library services in the university libraries in · pdf filelibrary services in the university...

International Journal of Social Science & Interdisciplinary Research__________________________________ ISSN 2277 3630 IJSSIR, Vol. 2 (9), SEPTEMBER (2013) Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

47

LIBRARY SERVICES IN THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES IN

TAMIL NADU: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

DR. M. PALANIAPPAN

LIBRARY ASSISTANT

CENTRAL LIBRARY

ALAGAPPA UNIVERSITY, INDIA

ABSTRACT:

The present era is the era of information and knowledge revolution. Library plays a vital role in

the process of information. Research is always based on the availability of information and

knowledge. The stuff of the research depends on the quality of information resources and

services available in the library. Today, researchers are more dependent on the online

information sources than traditional information sources. Academic libraries have the prime

responsibility of shaping the future generation by making them rich in information and the

libraries in these institutions have to supplement the knowledge base of the academic

community. The study shows that 31.8%, which is highest percentage in Alagappa University

have visited the library daily followed by 30.3% visited weekly, 29.5% visited alternative days,

and only 4 (3.0%) and 7 (5.3%) have visited the library monthly and occasionally. On the other

hand, it is seen from the Bharathidasan University that highest percentage 117 (47.4%) of the

respondents have visited the library alternative days, 73 (29.6%) visited daily, 50 (20.2%)

weekly, and only 6 (2.4%) and 1 (0.4%) have visited the library monthly and occasionally. It was

found from the total respondent that 41.2% of the respondents have visited alternative days,

which is the highest percentage followed by 156 (30.3%) visited daily, 90 (23.7%) visited

weekly, and only 10 (2.6%) and 8 (2.1%) have visited monthly and occasionally.

KEY-WORDS: Library Services, University Library, Internet, e-resources, Online database,

Search Engine.

1. Introduction

Information is all round us and is the staple diet of human beings. Information is variously

perceived as facts, intelligence, data, news and knowledge. Information has been a common

ingredient to all areas of human endeavor, be it the day-today affairs of business, matters of life

and death or the most trivial of pursuits. In a modern industrial society there are negligibly few

individuals, who do not, from time to time, occasionally or frequently have any requirement for

information. It is an essential accompaniment of almost every social activity.

Information is considered as important that contributes towards the development of a nation. It

provides the core for the development of knowledge, the basis for innovations, the resources for

informed citizenry, and as a result, becomes a key commodity for the progress of a society.

Acknowledging the significance of information in national development, Wasserman (1991,


48

p.38) has noted that it is not an accident that the developed nations are those in which

information products and services have been brought into being and are widely exploited, first in

conventional forms and later through computer intervention”. Members of a society acquire the

needed information from a variety of sources. However, several of these sources are expensive,

complex or difficult for individuals to acquire and use. Therefore, the role of libraries becomes

vital in meeting the information needs of individuals in the society. Libraries develop their

collections, facilities and services to meet the information needs of their patrons.

The concept of information appears to have undergone gradual change from 1950s to the present

information based society. During 1950s the concept of information meant the reduction of

uncertainty. During 1960s and 1970s the so called „information explosion‟ was the object of

considerable attention. In the 1980s, the concept of information meant „decision relevant data‟.

In the 1990s the information concept has reemerged with a totally new face lift and has occupied

the centre stage having a profound impact on society and economy. Today, it has been an

accepted fact that information is emerging as a critical resource for user activities at all levels

from education to economic and social development, improving the quality of day-to-day life.

This turning point towards an information centered society in the present century calls for

innovations in generation; collection; storage; processing; and dissemination of information and

knowledge.

2. Review of Literature

Feldman (2000) conducted a study under name “Library Use Survey of Random Sample of

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Faculty: Final Report”. Objective was

to ascertain the use of university library in the year 2000. Majority of the users considered library

resources and services as essential to their professional productivity. A change was observed

between the usage patterns of library as 56% users were connecting to library by computers

against the 32% users in 1996. About 40% users favoured the need to increase fee/ additional fee

to get more revenue for library.

Gurdev Singh (2002) “Use of College Libraries by Faculty Members of University of Delhi.”

