research on consortium and library network in...
TRANSCRIPT
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
116
Research on Consortium and Library Network in India: A Study of Library and
Information Science Doctoral Dissertations
Dr. Manjunatha K Chief
Librarian,
T.A. Pai Management
Institute, Manipal
India,
Mr. Sheshadri K N
Librarian,
BITS-Dubai
Dubai International
Academic City,
Dubai, UAE,
Dr. D. Shivalingaiah
Registrar,
Tumkur University, Tumkur
Karnataka, India
Abstract
A study of doctoral dissertations in Library and Information Science (LIS) field can provide
valuable information about performance, structure and evolution of the field. Similarly, a
study of doctoral dissertations on any segment of the LIS research such as consortium and
library Networks highlights its growth and development over the period. We undertook an
analysis of bibliographic information related consortium and library networks for the past
2½ decades awarded by various Indian Universities. We identified 65 doctoral
dissertations on the topic and classified them into various categories looking carefully at
the titles of the dissertations. We have also examined the distribution of dissertations
across universities, research supervisors and key themes of the research. During this
process, we found that the topic Consortium and Library Networking (CLN) is one of the
subjects of growing interest in LIS research in India. The results are presented here with a
goal of broadening the perspectives of LIS researchers and academic community. We wish
that this paper facilitates productive and fruitful discussions on the topic, which fuels the
enhanced research in the field.
Keywords: Library Consortium, Library Networks; Resource Sharing; LIS Research
Introduction
Wikipedia describes the scope of library networks and consortium as an effort to bring
together the libraries of similar kind for an effective resource sharing. In other words, Library
networks/networking or consortium can be treated as synonym terms for achieving the
common goal of optimal resource sharing. In-depth research studies can provide guidelines
on developing and utilizing such networks. Institutions of Higher learning like Universities
and Scientific & Research organizations promote research as their preferred agenda as it
contributes to the prosperity of the nation. Indian universities play a major role in creation
and dissemination of knowledge by providing opportunities for
research scholars to conduct doctoral research studies in specialized
subject areas. The doctoral researches are represented through the
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
117
dissertations submitted to universities for the award of doctoral degree (PhD). An analysis of
such doctoral dissertations submitted and awarded by universities clearly indicates the growth
and structure of a specific subject field.
The beginning of a doctoral research study on Library Cooperation in India in 1978
marked an important milestone in the development of the subject field Consortium or Library
Networks (hereafter CLN). The doctoral research on “Library Cooperation in India” by SC
Verma in 1978 awarded by University of Rajasthan, Jaipur appears to be the pioneering work
in the field of networking of Libraries in the country. This research laid the foundation,
triggered the interest among LIS researchers and has become one of the interesting subjects
of research. Since then, we found around 65 doctoral research studies on topic awarded by
different Indian universities during the past five decades. Since 1978, we traced 6
dissertations awarded on CLN during 1981-90; 19 dissertations during 1991-2000, and 39 in
the current decade (since 2001).
We recognized in CLN’s dissertation titles, an opportunity to consider two important
questions:
1. What does the CLN dissertations reveal about the structure and direction of CLN as a
field of research; and,
2. How well is CLN functioning as an instrument for shaping the work of the LIS
research community?
To provide a foundation for entertaining these questions, we undertook an analysis of
doctoral dissertations on CLN awarded by various Indian Universities during the period 1950
to May 20101. This paper reports our findings and we wish to encourage more discussions,
rather than to draw our own conclusions. Our intention is let this paper take a place alongside
other researches in LIS field. However, keeping the focus of the current paper, we limit our
observations to the CLN stream and leave the task of determining what the data mean more
broadly to our readers.
As the subject field grows and evolves, it not only provides a record of past research
but also helps in turn to define the field that it represents, serving as one arena in which, the
members of the community to chose their field of research. We hope this paper makes CLN
as just such an arena, more accessible and effective. The views expressed here can help
readers to understand the broader perspectives of the research.
