7 messages, 222 lines:
(1)------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 14:48:09 -0400
From: Lisa Macklin <lisa.macklin@IBID.LIBRARY.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Frequency of reproduced serials
Dear Mike (aka Between a rock and a hard place),
You are not crazy and your system is not asinine. We also predict fiche and
film based on the frequency of publication for that format. We predict the
paper issues based on the frequency of publication for those issues. For
instance, the paper issues of Newsweek are predicted to come weekly, which
is how they are published. The fiche shipments of Newsweek are predicted to
come quarterly, which is how the fiche is published and received. We do use
entirely different check in records for paper and fiche, so that may help
prevent confusion. We also use a pound sign (#) for the numbering of the
quarterly fiche shipments, which for us indicates that the numbering is made
up for prediction only and does not appear on the piece. We have 3 people
primarily responsible for check in, and all 3 grasp this concept just fine.
I'm sorry your staff member is near rebellion. Have you considered
chocolate? A candy dish or a plate of brownies can go a long way in
diffusing staff stress. I'm not trying to sound flip, just suggesting an
easy and often effective method of easing the strain a little. After all,
we're not practicing brain surgery and sometimes we need to lighten up on
ourselves and each other a little.
Lisa A. Macklin
Head, Serials Control Dept. Phone: (404) 894-4517
Georgia Institute of Technology FAX: (404) 894-1723
Library and Information Center e-mail: lisa.macklin@library.gatech.edu
Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0900
------------------
You said:
>Our chief journal "checker-inner" staged the closest she will ever come to
>a one-woman rebellion yesterday when checking in microfiche on our Serials
>control program (the Serials Module of EOSi -- the former Data Trek). When
>we first began subscribing to journals/serials on microfiche, we set the
>frequency and issue data up based upon how the source/paper copy is set up
>(bi-weekly, monthly, weekly, etc.) It turns out the fiche is more likely
>to be shipped in batches, quarterly, semi-annually, or annually. So we
>changed our records (35 titles) to reflect the expected frequency and
>arrival time (always later than the paper). So, for example, instead of
>checking in v. 75, #3, March 1996 of Journal of Something Medical, we
>check in v. 75, #1, 1996, as a >quarterly<, for the January through March
>fiche (the fiche sheets vary in how they are broken down: some follow the
>pattern of the paper, others appear continuous). When the Apr-June fiche
>arrives next January or so, we check that in as v. 75, #2, 1996, and so
>on. The chief reason for this is to allow the Serials module to
>anticipate when the next "issue" (batch of fiche, in this case) is due,
>greatly facilitating claiming. It isn't fair to the vendor to be claiming
>the January through May issues when none of them will be shipped until the
>June issue is filmed, and the semiannual fiche batch sent out, for
>example.
>
>As I said, our chief checker-inner staged her own little rebellion
>yesterday, and loudly labeled the arrangement as "asinine" (thank you
>very much). As I had altered all 35 titles from their inaccurate original
>to this new format, I tried to explain the arrangement (and tried NOT to
>be insulted....), but the explanation fell on deaf ears.
>
>How do others -- especially those using automated serials control --
>handle a) the frequency of reproduced serials (fiche, film, CD-ROM, etc.)
>where the frequency is different from the original, and b) the issue data
>for such items?
>
>The rebel is without a cause, for the rest of the week, being on vacation,
>so now is the time for us to come up with a plan.
>
>As is, our setup is "asinine", and "confusing". As was, the Serials
>Module was recommending items for claiming long before they were due.
>
>Any ideas?
>
>Mike "Between a Rock and a Hard Place" Scully, of....
>Swedish Medical Center/Ballard | Internet: swedlib2@wln.com
>Reference Library | http://www.wln.com/~swedlib1
>NW Market & Barnes PO Box 70707 | Voice:206/781-6462 Fax:206/781-6193
>Seattle WA 98107-1507 | "All opinions are those of the writer."
(2)-------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 13:31:28 -0500
From: Jeanette Skwor <SKWORJ@GBMS01.UWGB.EDU>
Subject: Re: Frequency of reproduced serials
> As I said, our chief checker-inner staged her own little rebellion
> yesterday, and loudly labeled the arrangement as "asinine" (thank you
> very much). As I had altered all 35 titles from their inaccurate original
> to this new format, I tried to explain the arrangement (and tried NOT to
> be insulted....), but the explanation fell on deaf ears.
>
> How do others -- especially those using automated serials control --
> handle a) the frequency of reproduced serials (fiche, film, CD-ROM, etc.)
> where the frequency is different from the original, and b) the issue data
> for such items?