Study brought forward that textbooks were most frequently used resources, followed by

reference books and general books. Main purpose of visiting library was to prepare notes for

students. Journals and textbooks were not considered very adequate. Almost all the faculty

members favoured need for computerization of their libraries.

Kemoni (2002) conducted a study titled “The Utilisation of Archival Information by Researchers

in Kenya: A Case Study of the University of Nairobi”. Objective was to ascertain the utilization

of archival information by researchers and the extent to which the Kenya National Archival and

Documentation Services was meeting their information needs. Opinions of users were collected

by interviews. Study revealed that researchers were using variety of information sources to meet

their information needs and relied more on archival personnel to access information.

Kumbar and Lohar (2002) conducted a survey of 91 teachers of Sahyadri Arts and Commerce

College and Sahyadri Science College in Shimoga (Karnataka) under title “Use of Library


49

Facilities and Information Resources in Sahyadri College” to study the use of resources and

services of their respective college‟s libraries. Various aspects of libraries regarding use of

resources, services and physical facilities were examined during study.

Okiy (2002) executed a survey of students and faculty members to assess the use of Delta State

University library under name “Assessing Students and Faculty Use of Academic Libraries in

Nigeria: The Case of Delta State University, Abraka”. The library had its origin from Advanced

Teachers College Library, Abraka. A difference was found between the frequency of use of

library by the faculty and students. Both the categories of users utilized books more often than

any other material, because of dearth of relevant current journals, abstracts and indexes. Majority

of users considered library services and facilities as fair. Only a small part of users responded

that they always found the needed material in library.

Padmamma et al. (2002) carried out a study to reveal the utilization of newspapers and

magazines in an undergraduate college under title “Utilisation of news papers and magazines by

the U.G. College teachers in Shimoga City: A case study”. Authors assessed the impact of

personal attributes of teachers on the use of periodicals by them. In another study, to ascertain

the use of resources and services of library of JJM Medical College, Davangere, Karnataka,

Padmamma et al. (2002) took up a study under title “Evaluation of Medical College Library

Sources and Services: A Study”. Survey disclosed that majority of users were visiting library to

consult books or journals, and textbooks were the most used resources. Majority of the users

were satisfied with physical facilities of library.

Marcum and George (2003) conducted a survey of 3,234 faculty members, graduate students,

and undergraduates in 392 doctoral research universities, public and private, and private liberal

arts colleges of USA under title “Who Uses What?” Responses revealed in aggregate that

electronic information use was substantial and growing in the nation's major universities and

liberal arts colleges. Respondents were making their use for research, teaching, and coursework,

and have equipped themselves well to do so. Responses confirmed that print was not dead, nor

was the campus library.

Ogombo and Adomi (2003) conducted a survey to reveal the utilization of library resources

under name “Student‟s Utilization of Library Resources at Baptist School of Nursing, Eku, Delta

State, Nigeria”. Data was collected using questionnaire. It was found that majority of the users

visited library daily. About 59.6% students went to library to prepare for examination, while

54% users used library to prepare assignments. As the students were not given orientation,

majority of them went directly to the shelves to locate needed material. Short duration of loan

period, less number of books issued at a time and inadequate opening hours of library were the

problems found during study.

Agaba et al. (2004) examined the utilization of electronic information resources by the academic

staff of Makerera University in Uganda under title “Utilization of Electronic Information

Resources by Academic Staff at Makerere University”. Author examined the users‟ awareness,

type of resources provided and utilization of resources. It was found that majority of the staff

was aware about the availability of electronic information resources but did not utilize them.


50

Mabawonku (2004) “Library Use in Distance Learning: A Survey of Undergraduates in three

Nigerian Universities”. Author assessed the use of library and information resources by the

students of distance learning in three universities of Nigeria. Study revealed that less than 50%

respondents were using main libraries of their respective universities regularly, whereas some

users were using departmental libraries and other libraries out of the campus to read personal

books. The reference and electronic collection was not used properly.

Sangam and Hadimani (2004) examined the use of Online Public Access Catalogue by research

scholars under title “Use of Online Public Access Catalogue by the Research Scholars in

Karnatak University Library, Dharwad”. Authors examined the users frequency of use and

purpose of consulting OPAC, difficulties in locating books, OPAC for periodicals and other

reading material, time spent in using it, approaches followed to locate material, assistance from

library staff in using OPAC, etc. Some users suggested for up to date library guides explaining

how to use catalogue.