In our concluding remarks, we suggest some guidelines for this broader interpretation.
To seed the discussion, we also venture some of our own observations. And we raise some
pointed questions: Does CLN reflect a sufficient diversity of research in LIS field? In the face
of technological and social change, do CLN dissertations indicate that the LIS research
community is responsive to important emergent phenomena?
1 The data for 2010 is obtained from University News only.
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
118
Methodology
In order to get a comprehensive view across various domains of LIS research and over time,
we gathered bibliographic details of the LIS doctoral dissertations awarded by various Indian
universities since 1950. The data was obtained from INFLIBNET
(http://www.inflibnet.ac.in), and Vidyanidhi (http://www.vidyanidhi.org) online databases,
back volumes of ‘University News’ and web-based survey. Our paper (Shivalingaiah;
Sheshadri and Manjunatha, 2009) presents the detailed analysis and interpretations of LIS
research covering the data from 1970 to 2007. Further, the data was augmented by obtaining
data till May 2010. The updated master sheet contained 1043 unique records related to LIS
research outputs in India. The data required for current study was extracted based on
dissertations’ key concepts or core theme of research. The analytic process involved three
steps: i) selecting relevant dissertations, ii) identifying their key concepts or core theme of
research, and iii) classifying them into respective categories.
Selecting Relevant Dissertations: We extracted 65 records from 1043 records on
LIS research using the terminologies like “library/information networks, resource sharing,
consortium, and institutional repository”.
Identifying Key Concepts: Identifying the key concepts or core areas of research
involved examination of 65 records. While examining dissertations, we found that the key
concepts could be identified through the expressive title of the dissertation. We had to depend
on the bibliographic details as abstract or synopsis of individual dissertations was not
available. The primary theme generated from the title is treated as key concept for analysis
purpose.
Classifying the Dissertations: We classified these 65 dissertations by assigning
subject heading (key concepts) that appear best fit to the title. While assigning key concepts,
we observed the convergence of records on library network, information network, resource
sharing, library cooperation and user assessment of existing library networks like DELNET
or INFLIBNET. The records were also examined to identify the historical development,
sample libraries covered for the study and the contribution of universities for the growth of
the subject. The records were cross verified to assess the relationships/associations among
subjects and other categories.
Research on Consortium and Library Networks:
Chronological growth of Doctoral Studies on CLN:
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
119
The chronological growth of research output on CLN is illustrated in fig.1.
(n=65)
Though the concept of networking is not a new phenomenon among LIS professionals, the
topic has become a subject of research since 1980s. Verma’s (1978) research on ‘Library
Cooperation in India’ awarded by University of Rajasthan, Jaipur appears to be the
pioneering work in the field of networking.
The figures illustrated in the above chart indicate 10.8% growth till 1990s and 29.2%
increase in the next decade (1991-00). The increasing trend could be seen in the current
decade (from 2001) too (60%). The increased interest in this segment of LIS research could
be attributed to the growing need of resource sharing among the institutes of similar kind.
Key Concepts/ Focused Areas of Research on CLN:
As mentioned earlier, the dissertations have been categorized based on the key concepts
derived from each title. Clustering of records was seen around the key concepts such as
library cooperation, Library/information network and assessment of existing networks;
Resource sharing and other related topics. The consolidation of dissertations around the key
concepts over the years is shown in Table 1.
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
120
Table 1
Key concepts of Research on CLN
Key Concept
Year Total
(%) 1975
-80
1981
-85
1986
-90
1991
-95
1996
-00
2001
-05
2006
-10
Library Cooperation 1 1 2
(3.1)
Library Network 3 1 12 7 23
(35.1
)
Information Network 1 3 5 9
(13.8
)
Library Networks
Assessment 3 2
5
(7.7)
Resource Sharing 1 3 4 4 3 15
(23.1
)
Consortium 2 2 4
(6.1)
Benchmarking &
Institutional Repository 1 1
2
(3.1)
Literature based study 1 1 1 1 1 5
(7.7)
Total
1
(1.5)
1
(1.5)
5
(7.7)
8
(12.
