LRTS Request for Grant Proposals

Library Resources & Technical Services (LRTS) announces the availability of grants of up to $1,000 (funded by an Association for Library Collections and Technical Services grant) to assist authors with preparing literature reviews. The purpose of the grants is to provide funds that will be used for clerical and research support, thereby allowing the author/s to concentrate on analyzing the resources and writing the literature review.  Possible support tasks might be collecting citations, sorting and organizing citations by themes and categories, locating and gathering resources to be reviewed, verifying citations, funding purchases of articles not owned by the home institution of the author, and so forth.  Funding also could provide a mentoring opportunity by funding assistance by a library school or information science student.

Highly cited, literature reviews provide an essential professional service to practitioners, scholars, and students by identifying the key themes and the most important publications appearing in successive two year periods.  Books and articles by accredited scholars and researchers, i.e., primarily peer-reviewed publications provide the basis for a literature review.  A good literature review is evaluative, selective, and critical, and goes beyond summarizing and quoting from the selected sources.   Literature reviews explain why the sources cited are important and valuable, may compare them to prior works, and create a structure that organizes the two-year body of content to make it comprehensible and to identify themes, not only for those who have followed the developments it describes, but to future researchers.  All sources referenced appear in the endnotes; a separate bibliography is not published.  Although commissioned, LRTS literature reviews go through the same double-blind peer review process as unsolicited manuscripts.

LRTS seeks authors for the following topical areas and coverage periods:

• Collection Development and Management literature published 2011-2012
• Cataloging/Classification/Metadata Management literature published 2011-2012
• Preservation and Reformatting literature published 2011-2012

Papers should be submitted not later than June 30, 2013. Grant recipients will be required to submit progress reports to the LRTS Editor in June and December each year.

The grant proposal must include:

1. Requester name, title, and contact information

2. The literature to be reviewed (see list above)

3. The requester’s credentials to write the literature review

4. Amount requested

5. Budget plan and rationale for how the funds will be expended

Proposals are due by January 31, 2012.

Applications and inquiries should be submitted to Peggy Johnson, LRTS Editor, lrtseditor@ala.org.  

Call for Papers: Library Resources and Technical Services

Library Resources & Technical Services (LRTS) is the Official Journal of the Association for Library Collections Technical Services (ALCTS)

Library Resources & Technical Services (LRTS) is a peer-reviewed journal that takes a critical approach to the questions and challenges facing librarians and libraries with regard to:

• Collections
• Scholarly communication
• Preservation (including digitization)
• Acquisitions (including licensing and economic aspects of acquisitions)
• Continuing resources
• Cataloging (including descriptive metadata, authority control, subject analysis, and classification) 

LRTS publishes both research papers and thoughtful explorations of operational issues that have value and implications for other libraries. In addition, LRTS publishes editorials, book reviews, letters to the editor, and the annual report of the president of the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services.

If you have thoughts or ideas for papers in these areas that you would like to explore or develop further, or if you would like to encourage your colleagues to develop a topic or theme (for example, from a presentation, program or poster session) and to turn the theme into a paper, please consider contributing to LRTS yourself, or invite a colleague to consider contributing.

For more information, see the LRTS web site: http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/alcts/resources/lrts/index.cfm

Instructions for authors can be found here: http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/alcts/resources/lrts/authinst.cfm

If you have questions or would like additional information, you can contact the editor:

Peggy Johnson

Editor, Library Resources & Technical Services

Editor, Technicalities

voice:    651-298-0121

m-john@tc.umn.edu

LRTS Request for Grant Proposals

Library Resources & Technical Services (LRTS), the journal of the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services (ALCTS), announces the availability of grants of up to $1,000 (funded by an ALA Carnegie-Whitney Grant) to assist authors with preparing literature reviews. 

The purpose of the grants is to provide funds that will be used for clerical and research support, thereby allowing the author/s to concentrate on analyzing the resources and writing the literature review.  Possible tasks might be collecting citations, sorting and organizing citations by themes and categories, locating and gathering resources to be reviewed, verifying citations, funding purchases of articles not owned by the home institution of the author, and so forth.  Funding also could provide a mentoring opportunity by  funding assistance by a library school or information science student.