Musoke (2005) investigated the availability and use of information by primary health care

providers under title “Access and Use of Information by the Primary Health Care Providers in

Rural Uganda: An Interaction-Value Model”. An interaction-value model emerged from study

which is driven by the value and impact of information unlike other previous models driven by

information needs.

Adikata and Anwar (2006) “Student Library Use: A Study of Faculty Perceptions in a Malaysian

University”. Authors ascertained the perceptions of faculty members on the students library use

and their role in motivating students to use libraries. Findings of study revealed that teachers

played an important role in promoting the use of libraries by students. Authors were not satisfied

with students‟ library use skills, available information resources and expected from librarians to

provide a comfortable academic environment in library. To study the use of periodicals by

scholars at National Library of Veterinary Sciences, Ahmad and Haridasan (2006) undertook a

study named “Use of Periodicals by the Scholars at National Library of Veterinary Sciences: A

User‟s Survey”. Out of 125 questionnaires distributed 110 were received back. It was found that

majority of the users were visiting library daily and used back volumes of periodicals for

research purpose. Majority of the users were satisfied with arrangement of current issues of

periodicals and arrangement of back volumes.

Atilgan and Bayram (2006) took up a study titled “An Evaluation of Faculty Use of the Digital

Library at Ankara University, Turkey” to ascertain the faculty‟s awareness and use of electronic

material at Ankara University. Findings of the study brought forward that majority of the faculty

members were aware about the existence of digital library and many were using electronic

databases. The impact of newly subscribed databases on the increased publications was found.

Lawoe (2006) conducted a study to examine the use of serial collection by students and faculty

under name “A Study of Serials Use at Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology

Library, Kumasi”. Authors examined the adequacy of collection to meet subject needs of users.

One-tenth of the registered members were chosen as a sample for survey. Interestingly,


51

undergraduates were using journals significantly, as lecturers were recommending them. This

study revealed gaps in collection development.

3. Objectives of the Study

The following research objectives formulated are listed as below.

1. To study the user perception on information sources and services between the research

scholars of Alagappa University and Bharathidasan University.

2. To analyse the information sources used by the users of Alagappa and Bharathidasan

Universities.

3. To study the information services used by research scholars of Alagappa and

Bharathidasan Universities.

4. To find out the staff attitude in providing information sources and services to the research

scholars of Alagappa and Bharathidasan Universities.

5. To find out the user satisfaction on information sources and services among the

respondents of Alagappa and Bharathidasan Universities.

4. Methodology

The research is based upon the research scholars of Alagappa University, Karaikudi and

Bharathidasan University, Trichirapalli, which consists of several departments. For the purpose

of the research study, every department in the said universities has been taken for real outcome.

The population considered for the purpose of this study is full time research scholars, doing their

research in Alagappa University, Karaikudi and Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli. The

total number of research scholars in the above said universities are 434. From the total

population, sample of 379 respondents with different age groups, qualifications, gender,

experience and specialization were taken for this study. From the total population of 434, 379

questionnaires were returned duly filled in with the response rate of 87.33% of the total

population.

5. Results and Discussion

Table.1: Gender-wise distribution of respondents

Gender Alagappa University Bharathidasan

University

Total

Male 87 (65.9) 163 (66.0) 250 (66.0)

Female 45 (34.1) 84 (34.0) 129 (34.0)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)

It is found from the table 1 that Majority of the respondents (65.9%) in Alagappa University and

(66%) of the respondents in Bharathidasan University were male respondents and 34.1% and

34% of the respondents in Alagappa and Bharathidasan Universities were female respondents

respectively. In total, majority of the respondents (66%) of the respondents in both Alagappa and

Bharathidasan Universities were male and 34% were female respondents.