3)
11
(16.
9)
23
(35.
1)
16
(24.
6)
65
(100)
Note: Figures in parentheses indicate the percentage
The figures in the above table indicate that:
Study in 1978 traced the emergence of research on ‘Library Cooperation in India’.
Later in early 1990s the study focused on Technical Libraries in India.
About half of the dissertations (48.9%) were focusing on library and information
networks.
36.9% of the studies are related to research studies on Resource sharing and consortium
and assessment of existing consortia.
The remaining 10.8% are focusing on other concepts such as literature studies,
benchmarking and institutional repository
We could not trace any CLN dissertation focusing on Literature studies and Information
network in the current decade. A probing is desirable to identify reasons for this or for
any change in terminology.
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
121
It is interesting to note that the research on CLN started with concepts such as library
cooperation followed by library and information network/networking. Knowledge
sharing, consortium, assessment of networks, benchmarking and institutional repository
are of recent origin (current decade). Generally, the research will be carried out at a
broader level in the initial stages and later they will be carried out at micro level.
59.7% of research works on CLN are on traditional terminologies such as library network
and resource sharing. With the advent of IT applications in LIS field, new terminologies
came into existence. However, the traditional terminologies are still dominating the field
indicating the infancy stage of new concepts or terminologies in the field. The recent
terminologies might replace the traditional ones in near future.
Key Concepts and Their Associations with Sub Themes:
In order to understand the relationship or linkages between main concepts and sub
concepts we prepared relational index table of key concepts and sub concepts. The relational
index is presented in Table 2.
Table 2
Key Concepts and Sub Concepts
Benchmarking
-Special Libraries
Consortium
- Activities- Kerala
- Descriptive study
- E-journals- India
- In general- India
Information Network
- Information Network
-ONGC Libs- India
-N. Paper Lib, Karnataka
- IIT libraries - India
-NIFT Libraries
-Linguistic Libraries
- Network Design
- National Disability
-Online Information
-Rural Information
- Network Program, Manipur
- Problems and Prospects
- India
- System Planning, Karnataka
Institutional Repository
- Web-Based Design
Library Cooperation
- India
- Tech. Libs, India
Library Network
- AGRILIBNET
- India
-Annotated Bibliography
- Arts Lib. Network, India
- Automation & Networking
- Delhi
- K D. Univ. Coll, AP
- College Libraries networking
- Gujarat
-Polytech Lib- Karnataka
-REC Libraries - India
-VTU Colleges- Karnataka
-Forestry Libraries- Rajasthan
-Health Science libraries
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
122
- Karnataka
- Orissa-Bhubaneswar
- Pharma colleges, Gujarat
- Local Library Network
-Attitude study
- Library Automation
-Resource Sharing- U.P
- Marketing in BCD Network (2)
-Sanskrit Vidyapeetha Libs
- India
- Networking
-Libraries in N-E India
- Network development.
