Results of the survey
5.2 Questionnaire results
5.2.1 Section 1 - General information
The information in this section deals with the demographics of the population.
5.2.1.1 University libraries
The number of subject librarians from each library who responded to the questionnaire is indicated in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Responses for each university library N
=
3111
10
9
8
7
6
C 5
8
:::l 410 10
e
I
5fJ
Library
UDW UND UNP UniZUL
The highest number of responses was from UNP with 10 or 32.3 %ofthe total possible responses and UND with 10 or 32.3% ofthe possible responses. Followed by UniZUL with six or 19.4 % ofthe possible responses and the about to be merged with UDW had five or 16.1% ofthe possible response. Ten subject librarians out ofa total of 10 (100 %) completed the questionnaire at UNP, thus all the subject librarians at UNP had completed the questionnaire. Ten subject librarians out of a total of 14 (71.4 %) completed the questionnaire from UND. Six subject librarians out of a total of 13 (46.2 %) completed the questionnaire at UniZUL. Five subject librarians out of a total of six (83.3 %) completed the questionnaire from UDW.
5.2.1.2 Branch or satellite libraries
Question 1 (b) was asked to determine whether the subject librarians worked in the main library or branch and satellite libraries and Figure 2 reflects the findings.
Figure 2
Distribution of responses between main and branch libraries N
=
3130~---'
20
10
0 : : = 21
Branch/Satellite
Of the subject librarians who responded to the questionnaire 21 or 67.7% worked in the main library of their institution. Three worked at the Life Sciences Library of UNP. Two worked at the Medical School Library ofUND. One each workedatthe Eleanor Bonnar Music Library and at the E S Edminson Library ofUND, the Umlazi Campus Library ofUniZUL, the Joe Ryan Dental Library at UDW and the GM J Sweeney Law Library ofUND. The Law Library at UNP is not reflected in the above figure since the subject librarian who facilitates the branch is stationed at the main library ofUNP.
5.2.1.3 Gender and Age
The findings concerning the age and gender of the respondents are presented in a cross tabulation in Table 1.
Table 1
Age and gender cross tabulation
Count
QUESHd) Ace
Aae and aender 20-29 30-39 40-49 50+ Total
QUES1(c) Female 1 9 10 6 26
Gender Male 2 2 1 5
Total 1 11 12 7 31
There were 26 or 83.9 % female subject librarians who responded to the
questionnaire. The highest number of female subject librarians was between the ages of 40-49 at 10, followed by 30-39 at nine, 50+ at six and 20-29 at one.
Of the small minority of potentially six male subject librarians five or 16.1 % responded to the questionnaire. Two were between the age of 30-39 and 40-49 respectively and one was 50 years or older.
Therefore, of the 31 subject librarians who responded 23 were between the ages of 30-49 and seven were 50 years or older with a majority of female subject librarians.
5.2.1.4 Professional qualifications
Question 1 (e) was asked to determine the education and training levels of the subject librarians. The librarians could give more than one response.
Figure3
Professional library qualifications N
=
3130---,
20 21
15
10
C::J
0 2
() 0
hdls audis b.bibl b.biblho pdim mlis ndlis mbibl
Key:
• hdls= Higher Diploma in Library Science
• audis= Advanced University Diploma in Library and Information Studies
• b.bibl= Bachelor of Library Science
• b.biblho= Bachelor of Library Science Honours
• pdim= Postgraduate Diploma in Information Management
• mlis= Master in Library and Information Studies
• ndlis= National Diploma in Library Science
• mbibl = Master of Library Science
The most commonly held qualification was the Bachelor of Library Science Honours Degree (B.Bibl. (Hons)) at 21 or 33.9 %, held by just over a third of the respondents.
Of these subject librarians 19 or 30.7 % had a postgraduate diploma in the form of the Higher Diploma in Library Science (HDLS) (15 or 24.2 %) the Advanced University
14.5 % holding the equivalent Bachelor of Library Science (B.Bib!.) In spite of the high proportion ofB.Bib!. (Hons) graduates only eight or 12.9% had a Masters in Library and Information Studies. Two technikon diplomas, the Postgraduate Diploma in Information Management (PDIM) and National Diploma in Library Science (NDLIS) were held by five or 8 % ofthe subject librarians respectively
5.2.1.5 Year of qualification
The subject librarians obtained their professional qualifications between the years 1960 and 2000 as reflected in Figure 4. This covers a 40 year range.
Figure4
N=31
Year of qualification
1960-1969
2000+
1.0/2.3%
1990-1999 22.0/50.0%
1.0/2.3%
1970-1979 4.0/9.1%
1980-1989 16.0/36.4%
Of the 31 subject librarians who responded to the questionnaire half, 22 or 50 %, had obtained the above qualifications during 1990-1999, followed by 16 or 36.4 % in 1980-1989, four or 9.1 % in 1970-1979 and one or 2.3 % in 1960-1969 and 2000+
respectively.
5.2.1.6 Main tasks or duties performed by subject librarians
Subject librarians were asked to identify what main tasks or duties they performed at work. Subject librarians could give more than one response.
Table 2
N
=
31Main tasks
Yes
Tasks No and%
user education 24 (77.4%) collection development 21 (67.7%)
cataloguing 18 (58.1%)
reference work 17 (54.8%) literature searching 15 (48.4%) classification 15 (48.4%) academic liaision 9 (29%) staff supervsion 8 (25.8%) administrative tasks 6 (19.4%) branch facilitator 5 (16.1%) manage e-journals 2 (6.5%) staff training and
2 (6.5%) development
manage guides 2 (6.5%) curriculum development 2 (6.5%) reading services 1 (3.2%) manage dialog 1 (3.2%) manage website 1 (3.2%)
Very few of the tasks were ICT related, in fact only the management of e-journals, lCT and a library website were lCT related. Compared with the other tasks and duties these were only performed to a small extent. The management of e-journals 6.5 %, followed by the management ofICT and a website at one or 3.2% respectively. Most of the tasks related to the "traditional" duties of subject librarians with user education appropriately scoring the highest at 24 or 77.4 %, followed by collection development 21 or 67.7 %, cataloguing 18 or 58.1 %, reference work 17 or 54.8 %, classification and literature searching 15 or 48.4 %, academic liaison 9 or 29 %, staff supervision 8 or 25.8 %, administrative tasks 6 or 19.4 %, branch facilitator 5 orl6.1 %, staff
2 or 6.5 %, and reading services and the management of dialog one or 3.2 %.
5.2.1.7 Access to a home computer
Question 1 (g) asked whether subject librarians had access to a home computer. Of the subject librarians who responded to the questionnaire 22 or 71 % had access to a home computer, while nine or 29 % did not.
5.2.1.8 Home computer use
Question 1 (g) asked the above 71 % of subject librarians who had access to a home computer what they used their home computer for. More than one response was possible.
Figure 5
N