CHAPTER SIX – RESEARCH FINDINGS
6.5 Research library services
This section presents the services that research libraries in Kenya offer, how important the librarians and researchers perceive them to be as well as where else the researchers seek information.
6.5.1 Important services according to librarians
During the interviews with librarians, fourteen respondents rated access to the Internet as a very important (scale point 1) service while thirteen respondents also rated access to online journals as very important (scale point 1). Seven respondents also rated reference and provision of books as very important services. Fig 6.10 summarizes the responses.
6.5.2 Important services according to researchers
On the other hand, the users rated access to online journals as the service they consider most important (scale point 1) followed by seeking help from librarians, access to online research papers, borrowing books, surfing the World Wide Web (WWW) and using print journals in that order. Fig 6.11 represents these preferences.
169
Fig 6.10 - Services offered by the libraries as rated by the librarians Source: Researcher
Fig 6.11 - Services offered by the libraries as rated by the users Source: Researcher
170
These findings were corroborated by the results of the focus group discussions with users which showed that the most popular service offered by the research libraries, according to the users, is access to the Internet followed by access to online journals. A number of users also said that they still use the physical library space when they need to concentrate on a project. Many users in one of the libraries said that they like the interlibrary loan service. Other services liked by most users include literature searching and alerts on new items in the library. On the other hand, users do not like their colleagues who keep library material for too long; unreliable Internet connections; lack of WiFi connections in some libraries; tedious borrowing procedures such as being asked to leave one‟s national identity card in the library during the loan period; inadequate opening hours; poor customer services; and crowded reading areas.
The researchers also said that they use the library as a work space. Others also said that they value photocopying services as well as the library computers which they use to analyze research data and process assignments. Curiously, one user said that he values access to television and especially Digital Satellite Television (DSTV) services. Another researcher in a different institution, however, said he does not appreciate the presence of a television set in the library which, according to him, is too noisy. This latter researcher said that he has reduced the time he spends in the library because of a television set which is coincidentally located at the point from which he uses the library and which makes a lot of noise.
The users wished to get reprographic services such as scanning, printing and photocopying; a shop to buy basic stationery, gifts, basic software such as antivirus or statistical packages; provision of multimedia materials on DVDs or downloads; facility to capture, organize, store and provide access to grey literature generated by the research institutions and their partners; a Wide Area Network (WAN) linking all centres of research and helping the researchers to remain in touch with each other; an Intranet (local “Google”) containing relevant information; systems to detect plagiarism;
delivery of information materials to the researchers‟ offices and duty stations; private reading spaces;
touch-screen facilities where users can peruse documents; and better customer service. There were no specific services that the users did not particularly like. However, they suggested that reduction of physical resources would facilitate the reorganization of the physical library space which would then enable the libraries to provide more public reading space, private reading rooms as well as more
171
comfort. Some research institutions are also being asked to provide Internet connectivity in some remote areas but this has not been done yet.
A participant in the focus group discussion for librarians recommended that research libraries should not hold newspapers. She felt that newspapers do not contain information that supports research and that they attract idlers to the insufficient library space. The general feeling, however, was that the newspapers are important but the usage should be regulated. They suggested that one way of regulating newspapers is by reducing the copies as well as the seats for reading them. It was also proposed that the library should maximize those who just come to read newspapers. These views were also corroborated by results of the focus group discussions and interviews with the users.
However, one researcher actually recommended that libraries should keep back copies of newspapers and “not just sell them off”.
6.5.3 Where else the researchers get information
The researchers said that apart from their own libraries, they obtain the information they need for their research projects from other libraries (University of Nairobi, Catholic University of East Africa, Aga Khan University and International Centre for Insect Physiology and Ecology [ICIPE]);
seminars, conferences and workshops; personal exchanges with colleagues and stakeholders; mass media (newspapers, radio, TV); exhibitions; own home library; Internet (Google, Google Scholar);
field visits; online databases; government institutions (line Ministries such as Health, Livestock Development, Environment, Forestry Services and Agriculture); records from local administration (chiefs, District Commissioners); collaborating researchers, projects and programmes; classrooms (notes, handouts, lecturers, classmates); information providers (specialized research institutions);
public forums; journals accessed through individual membership; and national and international research networks. Eighty three (51%), that is more than half of the respondents, said that these other sources of information were complementary to the library sources. Twenty eight (17%) said they were better than the library sources while twenty one (13%) said they were worse than the library sources. Thirty (19%) of the respondents were not sure whether these sources were better or worse than the library sources. Fig 6.12 presents these results.
172
Fig 6.12 – Comparison of other sources and the library sources Source: Researcher