- Madhya Pradesh
- Rural library network
-Haryana
- User Education
-IT Resources - India
Library Networks Assessment
- DELNET-Usage
- INFLIBNET Usage
- HEALTHNET Usage- Nepal
- INDEST Consortia Usage-
Aligarh
- INFONET usage- Karnataka
Literature Study
-Annotated Bibliography
- Resource Sharing
- Library Networks
-Consortium
-Descriptive study
-Resource sharing
E-journal consortia
- Rural public library network
- Punjab
Resource Sharing
-Annotated Bibliography
-e-journal Consortia (2)
-Knowledge Sharing-India
- Network Model
-Punjab Univ- Chandigarh
-University Libraries
- Andhra Pradesh
- Delhi
- Orissa
- Management Libraries
- India
-IIM Libraries
-S & T Libraries
- India
-Public Libraries
- Madhya Pradesh
-Health Science Libraries
- Chennai
- West Bengal
- Virtual Resource Sharing
- University Library-
Chennai
- Social science Libraries
- India
Library / Information Network: As mentioned earlier, more than half (53%) of research on
CLN is covered by this group. The concepts in this group cover research studies on study and
design of library and information networks for special libraries, technical specific programs and
problems and prospects. The sub-themes associated with the Library networks concept study and
development of library networks for college, professional and university libraries. The sub
concepts are automation and automated libraries; Benchmarking special libraries for networking;
cooperation among libraries; design and development for library networking for college libraries
and professional libraries like medical, technical and university libraries. The other related issues
are educating users on obtaining information on networks and study of attitudes and
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
123
organizational factors while developing library networks. Two literature based studies have been
conducted on this subject.
Resource Sharing: This group shares about 23.7% of research on CLN. The favored
sub themes in this group are resource sharing activities among central Universities in Delhi
region, University libraries in Orissa and Chandigarh and development of networks for resource
sharing among Medical, Technical and Special libraries. Two literature based studies have been
conducted on this concept.
Consortia and Assessment of Existing Consortia: this concept group holds about
13.8% in CLN research output. Two literature based studies have been conducted on the topic.
The focused areas are related to research on consortium activities for e-journal access and
management issues and consortium model development for Technical and Special Libraries. We
could trace five research studies on users’ assessment national level consortiums namely
DELNET, INDEST, HELTHNET, INFLIBNET and INFONET. We could trace two literature
based studies on the topic.
Coverage of Libraries in CLN Research:
An examination of libraries covered for conducting research studies discovers the
thrust areas of research and also signals the type of libraries that needs to be considered for such
studies. The distribution of research studies along different type libraries is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Type of Libraries Considered for Research on CLN (n=65)
Academic Libraries Network (1)
Agricultural Library Network (1)
BCD Library Network (2)
College Libraries Network (4)
Libraries in General Networking (10)
-Consortium
-DELNET Usage
-Information Network
-Information Systems
-Institutional Repository
-Knowledge Sharing
-Library Cooperation
-Local Library Network
-Manipur Libraries Network
-N-E India-Library Network
Management Lib. Resource Sharing (2)
Medical Libraries Network (7)
- HEALTHNET
-Information Network
-Library Network (3)
-Resource Sharing (2)
Public Libraries Network (2)
-Resource Sharing
Special Libraries Network (10)
- Soc Sci Lib-Resource Sharing
-Benchmarking
- NIFT-Lib. Network
-Disables-Info Network
-Forestry Lib Network
-Linguistic Lib Network
-Newspaper Lib Network
-ONGC-Info Network
-Resource Sharing
-S&T-Consortium
Technical Libraries Network (10)
-Consortium (2)
-INDEST Usage
-Information Network (2)
-Library Cooperation
-Library Network (3)
-Resource Sharing (1)
University Libraries Network (11)
-INFLIBNET usage
-INFONET consortium
-Library Network (3)
-Resource Sharing (6)
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
124
-Rural -Library Network Literature Based Studies (5)
Looking at the pattern illustrated in Table 3, it is clear that University, Technical and Medical
libraries are more favored libraries for research on CLN. The homogenous nature of information
resources, budgetary constraints of these libraries and Govt.’s guidelines for more digital
resources could have been the motivational factors for conducting research studies on consortium
or networking activities. Though special libraries are also favored libraries for research study,
unlike above mentioned libraries, the special library category comprises libraries, which are
heterogeneous in nature. Literature based studies and studies on libraries-in-general are also
contributing significantly CLN research. There are representative studies on Management and
Public Libraries too.
