s a quick summary of the statistics for activity from February 15 through August 15:

  • Expert Community Experiment replaces: 108,766
  • Number of institutions participating: 1,690 did at least one replace during the experiment with 368 institutions having activity each month.

The functionality that was implemented for the experiment will remain available for your continued use.

Over the next few weeks, we will complete our evaluation (including potential credits) and prepare for a wrap-up webinar that is planned for the latter half of September.   Watch for an announcement of this webinar.

Leave a comment

Filed under cataloging, OCLC

OCLC Expert Community Experiment – July Stats

The July statistics for OCLC’s Expert Community Experiment have been announced by Glenn Patton:

Activity continued to grow in July with 20,287 replaces compared to 19,387 in June.  That brings us to a total of 99,693 Expert Community replaces since the Experiment started in February.

The number of Expert Community replaces continues to be higher than any other type of replace.

1,023 institutions did at least one replace during the month of June with 18 institutions doing more than 200 replaces. 1658 institutions have done at least 1 replace during the span  of the Experiment with 425 having activity each month.

Here are statistics for other types of replaces during July:

  • Database Enrichment: 19,225 (up from 16, 992 in June)
  • Minimal-Level Upgrade: 12, 720 (down from 14,185)
  • Enhance Regular: 14,961 (down from 15,212)
  • Enhance National: 3,296 (down from 3,400)
  • CONSER Authentication: 1,400 (down from 1,490)
  • CONSER Maintenance: 5,472 (down from 5,785)

Leave a comment

Filed under OCLC

OCLC Expert Community Experiement and Webinars

Just out from OCLC:

OCLC WorldCat Quality Management staff members are planning to offer webinars for OCLC member libraries approximately once per quarter in the future.  The Expert Community Experiment was the subject of a Webinar in February 2009.  In June 2009, we offered a Webinar on parallel records.  Recordings of both of these webinars are available on the web at: http://www.oclc.org/us/en/worldcat/catalog/quality/expert/default.htm
We plan to offer a Webinar in September on the results of and next steps for the Expert Community Experiment.  Dates and times will be announced at a later date.

…What topics would you like us to cover in future webinars?  Are there cataloging or cataloging quality related topics that you would find helpful to hear about from OCLC staff?

We welcome your ideas and suggestions:  askqc@oclc.org.  Askqc@oclc.org is the address we created for questions about the Expert Community Experiment.

Leave a comment

Filed under cataloging, OCLC

OCLC Expert Community Experiment, June 2009 Stats In

Glenn Patton just posted the statistics for the OCLC Expert Community Experiment for the month of June.

In June, activity was higher with 19,387 replaces compared to 16,704 in May.  That brings us to a total of 79,406 Expert Community replaces since the Experiment started in February. The number of Expert Community replaces continues to be higher than any other type of replace.

1,011 institutions did at least one replace during the month of June with 16 institutions doing more than 200 replaces. 1573 institutions have done at least 1 replace during the span  of the Experiment with 449 having activity each month.
Intensive review of replaced records for the month of May has been completed and the June review has started.

As we announced at the beginning of the Experiment, it will last at least until August 15th.  As we make more progress with the review process, we will have more information about future plans.

Here are statistics for other types of replaces during June:
Database Enrichment: 16, 992 (up from 15,950)
Minimal-Level Upgrade: 14,185 (up from 13,178)
Enhance Regular: 15,212 (down from 15,521)
Enhance National: 3400 (up from 2,998)
CONSER Authentication: 1,490 (up from 1,118)
CONSER Maintenance: 5,785 (up from 5,410)
During June, OCLC staff presented two webinars on parallel records.  A recorded version of one of those sessions is now available from the Expert Community page


Leave a comment

Filed under cataloging, OCLC

OCLC Expert Community Stats for May

Glenn Patton has just put out the statistics for May in regards to the OCLC Expert Community Experiment.

In May, there were 16,704 Expert Community Experiment replaces (down from 19,489 in April).  Activity since the start of the Experiment now totals 60,244 records replaced.  There were 1024 institutions that did at least one replace in May.  Individual institution numbers ranged from 2 institutions doing more than 400 replaces and 2 institutions doing  more than 300 replaces to 283 institutions doing 1 replace each.
Here are the number for the other types of replaces during the same time period:
Database Enrichment: 15,950
Minimal-Level Upgrade: 13,178
Enhance Regular: 15,521
Enhance National: 2,998
CONSER Authentication: 1,118
CONSER Maintenance: 5,410
Later this month, we will offer a webinar on parallel records.  Watch for the announcements.

Leave a comment

Filed under cataloging

OCLC Expert Community Experiment

The experiment ends this coming July. We have reached the middle of this experiment (more or less). There has been an increase in the number of changes to records in OCLC. These changes range from adding call numbers to correcting spelling mistakes. With the knowledge that Glenn Patton releases every month as to the statistics related to this experiment, a number of questions can be asked:

-Is this experiment still important?
-Is this experiment an attempt to “wiki” ize OCLC’s Connexion?
-Should this experiment be made into a permanent feature?

Yes, this experiment is still very important. The cataloging community is a rich resource of talented and knowledgeable professionals. However, as we all know, not all catalogers possess the same knowledge or have the same skill sets. Some are better with languages. Some are more familiar with particular types of formats over others. This diversity is our strength as a community. This experiment shows that we can pool together those skills to offer better quality records to other libraries and hence users.

Is this experiment an attempt to “wiki-ize” Connexion? There is no tagging or comment boxes available in Connexion. Records can be changed (hopefully for the better). But this is really not much different from what has taken place before now. We relied on other catalogers who entered original records and/or members who could change master records to enter “good” data that needed little updating. Errors were corrected by using a form that was submitted or by alerting the community through the use of one of the listservs like AUTOCAT. That process is now much easier and quicker thanks to this experiment. However, the tempered voice of the community is still being heard on various listservs.

I don’t think this experiment has turned Connexion into a wiki. It has “wiki-ized” Connection because it has given the opportunity to enhance records to a larger set within the community than before. In this regard, all members with full cataloging privileges and not just a select few can be instrumental in bettering records. Not only does the community have opinions and suggestions posted on listservs but more of us can participate and take action for the better. Of course, errors will continue to plague us as well as difference of opinions. Yet, I see this experiment as empowering the community to make better bibliographic records overall.

I believe that this experiment should be a permanent feature of Connexion. Why should someone have to report a spelling error instead of being able to just correct that error then and there. I understand that we have to be careful when manipulating master records. Adding local information or changing the record to reflect our library’s collection is not a good tactic to implement.

Since the experiement is not over yet, there is time to see just how it affects Connexion. Are records really being improved? Are there little battles being played out in terms of records being changed, changed back, changed again, and then changed back to what it was originally?

It will be interesting to see the end results of this experiment. It will also be helpful to have more information as to the nature of those changes, what those changes were, and if certain fields were changed more than once.

1 Comment

Filed under cataloging, OCLC