A Survey of Collection Development Practices in Technical Institutes in Ghaziabad, Utter Pradesh, India
This study is a survey of technical institute libraries in Ghaziabad, Utter Pradesh, India. A list of the libraries in the population is found inAppendix 1. The survey sought to determine the nature of the collection, tools that are used to access it, funds allocated, and the characteristics of the user population. Technical institutes generally offer courses and degrees in engineering, technology, management, and related fields.
Library and information science (LIS) has no rigorous definition of "collection," which represents many different entities that are often seen from a library management perspective. Since collections have been associated with the physical library, it is uncertain how the concept of a collection means in the virtual world. The purpose of this study is to explore what constitutes a collection in the current environment, where information is increasingly made available digitally.
Collection development includes activities such as assessing user needs, evaluating the present collection, determining selection policies, coordinating selection, re-evaluating and storing parts of the collection, and planning for resource sharing. Thus, collection development is not a single activity but a group of activities. Acquisitions is usually distinguished from collection development, and refers do the process of verifying, ordering, and making payments for materials. There has been a general belief that there is a positive correlation between the collection size and its performance in terms of patron satisfaction. If a library ceased adding fresh material to its collection, it would soon have a negative effect on the library's services. A collection development policy is essential for a balanced and robust collection. It specifies the scope of the collection, authority for selection, criteria for allocation of funds and for selection of various types of materials, priorities in selection, and criteria for weeding.
Objectives of the Study:
Data were gathered using a survey and then organized and tabulated. Twenty questionnaires were distributed and fifteen were returned.
The literature of collection development is vast. General treatments of academic library collection development include Gessesse (2000), Nisonger (1999), Rowley and Black (1996), Seth, Ramesh, and Sahu (1997), Susana, Vignau, and Meneses (2005), Taylor (1999), and Wessels (1995). Explorations of particular countries and case studies of individual libraries include Andrada and Vergueiro (1996), Maharana, Choudhury, and Dutta (2004), and Sinha and Tucker (2005). Digital collections are of particular interest. Authors who discuss this topic include Arlitch and Johnson (2005), Cole and Shreeves (2004), Kiondo (2004), Leung (2005), Nikolaidou et al. (2005), and Ashoor (2005). Tools such as metadata systems and software are pertinent to collection development. Works on those topics include Bekaert, et al. (2002), Calanag, Tabata, and Suginoto (2004), and Mutula and Makondo (2003).
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Table 1: Collections
Collections were classified into three categories. Table 1 shows that the 15 (100%) respondents use both type Indian and Foreign collections.
Table 2. Language of the Collection
Table 2 shows that the majority of institutes under study (93.33%) have collections mainly in English, followed by Hindi (16.67%). Other languages represent a very small percentage (6.66%), and Urdu/Sanskrit are not represented at all.
LANGUAGE OF THE COLLECTION
Table 3: Document Collection (SeeAppendix 1 for Institute names and abbreviations)
Taken together, the institutes in the study have 373,532 books, nearly 6,000 Thesis/Dissertation, about 1,000 periodicals, 1,410 bound volumes, and 6,702 non-book items. S.R.M. has the largest collection, followed by R.K.G.I.E.T., and K.I.E.T.
Table 4: Library Users and Faculty Members
Table-4 focuses that the library users and faculty members. The total number of faculty members are 1,593. A.K.G.I.E.T. has the most faculty, with 507 (31.82%), followed by K.I.E.T. at 150 (9.41%).
Library Users and Faculty Members
Table 5: Budget
Table 5 shows that R.K.G.I.E.T. has the largest budget, followed by V.I.E.T. Some technical substitutes have no particular budget for library materials.
Table 5. Courses Offered
Table 6 shows that, at the post-graduate (P.G.) level, 12 institutes (80%) offer the MCA, 9 (60%) the MBA. It is clear that the MCA and B. Tech are the most popular courses offered.
Table 7: Information Technology
Table 7 depicts the use of information technology, including those libraries who have computerized, and those who plan to do so.
Table 8. Software Used
Respondents are using a variety of software with no clear majority.
Table 9. Hardware Used
Table 9 indicates nearly all respondents are using Pentium hardware.
Table 10. Journals
Table 10 shows that while many of the institutions have a substantial periodical budget, a number have no fixed allocation.
Table 11. Sources of Procurement
Table 11 show that nearly all the institutions (14 - 93.33%) use agency procurement, while 10 (66.66%) also procure directly.
Sources of Procurement
Table 12. Institutional Coverage
Table 12 shows that most coverage is at the national level.
Table 13. Technical Processing
Table 13 shows that 12 institutions (80%) use AACR II as a cataloging code, while 14 (93.33%) of the respondents use Dewey Decimal (DDC) for classificaiton and one institute (6.66%) uses Colon Classification (CC)
Table 14. Library Networking
DELNET is the most popular and extensively-used link among analyzed libraries.
Table 15. Human Resources
A majority of the professionals work at R.K.G.I.E.T., while a majority of non-professionals are at K.I.E.T., A.B.E.S. and I.M.S.