We observed that the studies are more focused on specific regions or states
(geographical locations). The assessment of national level networks utilization are based on some
specific regions. Region based studies may not provide clear and comprehensive picture of their
utilization at national level. Of late, we could not trace any studies on Networking of Public
libraries at different levels (district/state/national). Further probing may be desirable in this
regard.
Contribution of Universities and Research Guides in CLN Research output:
Universities: As on March 2008, there are 382 universities promoting higher
education in India, of which, 231 are state, 25 central and 126 are deemed universities
((http://www.indiastat.com - a leading statistical online database). It is estimated that about 100
Indian universities are having LIS departments (LIS Schools) offering courses like BLIS, MLIS,
MPhil and PhD. We observed that about 90 LIS schools in India have produced over 1000
doctoral dissertations on various facets of LIS research and about 250 faculty members spread
across these universities have effectively supervised these research studies (Shivalingaiah,
Sheshadri, Manjunath, 2009). The Universities that have produced PhDs on CLN are shown in
Appendix- 1 and it indicates that:
1. 34 LIS schools/ universities have produced 65 PhDs on the topic during past three decades.
The seed for CLN research was sown by Rajasthan University in 1978. Of the 65
dissertations, 64.6% are from 11 Universities, out of which, more than half (54%) of them are
from three universities alone. Further, it is to be noted that 1/3rd
of 34 universities produced
more than one PhD on CLN. Karnatak University has contributed maximum of 12 PhDs
followed by AMU and Madras Universities with 6 and 5 PhDs respectively. Andhra, Punjab
and Delhi Universities have contributed three PhDs each. Another five Universities
contributed two dissertations each.
2. Rajasthan, Karnatak, Punjab and Gulbarga universities appear to be pioneers in encouraging
research on CLN in early 80s. These universities might have induced other universities to
encourage research on the similar topic. The trend is increasing over the recent years.
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
125
3. The number of dissertations by universities was doubled during 1990-2000 as compared to
that in 80s. Since the year 2000, about 12 universities (including the pioneer univs) are
contributing towards CLN research
4. Aligarh, Andhra and Karnataka Universities are consistently producing research outputs
related to CLN
Research Supervisors: The research supervisors (faculty members) also play a major role in
research outputs in universities. The success of research is directly influenced by the eligible
research supervisors available in the LIS department of universities. The doctoral dissertations on
CLN supervised by individual faculty guides are shown in Appendix -2 and its figures reveal that:
48 research guides from 34 universities have supervised 65 doctoral students on CLN and
10 (20.8%) of them have guided more than one doctoral student, of which, two of them
have supervised five and 4 students.
Karisiddappa and Sangam from Karnatak University have supervised five & four students
respectively on CLN. It is also to be noted that Karisiddappa has guided maximum
number (over 40) of doctoral students in LIS research (Shivalingaiah, Sheshadri,
Manjunatha, 2009).
Observations and Discussions:
It is worth noting that the CLN is one of the growing subjects of research interest and it
shares about 6% of research in LIS field. Though the research seed for CLN is sown in late
70s, the growth is visible in 90s. Generally, it takes about two to three decades for a concept
to become independent subject of research interest (Fisk; Brown, and Bitner, 1993). Repeated
researches make the concept more tested and get promoted among research community. We
can find the validity of the logic in the current paper too.
As mentioned earlier, our intention of this paper is to encourage more and more
discussions rather than drawing our own conclusions. We raised some issues here based on
our experience and issues generated while analyzing the data and invite the professionals for
constructive remarks and discussions.
In India, about 100 Universities are offering LIS education, of which about 90% have
produced Doctoral dissertations on various topics in the field. Of the 90 LIS schools,
34 have contributed towards research output on CLN. We observed different figures
of universities in different sources and hence feel that there is a need to compile a
comprehensive latest database of Universities that are offering LIS education and
specific courses offered by them.
The Keywords like Library network; Information network and cooperation were the
popular terminologies during 80s & 90s. The terminologies such as Consortium,
Knowledge sharing, Benchmarking, and Institutional repository are of recent origin.