52

Fig.1: Gender-wise distribution of respondents

Table.2: Age-wise distribution of respondents

Age Alagappa University Bharathidasan

University

Total

Below 30 years 101 (76.5) 215 (87.0) 316 (83.4)

31-40 years 17 (12.9) 12 (4.9) 29 (7.7)

Above 40 years 14 (10.6) 20 (8.1) 34 (9.0)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)

It is identified from the table 2 that Majority of the respondents (76.5%) and 87%) respectively

in Alagappa and Bharathidasan Universities were below the age of 30 years old, 12.9% in

Alagappa University and 4.9% in Bharathidasan University were between the age group of 31-40

years, and 10.6% in Alagappa University and 8.1% in Bharathidasan University were above 40

years age group. To sum up, majority of the respondents (83.4%) in both Alagappa and

Bharathidasan Universiities were below the age group of 30 years old, 9% were above 40 years

age group and only 7.7% were found between 31-40 years age group.


53

Fig.2: Age-wise distribution of respondents

Table.3: Distribution of Respondents based on Educational Qualification (s)

Educational

Qualification (s)

Alagappa University Bharatghidasaun

University

Total

PG 72 (54.5) 144 (58.3) 216 (57.0)

M.Phil 60 (45.5) 103 (41.7) 163 (43.0)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)

It is noted from the table 3 that majority of the respondents (54.5%) and (58.3%) respectively

from Alagappa and Bharathidasan Universities were having Post Graduate qualifications

followed by 45.5% in Alagappa University and 41.7% in Bharathidasan University have M.Phil

qualifications. The above table shows that majority of the respondents (57%) in both Alagappa

and Bharathidasan Universities were having Post Graduate qualifications followed by 43% of the

respondents have M.Phil qualifications.


54

Fig.3: Distribution of Respondents based on Educational Qualification (s)

Table.4: Distribution of Respondents based on Marital Status

Marital Status Alagappa University Bharathidasan

University

Total

Married 29 (22.0) 31 (12.6) 60 (15.8)

Unmarried 103 (78.0) 216 (87.4) 319 (84.2)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)

It is identified from the table 4 that majority of the respondents (78%) in Alagappa University

and (87.4%) in Bharathidasan University were married and in overall it was found that Majority

of the respondents (84.2%) in total were married and only 15.8% were not married.

Table.5: Distribution of respondents based on Native Background

Native Background Alagappa University Bharathidasan University Total

Rural 76 (57.6) 102 (41.3) 178 (47.0)

Urban 28 (21.2) 105 (42.5) 133 (35.1)

Semi Urban 28 (21.2) 40 (16.2) 68 (17.9)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)

From the table 5 that majority of the respondents (57.6%) in Alagappa University were from

rural background followed by 21.2% each were from urban and Semi urban background

respectively, in case of Bharathidasan University, it is noted that 42.5% of the respondents were

from urban background followed by 41.3% were from rural background and only 16.2% were

from semi urban background. To sum up, it is found that 47% of the respondents in both

Alagappa and Bharadhidasan Universities were from rural background followed by 35.1% were

from urban background and only 17.9% of the respondents were from semi urban background.


55

Fig.4: Distribution of respondents based on Native Background

Table.6: Membership in Professional bodies

Membership Alagappa University Bharathidasan

University

Total

Yes 16 (12.1) 26 (10.5) 42 (11.1)

No 116 (87.9) 221 (89.5) 337 (88.9)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)

The table 6 showed that majority of the respondents (87.9%) in Alagappa University were not

members in any of the professional bodies and only 12.1% were members in professional bodies.

It is also found that (88.9%) of the respondents in Bharathidasan University were not members in

professional bodies and 10.5% were members in professional bodies. In nutshell, majority of the

respondents (88.9%) in both Alagappa and Bharathidasan Universities were not members in any

of the professional bodies and only 11.1% of them were members in professional bodies.