Table 16. Staff Training
Table 16 shows that a majority of library professional have software training at V.I.E.T.
Table 17. Library Services
The results show that 14 institutions (93.33%) provide reprography service.
Findings and Conclusion
The collections of respondents' libraries include both Indian and foreign literature. The vast majority of collections are English language material (93.33%), followed by Hindi (16.67%). Most of the institutions in the population do not have substantial library collections in any format, although selected institutions do have adequate collections of books, theses and dissertations, and periodicals. The libraries of the technical institutes in the population serve faculty, research scholars, graduate students, and undergraduates. The majority of the institutes have no research scholars, while all have users in all the other categories. The budget for library materials is variable in the population. Some have no special library allocation. Most of the institutions devote their budget to the purchase of science and engineering material. Two-thirds of the institutions in the population offer the B. Tech. degree to undergraduates, while 80 percent offer the MCA at the graduate level. Eighty percent of respondents stated that their institutions were fully computerized. More than half the institutions are part of Delnet.
Technical institutes represent a growing sector of the higher education market. This is demonstrated by the array of institutions found in Ghaziabad alone. Regular budget allocations, continued computerization, and move toward digital collections would strengthen the information resources provided for the clientele of these institutions.
Andrada, Diva and Vergueiro Waldomiro. Collection Development in Academic Libraries: A Brazilian Library's Experience.New Library World. 97 (4); 1996, Jul. 15-24. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/03074809610120171>
Arlitch, Kenning and Jonsson, Jeff. Aggregating Distributed Digital Collection in the Mountain West: Digital Library with the ContentDM Multi-Site Server. Library Hi Tech. 23 (2); 2005, Jun.; 220-232. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07378830510605179>
Ashoor, Mohammad-Salch. Information Literacy: A Case Study of the KFUPM Library.The Electronic Library. 23 (4); 2005, Aug.; 398-409. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02640470510611463>
Bekaert, Jeroen, et al. Metadata Based Access to Multimedia Architectural and Historical Archive Collection: A Review.Aslib Proceedings. 54 (6); 2002, Dec., 362-371. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/00012530210452564>
Calanag, Maria Luisa, Tabata, Koichi, and Suginoto, Shigeo. Linking Preservation Metadata and Collection Management Policies.Collection Building. 23 (2); 2004, Jun.; 56-63. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01604950410514730>
Cole, Timothy W. and Shreeves, Sarah L.. Search and Discovery across Collections: The IMLS Digital Collection and Content Project.Library Hi Tech. 22 (3); 2004, Sep.; 307-322. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07378830410560107>
Gessesse, Kebede. Collection Development and Management in the Twenty First Century with Special Reference to Academic Libraries.Library Management. 21 (7); 2000, Oct.; 365-372. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01435120010372551>
Kiondo, Elizabeth. Around the World To: The University of Dares Salaam Library: Collection Development in the Electronic Information Environment.Library Hi Tech News. 21 (6); 2004, Jul.; 19-24. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07419050410554861>
Leung, Shirley W. International Conference of Developing Digital Institutional Repositories: Experiences and Challenges.Library Hi Tech News. 22 (2); 2005, Feb.; 14-15. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07419050510593335>
Maharana, Bulu, Choudhury, BK, and Dutta, Sxamashree. Collection Development of Electronic Information Resources in the R & D Libraries of Kolkata City: A Survey.Library Herald. 42 (3); 2004, September; 235-245.
Mutula, Stephen M. and Makondo, Francina S. IT Skills Needs for Collection Development at the University Botswana Library.Library Hi Tech. 21 (1); 2003, Mar., 94-101. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07378830310467436>
Nikolaidou, Mara, Anagnostopoulos, Dimosthenis and Hatzopoulos, Michael. Development of Medical Digital Library Managing Multiple Collections.The Electronic Library. 23 (2); 2005, Apr. 221-236. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02640470510592933>
Nisonger, Thomas E.. A Review of the 1997 Collection Development and Management Literature.Collection Building. 18 (2); 1999, June; 67-80.
Rowley, Gordon and Black, William K. Consequences of Change: The Evolution of Collection Development.Collection Building. 15 (2); 1996, Jun.; 22-30. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01604959610113879>
Seth, Mk, Ramesh, Db and Sahu, Jr. Utility of Library Collection in a Special Library: A Case Study.IASLIC Bulletin. 42 (3); 1997; 107-110.
Sinha, Reeta and Tucker, Cory. New Program Growth and Its Impact on Collection Assessment At UNLV Libraries.Library Hi Tech. 23 (3); 2005, Sep., 362-371. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07378830510621775>
Susana, Barbara, Vignau, Sanchez and Meneses, Grizly. Collection Development Policies in University Libraries: A Space for Reflection.Collection Building. 24 (1); 2005, March; 35-43. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01604950510576119>
Taylor, Donald. Standards Collection Development in an Academic Library.Collection Building. 18 (4); 1999, Dec., 148-152. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01604959910303280>
Wessels, R. H. A. Optimizing the Size of Journal Collections in Libraries.Interlending & Document Supply. 23 (3); 1995, Sep., 19-21. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02641619510155031>