However, the terms like library network and resource sharing are still dominating in
the filed indicating infancy stage of this subject field. As the subject becomes
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
126
microscopic in nature, it may experience the emergence of new terminologies and
they might replace the current words.
The increased attention from researchers in the field could be attributed to increased
need for united efforts to combat financial constraints.
While analyzing we found that many models/designs have been proposed by
researchers. But we feel most of them remain a document in university without
finding much practical applicability. A nationwide debate is desirable on how these
models could be realized in the field.
The assessment of existing national networks/consortiums like DELNET, INDEST,
INFONET are carried out at regional/state level like Karnataka, Gujarat etc. It is
desirable to have nation-wide feedback for proper growth and coordination. The
moderators of these networks could initiate nationwide assessment.
During discussions with professional colleagues in various platforms, it is observed
that some library networks DELNET, INDEST, INFONET are working at national
levels and it is better to coordinate with them rather than starting a new consortium…
if this is true is there any need for new consortium/network?
IIM & CSIR consortia are available for IIM and CSIR libraries. Unfortunately, these
government financed consortium benefits are exclusive to members of the group and
are not available for similar organizations in private sector. This needs wider debate.
There is a notion that the consortium activities are primarily meant for discounted
subscriptions. Many organizations approached other institutes to for forming
consortium to avail subscription benefits. Is consortia meant only for subscriptions? Is
it a misconception or reality?
Consortium can be associated with many activities like combined employee job
training, employee exchange, union cataloguing, institutional repositories, common
membership, publication of journals, etc. It is high time that the scope of the existing
national level networks need to reviewed at various platforms and appropriate
measures could be taken networks authorities to widen their operations.
The accrediting bodies in countries like UAE suggest the institutes to form consortia
during their visits for accreditation. This incidence has occurred in the co-author’s
institute in UAE. It is happening in India? Or is this approach really required for our
country? This needs more discussion.
We feel satisfied and elated, if this paper generates more productive discussions and results in
constructive actions for the benefit of academic fraternity.
Conclusion
Consortium and library networks is a small segment in LIS filed and is gaining importance as
subject of independent research among LIS researchers. Consortium or networking is need of
the day to meet the highly selective and fast changing user requirements within the limited
resources. Technical, Medical and University libraries are becoming focal points for CLN
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
127
research. It is desirable that the research embraces other type of libraries like School, and
particularly, public libraries as they serve large number of users in public. We wish let the
existing national level consortiums go beyond the e-journal/online database subscriptions to
cover technical, manpower training, institutional repositories and advisory services. We also
wish, let the current closed group consortiums open their doors to similar organizations in
private sectors too. Doctoral degree is result of in-depth research of specific topic and it will
enrich the literature on the subject of research. Our country also gets benefited by augmented
knowledge based resources. We wish, let individual researchers or respective universities
sincerely work realizing the results of their research studies for the benefit of academicians
and field of Knowledge.
Finally, the growth of consortium activities improves the nation’s economy and effective
resource sharing. It also facilitates to broaden the base of information resources, improves
bargaining power and unites the libraries of similar kind. The authors wish the growth of
consortia at all level for the benefit of academic community/research, which in turn improves
the prosperity of the country.
Scope & Limitations: the authors considered the bibliographic information on doctoral
dissertations awarded by various Indian Universities. The data is obtained through published
sources as mentioned earlier in this paper. The authenticity and correctness of data available
in those sources are not verified. The data for 2010 is not complete. Though maximum effort
has made for comprehensive coverage of relevant data, there could be some errors and
omissions, as we feel many universities might not have submitted their data to UGC and
many individuals might not have responded to our web surveys. Further, this paper does not
cover the research studies that are in progress. Hence, the inferences may not be conclusive in
nature.