Table.7: Visiting the Library

Visiting Library Alagappa University Bharathidasan

University

Total

Daily 42 (31.8) 73 (29.6) 115 (30.3)

Alternative Days 39 (29.5) 117 (47.4) 156 (41.2)

Weekly 40 (30.3) 50 (20.2) 90 (23.7)

Monthly 4 (3.0) 6 (2.4) 10 (2.6)

Occasionally 7 (5.3) 1 (0.4) 8 (2.1)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)


56

It is known from the table 7 that 31.8%, which is highest percentage in Alagappa University have

visited the library daily followed by 30.3% visited weekly, 29.5% visited alternative days, and

only 4 (3.0%) and 7 (5.3%) have visited the library monthly and occasionally. On the other hand,

it is seen from the Bharathidasan University that highest percentage 117 (47.4%) of the

respondents have visited the library alternative days, 73 (29.6%) visited daily, 50 (20.2%)

weekly, and only 6 (2.4%) and 1 (0.4%) have visited the library monthly and occasionally. It was

found from the total respondent that 41.2% of the respondents have visited alternative days,

which is the highest percentage followed by 156 (30.3%) visited daily, 90 (23.7%) visited

weekly, and only 10 (2.6%) and 8 (2.1%) have visited monthly and occasionally.

Fig.5: Visiting the Library

Table.8: Familiarity with use of Computer

Familiarity in using

computer

Alagappa University Bharathidasan

University

Total

Familiar in using

Computer

112 (84.8) 202 (81.8) 314 (82.8)

Very Large extent 19 (17.0) 29 (14.4) 48 (15.3)

Large Extent 38 (34.0) 116 (57.4) 154 (49.0)

Some extent 53 (47.3) 53 (26.2) 106 (33.8)

Less extent 2 (1.8) 4 (2.0) 6 (1.9)

Very less extent 0 0 0

Total 112 (84.8) 202 (81.8) 314 (82.8)

It is know n from the table 8 that majority of the respondents 112 (84.8%) and 202 (81.8%) in

Alagappa and Bharathidasan Universities expressed that they are familiar with use of computers

and 314 (82.8%) out of 379 respondents in total stated that they are familiar with use of

computers. It is also found that 53 (47.3%) respondents followed by 38 (34.0%) in Alagappa

University expressed that they are familiar with computer some extent and large extent, 19


57

(17.0%) and only 2 (1.8%) stated that they are familiar with very large extent and less extent and

it is interesting to note that none of the respondents stated they are not familiar with use of

computers. In case of Bharathidasan University, majority of the respondents 116 (57.4%) of the

respondents expressed that they are familiar with use of computers large extent, 53 (26.2%) and

29 (14.4%) stated that they are familiar with some extent and very large extent and only 4 (2.0%)

stated they are familiar with very less extent and none of the respondents stated that they were

not familiar with use of computers. In total, it is noted that 154 (49.0%) stated that they are

familiar with computers at large extent followed by 106 (33.8%) stated some extent, 48 (15.3%)

and 6 (1.9%) stated very large extent and very less extend respectively and none of the

respondents in both the universities expressed that they are not familiar with use of computers.

Table.9: Training course undergone for computer operations

Training Course Alagappa University Bharathidasan

University

Total

Yes 64 (48.5) 169 (68.4) 233 (61.5)

No 68(51.5) 78 (31.6) 146 (38.5)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)

It is observed from the table 9 that majority of the respondents (51.5%) in Alagappa University

expressed that they have not undergone for any training for using computers, on the other hand,

it was noted from the Bharathidasan University that only 78 (31.6%) of the respondents have not

undergone for training. To sum up, majority of the respondents 233 (61.5%) in both Alagappa

and Bharathidasan Universities stated that they have undergone computer training programme

and 146 (38.5%) stated that they have not gone for computer training programme.

Table.10: Accessing Place of Electronic Information Sources and Services

Place of Accessing

Information

Alagappa University Bharathidasan

University

Total

Library 35 (26.5) 191 (77.3) 226 (59.6)

Department 73 (55.3) 204 (82.6) 277 (73.1)

Browsing Centres 55 (41.7) 83 (33.6) 138 (36.4)

House 17 (12.9) 92 (37.2) 109 (28.8)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)

It is found from the table 10 that in Alagappa University , majority of the respondents 73

(55.3%) expressed that they are accessing the electronic information from the department

followed by 55 (41.7%) stated in browsing centres, 35 (26.5%) expressed in library, and only 17

(12.9%) stated in house. In case of Bharathidasan University, it is found that majority of the

respondents 204 (82.6%) are accessing the electronic information from the department, 191

(77.3%) accessed from library, 92 (37.2%) from house and 83 (33.6%) from browsing centres. It

is concluded that majority of the respondents 277 (73.1%) and 226 (59.6% ) from Alagappa and

Bharathidasan universities are accessing the electronic information from the department and

library and 138 (36.4%) and 109 (28.8%) were accessing the information from browsing centre

and houses.