***Why not ask the chief checker-inner for suggestions?
Jeanette Skwor
the person who both sets up patterns and checks in troublemakers
here at UWGB, but has not faced this particular manner of
fiche mailings
(3)-------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 13:56:53 -0500
From: Vickey Baumli <VBAUMLI@ACAD.NWMISSOURI.EDU>
Subject: Re: Frequency of reproduced serials
Mike, please share your answers-I, too, have wrestled with this
problem and as of now I check them in as individual issues and
forget about the claiming, as there doesn't seem to be that
much of a problem needing to claim.
Vickey Baumli, NWMSU,
Maryville, MO
(4)----------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 14:54:36 -0500
From: Liz Linton <melinton@ALISON.SBC.EDU>
Organization: Sweet Briar College Library
Subject: Re: Frequency of reproduced serials
We went the middle way--on the Dynix system we put the publication
patterns of the fiche and film in so that they match the patterns of the
paper copies. But then we made all the fiche and film subscriptions
something other than "active" in the "aquisitions status" field. (They
say "other" on our subscription summary screens.) This way, the system
doesn't generate claims, which isn't a problem
for us since they are all UMI subcsriptions. All the
check-in person has to do is update holdings. One drawback to this
method is that you can't see individual "packets" of fiche that
were processed. You just see the broad holdings--but I agree in
theory with your paraprofessional. The systems allow no workable
patterns for dailies that arrive quarterly or annually (like our USA
Today fiche subscription).
--
Liz Linton
Serials Librarian
Sweet Briar College Library
melinton@alison.sbc.edu
804-381-6315
(5)--------------------------
Date: 17 Sep 1996 14:12:56 -0600
From: "Kaaren Pupino" <Kaaren.Pupino@thor.law.und.nodak.edu>
Subject: Re: Frequency of reproduced serials
Dear Mike,
Our automated system is the MSUS-PalsTac system and although I don't have
microform journal records loaded yet I can empathize with the problem. Law
Libraries seem to have more than their share of titles that come irregularly
and it doesn't help when the holdings patterns don't allow for some creativity
not to mention tolerance with expected dates.
Some serials you will want to get as close to the expected date for
predicting arrival as possible because the publisher may have you on a short
rope for claiming purposes. The biggest question I think is if you missed a
batch or one came late, how long do you have to claim it? If the time set by
the publisher or microform vendor is generous enough to allow some leeway then
you can set your claims to a pattern that can give it a little more time.
However, if the publisher gives you something like three months to claim or be
out of luck getting it because it is out of print or have to pay for it again
then I say let the claims roll. I understand what you are saying though,
either way it creates work for the staff. I wish I had only 35 titles that
came irregularly like that. I would be happy!
Kaaren Pupino
Acquisitions/Serials Librarian
University of North Dakota
Thormodsgard Law Library
School of Law-Room 161
Grand Forks, ND 58202
(701) 777-2486
kaaren.pupino@thor.law.und.nodak.edu
(6)-----------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 12:24:35 -0700
From: Ron Phillips <ron.phillips@sonoma.edu>
Subject: Re: Frequency of reproduced serials
Mike - I have to agree with your chief journal "checker-inner." I've come
across this situation (we use the DRA system), and agree that it is illogical
to use an incorrect (i.e. quarterly) frequency to check in individual fiche.
Yes, they arrive in a group but what if any are missing? How do you claim? I
don't know how your system works, but DRA allows for a 'deviation' from the
expected checkin date. That takes care of some of the problem, as the
deviation adjusts in part for the erratic receivals. DRA also allows 3 claim
intervals, and we set ours higher for the fiche replacement issues (60 for a
first claim). So, the system looks at the deviation and adds 60 days before
the first claim. It works pretty well, and I prefer it to the inaccuracy of
an incorrect frequency.
From: Ron Phillips <ron.phillips@sonoma.edu>
(7)---------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 15:57:35 -0700
From: Carol Morse <MorsCa@GW.WWC.EDU>
Subject: Frequency of reproduced serials -Reply
I read with interest the case of the "rebel" in the Serials Dept. I tend to
agree with her. We also use Datatrek. We set up the frequency of the
journal as bimonthly, etc, because this reflects reality. If you set
(correct) the due date for the first issue of your quarterly or yearly
shipment for the date you are checking it in, the system will automatically
predict the next due date 3 months or 6 months or one year later for the
next shipment. The important thing is to set that due date (F6) before
checking in the first item.
Twice a year UMI sends subscription status reports. When I receive it, I
go through Datatrek and reset the due dates later for the ones that they
indicate "awaiting filming", or whatever the term is.
This is not a fool-proof method, but it surely beats changing the
frequency, in my opinion. For microfilm, however, I often call it an
annual, since it comes one reel of film per year. Hope this helps, though
it's probably not what you wanted to hear.
From: Carol Morse <MorsCa@GW.WWC.EDU>