Reference
1. Fisk, Raymond P; Brown, Stephen W and Bitner, Mary Jo (1993). Tracking the Evolution
of the Services Marketing Literature. Journal of Retailing; 69(1), Spring; pp 61- 100
2. Jha, Pawan Kumar (2001): Library networks and network based Information Services in
India. Dissertation submitted to partial fulfillment of ASSOCIATESHIP IN
INFORMATION SCIENCE (1999-2001) of INSDOC, chapter 3.
3. DSIR, Government of India (2003). DSIR Annual report 2002-03. II E- NISSAT, pp 74 ,
(http://www.dsir.gov.in/a_report/english/2002-03E/nissat.pdf
4. Jebaraj, Franklin David and Devadoss, Fredrick Robin (2004). “Library and Information
Networks in India”, Library Philosophy and Practice, 6(2) spring, 76-84.
5. Potter, William G, et al (1996), “Georgia Galileo: Georgia's electronic library”, Library
Hi-Tech, 14(2-3), 9-32.
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
128
6. Shivalingaiah, D., Sheshadri K N., Manjunatha, K (2009). “LIS Research in India 1980-
2007: An Analysis of Doctoral Dissertations”, Proceedings of Asia-Pacific Conference on
Library & Information Education & Practice, 409 – 420, 6th
– 8th
March 2009, University
of Tsukuba, Japan. Full paper can be downloaded from http://a-
liep.kc.tsukuba.ac.jp/proceedings/Papers/a9.pdf
7. DELNET http://www.delnet.nic.in;
8. DSIR http://www.dsir.gov.in/a_report/english/2002-03E/nissat.pdf;
9. INDEST http://paniit.iitd.ac.in/indest/; INFLIBNET http://www.inflibnet.ac.in;
10. UGC http://www.ugc.ac.in;
11. VIDYANIDHI http://www.vidyanidhi.org;
12. Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consortium).
13. Appendix - 1
14. Total No. of PhDs on CLN Awarded by Indian Universities.
Sl
no Name of University
1975-
1980
1981-
1985
1986-
1990
1991-
1995
1996-
2000
2001-
2005
2006-
2010 Total
1 Aligarh Muslim Univ., Aligarh 1 1 2 2 6
2 Andhra Univ., Waltair 1 1 1 3
3 Annamalai Univ., Madurai 1 1 2
4 Banaras Hindu Univ., Varanasi 1 1
5 Bangalore Univ., Bangalore 1 1
6 Bhavnagar Univ.,Bhavnagar 1 1
7 Bundelkhand Univ., Jhansi 1 1
8 Dr Hari Singh Gour Univ., Sagar 1 1 2
9 Dr. B R Ambedkar Univ., Agra 1 1
10 Gulbarga Univ., Gulbarga 1 1
11 Guru Ghasidas Univ., Bilaspur 1 1
12 Guru Nanak Dev Univ., Amritsar 1 1
13 H. N. Gujarat Univ, Patan 1 1
14 Jammu Univ., Jammu 1 1
15 Jadavpur Univ., Kolkata 1 1
16 Jiwaji Univ., Gwalior 1 1
17 Karnatak Univ., Dharwad 2 1 3 5 1 12
18 Makhanlal Chaturvedi Rashtriya
Patrakaria Viswavidyalaya,Bhopal 1 1
19 Mangalore Univ., Mangalore 1 1
20 Manipur Univ., Imphal 1 1
21 Punjab Univ., Chandigarh 1 1 1 3
22 Sambalpur Univ., Sambalpur 1 1
23 S V. Univ., Tirupati 1 1
24 Univ. of Burdwan, Burdwan 1 1
25 University of Calicut, Kochi 2 2