58

Fig.6: Accessing Place of Electronic Information Sources and Services

Table.11: Awareness on Electronic Information

Awareness Alagappa University Bharathidasan University Total

Library Staff 22 (16.7) 102 (41.3) 124 (32.7)

Notification/Notice Board 22 (16.7) 159 (64.4) 181 (47.8)

Colleagues/Friends 98 (74.2) 197 (79.8) 295 (77.8)

Orientation Programme 15 (11.4) 55 (22.3) 70 (18.5)

Total 132 (34.8) 247 (65.2) 379 (100.0)

It is observed from the table 11 that majority of the respondents 98 (74.2%) in Alagappa

University stated that they were aware of the electronic resources through colleagues and friends,

22 (16.7%) each in the same university stated aware through library staff and notice board

respectively and only 15 (11.4%) stated that they aware through orientation programme. In

Bharathidasan university, it is noted that majority of the respondents 197 (79.8%) and 159

(64.4%) respectively stated that they aware through colleagues/friends and notice board followed

by 102 (41.3%) stated through library staff and only 55 (22.3%) stated through orientation

programme. To sum up, majority of the respondents 295 (77.8%) stated that they came to know

the electronic resources through colleagues /friends followed by 181 (47.8%) stated through

notice board, 124 (32.7%) stated library staff and only 70 (18.5%) stated through orientation

programme.

Table.12: Learning to use Electronic Information

Learning to Use Information Alagappa University Bharathidasan University Total

Self Taught and Trial and error 49 (37.1) 67 (27.1) 116 (30.6)

Online Instruction 40 (30.3) 115 (46.6) 155 (40.9)

Through friends/colleagues 53 (40.2) 145 (58.7) 198 (52.2)

Training provided by library staff 11 (8.3) 120 (48.6) 131(34.6)

Someone at Terminal 8 (6.1) 112 (45.3) 120 (31.7)

By reading books, journals, etc. 24 (18.2) 113 (45.7) 137 (36.1)


59

It is noticed from the table 12 that in Alagappa University, 53 (40.2%) and 49 (37.1%) of the

respondents stated they learned to access electronic information through friends/colleagues and

self taught followed by 40 (30.3%) stated through online instruction, 24 (18.2%) opined through

by reading books, and only 11 (8.3%) and 8 (6.1%) stated through training provided by library

staff and someone at terminal respectively. On the other hand, in Bharathidasan University, 145

(58.7%), which is the majority of the respondents stated through friends/colleagues followed by

120 (48.6%) and 115 (46.6%) stated training by library staff and online instructions, 113 (45.7%)

and 112 (45.3) stated by reading books and some one at terminal and only 67 (27.1%) stated

through self trial. In total, it is identified that 192 (52.2%) stated that they came through

friends/colleagues, 155 (40.9%), 137 (36.1%) 131 (34.6%) 120 (31.7%) and 116 (30.6%) stated

that they learned to use electronic information through online instructions, by reading books,

training by library staff, someone at terminal and self taught respectively.

6. Suggestions

The following suggestions are put forward to improve the library services in the University

Libraries in Tamilnadu.

E-resources should be procured by the libraries and used to satisfy information needs of

the faculty and the users.

The need for adequate staff for the university libraries requires no discussion. The need is

for implementing the norms laid by the UGC in respect of the staff position for every

university library. Steps therefore need to be taken on priority basis to fill vacant library

posts.

The total conditions of the libraries are very poor due to insufficient grants on the one

hand and failure to utilize these grants in time on the other. The present budgets of the

libraries need to be doubled to enable the librarians to procure at least the minimum of

suitable books, periodicals, reference and special material.

It is necessary to see that an adequate number of text books, reference book and

periodicals should be procured as per the needs of the students, researchers and the

teachers.