Highly cited, literature reviews provide an essential professional service to practitioners, scholars, and students by identifying the key themes and the most important publications appearing in successive two year periods.  Books and articles by accredited scholars and researchers, i.e., primarily peer-reviewed publications provide the basis for a literature review.  A good literature review is evaluative, selective, and critical, and goes beyond summarizing and quoting from the selected sources.   Literature reviews explain why the sources cited are important and valuable, may compare them to prior works, and create a structure that organizes the two-year body of content to make it comprehensible and to identify themes, not only for those who have followed the developments it describes, but to future researchers.  All sources referenced appear in the endnotes; a separate bibliography is not published.  Although commissioned, LRTS literature reviews go through the same double-blind peer review process as unsolicited manuscripts.

 LRTS seeks authors for the following topical areas and coverage periods:

• Acquisitions literature published 2010-2011
• Serials literature published 2010-2011

Papers should be submitted not later than June 30, 2012. Grant recipients will be required to submit progress reports to the LRTS Editor twice a year.

The grant proposal must include:

1. Requester name, title, and contact information
2. The literature to be reviewed (see list above) 
3. The requester's credentials to write the literature review
4. The amount requested
5. Budget plan and rationale for how the funds will be expended 

Proposals are due by January 31, 2011.
Applications and inquiries should be submitted to Peggy Johnson, LRTS Editor, lrtseditor@ala.org

"How the Current Draft of RDA Addresses the Cataloging of Reproductions, Facsimiles, and Microforms" by Steven A. Knowlton

Knowlton's article discusses the "multiple versions problem" (sometimes called the MulVer problem) that arises when cataloging reproductions. He provides a brief overview of how reproductions have been handled under various cataloging codes. He then discusses how RDA, with its basis in FRBR principles, will deal wtih the MulVer problem. While the proposed new cataloging code may help to clarify relationships between originals and reproductions, Knowlton argues that, "RDA as currently designed is challenging for the cataloger and includes many data that may prove to be difficult for catalog users to understand."

Read Knowlton's article in Library Resources & Technical Services, vol. 53, no. 3 (July 2009), pages 159-165.

"Evaluating and Improving the Presentation of Serials Information in the Online Catalog" by Lori J. Terrill

Abstract:

Many factors should be considered when evaluating how serial publications are presented in online library catalogs. Both patrons and library employees utilize the catalog to locate serial titles and then must be able to determine which formats are available, as well as which issues are available in each format. Consideration of both the recording and display of serials data should be part of a thorough evaluation. This paper presents an outline for an evaluation focusing on meeting user needs. It also provides advice based on the experience of undertaking a successful project at the University of Wyoming Libraries.

This article can be found in Library Resources & Technical Services, vol. 52, issue 3 (July 2008), pages 192-204.

“Building Connections: A Review of the Serials Literature 2004 through 2005” by Cecilia Genereux

Genereux covers three major aspects of serials trends in her literature review for 2004-2005: cost, management, and access. Serials catalogers will be particularly interested in her coverage of access issues. Specific topics addressed include: FRBR and serials; new rules for major and minor title changes; aggregator-neutral records for online serials; changing roles and responsibilities of serials catalogers brought on by the proliferation of e-journals; cataloging of new types of continuing resources such as zines, e-zines, and blogs; and serials holdings records. As with any literature review, readers will want to consult the original works to learn more about the topics.

Genereux’s article can be found in Library Resources & Technical Services, vol. 51, no. 4 (Oct. 2007), pages 293-304.

A Solution to the Multiple Version Problem

July 2007's issue of Library Resources & Technical Services (vol.51, no.3) features an interesting article by Julian Everett Allgood called, "Serials and Multiple Versions, or the Inexorable Trend toward Work-Level Displays." Allgood looks at revisions to cataloging rules, implementation of FRBR principles, and the MARC 21 authority format in the context of solving the "MulVer" problem. He predicts that manifestation-level cataloging will continue to be the standard, and thus sees FRBRization and an expanded use of authority records (for work and expression identifiers) as the best option to achieve better displays for multiple formats of a title in online library catalogs.