26 Univ. of Delhi, Delhi 1 1 1 3
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
129
** Awarded in 1978
Appendix – 2
List of Research guides who Supervised research studies on Library Network/Consortium
Slno Library Networks 85-90* 91-95 96-00 01-
05
06-
09 Total
1 Aggrawal, D S; Univ. of
Delhi,
1 1
2 Amudhavalli, A; Univ. of Madras, 1 1
3 Anas, K; Aligarh Muslim Univ, 1 1
4 Bansal, G C; Punjab University, 1 1
5 Bavakutty, M; Univ. of Calicut, 2 2
6 Bhandi, M K; Mangalore Univ., 1 1
7 Burua, Pulin; Univ. of Burdwan, 1 1
8 Chakraborty, M, Jadavpur Univ, 1 1
9 Chowdhary, B K Sambalpur Univ, 1 1
10 Madhuri Devi; Manipur University, 1 1
11 Gopinath, M A; Bangalore Univ, 1 1
12 Gunjal, S R; Gulbarga Univ., 1 1
13 Harish Chandra, MCRP Univ, 1 1
14 Karisiddappa, C R, Karnatak Univ, 1 1 2 1 5
15 Khan, H A; Univ. of Mysore, 1 1
16 Konnur, M B, Univ. of Pune, 1 1
17 Kumbar, B D; Karnatak Univ., 2 2
18 Malhan, I V; Jammu Univ., 1 1
19 Manorama S, Univ. of Madras, 2 2
20 Masoom, Raza M AMU,Aligarh 1 1 2
21 Mohammad, S H, AMU, Aligarh 1 1
22 Murthy, T A V, Vikram
University,
1 1
23 Nandwana, H B, V M Open Univ 1 1
24 Naushad, Ali P M, AMU, Aligarh 1 1
25 Pandey, S S K ,Bundelkhend Univ. 1 1
26 Prasad, H N; BHU,Varanasi 1 1
27 Univ. of Lucknow, Lucknow 1 1
28 Univ. of Madras, Chennai 4 1 5
29 Univ. of Mysore, Mysore 1 1
30 Univ. of Pune, Pune 1 1
31 Univ. of Rajasthan, Jaipur 1** 1 2
32 Utkal Univ., Bhubaneswar 1 1
33 Vardhaman Mahaveer
Open Univ, Kota 1 1
34 Vikram Univ., Ujjain 1 1 2
Total 1 1 5 8 11 23 16 65
International Research: Journal of Library & Information Science | Vol. 2 No. 1, Jun. 2012
130
27 Prasher, R G; Dr HS Gour Univ. 2 2
28 Ramesh Babu B, Univ of Madras, 2 2
29 Rao, Laxman; GNDU Amritsar 1 1
30 Rawal, C N; H N Gujarat Univ, 1 1
31 Reddy, Pulla V; S V Univ. 1 1
32 Sangam, S L; Karnatak Univ. 1 2 1 4
33 Sarada, K; Andhra Univ. 1 1
34 Satyanarayana, N R, Univ of
Lucknow
1 1
35 Shailendra Kumar, Univ of Delhi, 1 1 2
36 Sharma, B K & Sharma, H, Jiwaji
Univ.
1 1
37 Sharma, Jagdish S; Punjab Univ. 1 1
38 Sharma, U C, Dr. B R Ambedkar
Univ.
1 1
39 Shukla, B B; Utkal Univ. 1 1
40 Singh, S and Singh, S, Vikram Univ. 1 1
41 Sood, S.P, Univ. of Rajasthan, 1 1
42 Srivastava, S N, Univ of Rajasthan, 1 1
43 Sudharma Haridasan, AMU, Aligarh 1 1
44 Suriya, M; Annamalai Univ. 1 1
45 Tikku, U K; Punjab Univ. 1 1
46 Tiwari, Brajesh; Guru Ghasidas Univ. 1 1
47 Uma Kanjilal; Annamalai University, 1 1
48 Vijayalakshmi, B; Andhra Univ., 1 1 2
49 N. A., Bhavnagar Univ** 1 1
Total 7 8 11 23 16 65
*From 1978 to 1990; ** supervisor name in not available
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Follow us on:
IRJLIS, Facebook, Twitter