7. Conclusion

Library and information centres are playing a crucial role in the growth and development of the

nation directly/indirectly by providing better services to the members of the society. Electronic

resources have become the vital part of human life in the 21st century. University libraries are

rapidly transforming into digital libraries. It is important that university libraries maintain the E-

Library with all necessary technology, for the effective use of electronic information. A large

portion of users in the university library are aware about the e-resources, but they do not know

all its techniques and applications. Further, a few users of university libraries in Tamil Nadu still

have no knowledge about the e-resources and related applications. For this purpose, there is

need for effective user education, to develop awareness and knowledge of the users.


60

References

Adikata, Adnan Ali; and Anwar, Mumtaz A. (2006), “Student Library Use: A Study of Faculty

Perceptions in a Malaysian University”, Library Review, Vol. 55, No. 2, PP. 106-119. Available

from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/ 00242530610649602 (20-02-09).

Ahmad, Moin; and Haridasan, Sudharma (2006), “Use of Periodicals by the Scholars at National

Library of Veterinary Sciences: A User‟s Survey”, IASLIC Bulletin, Vol. 51, No. 2, PP. 05-17.

Atilgan, Dogan; and Bayran, Ozlem (2006), “An Evaluation of Faculty Use of Digital Library at

Ankara University, Turkey”, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 32, No. 1, PP. 86-93.

Feldman, Jonquil (2000), “Library Use Survey of Random Sample of University of Texas Health

Science Center at San Antonio Faculty: Final Report”. Available from http:// www.

Library.uthscsa.edu/services/Libsurvey2000.cfm?views=print&34-(07-04-07).

Gurdev Singh (2002), “Use of College Libraries by Faculty Members of University of Delhi”.

Library Herald, Vol. 40, No. 4, PP. 263-270. Haider, Syed Jalaluddin (1996), “Acquisition and

Collection Development in Pakistan”, Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. 20, No. 2,

PP. 147-156. Available from linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/0364640895000895 (1402-10).

Kemoni, Henry N. (2002), “The Utilisation of Archival Information by Researchers in Kenya: A

Case Study of the University of Nairobi”, African Journal of Library, Archives and Information

Science, Vol. 12, No. 1, PP. 69-80. Available from

http://www.ajol.info/viewarticle.php?jid=158&id=5429&layout= abstract (25-02-10).

Kumbar, Mallinath; and Lohar, M.S. (2002), “Use of Library Facilities and Information

Resources in Sahyadri College”, Annals of Library and Information Studies, Vol. 49, No. 3, PP.

73-87.

Kumbar, T.S. (1986), “College Libraries under Gulbarga University Area: A Survey”, Library

Herald, Vol. 25, No. 2-3, PP. 121-135.

Lawoe, M.A. (2006), “A Study of Serials Use at Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and

Technology Library, Kumasi”, Ghana Library Journal, Vol. 18, PP. 25-38. Available from http://

ajol.info/index.php/glj/article/view/33958 (06-03-10).

Mabawonku, Iyabo (2004), “Library Use in Distance Learning: A Survey of Undergraduates in

three Nigerian Universities”, African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science,

Vol.14, No. 2, PP. 151-165. Available from http://www.ajol.info/ viewarticle.php?id=17234 (01-

03-09).

Musoke, Maria G.N. (2005), “Access and Use of Information by Primary Health Care Providers

in Rural Uganda: An Interaction-Value Model”, University of Dar es Salaam Library Journal,


61

Vol. 7, No. 1, PP. 1-19. Available from http://ajol.info/index.php/ udslj/article/view/26627/0 (01-

03-09).

Ogbomo, Monday O.; and Adomi, Esharenana E. (2003), “Student‟s Utilization of Library

Resources at Baptist School of Nursing, Eku, Delta State, Nigeria”, International Library

Movement, Vol. 25, No. 3, PP. 117-126.

Padmamma, S.; Vijayakumar, M.; and Shakuntala, G.S. (2002), “Evaluation of Medical College

Library Sources and Services: A Study”, CLIS Observer, Vol. XIX, No. 1-2, PP. 46-50.

Sangam, S.L.; and Hadimani, Manjunath B. (2004), “Use of Online Public Access Catalogue by

the Research Scholars in Karnatak University Library, Dharwad” IASLIC Bulletin, Vol. 49, No.

3, PP. 162-170.

library services in the university libraries in · pdf filelibrary services in the university...

Documents