Challenges that Affect the Utilization of KLISC’s Resources and Services at University of Nairobi
pdf
Received 2019-06-29
Accepted 2021-01-05
Published 2021-07-10
Bookmark and Share

Abstract

It is not feasible for a library to hold or acquire a full collection of information resources which may be required by its patrons. To deal with this issue, library cooperation was adopted, for instance, interlibrary loaning, document delivery and library network, formed to build the acquiring capacity of cooperating institutions to grow the accessibility of information resources and offer computerized services. In Kenya, there is KLISC which has carried out commendable activities to support research in Kenya. KLISC has done admirable exercises to support research in Kenya. These exercises incorporate collaborative acquisition of information resources, ICT training of information experts and the preparation of researchers to improve their abilities in retrieving information. Despite the activities and services that KLISC provide, its resources are yet to be appreciated by a majority of the users of the member institutions. Also, not all information providers and institutions of higher learning are members. Kenya has over 600 institutions but only 112 are KLISC members as of 2018 and the numbers keep reducing. The study therefore tried to identify the challenges that the KLISC members face that could be affecting utilization of the electronic resources, members pulling out and also discouraging other institutions from joining. The study found out that KLISC members experienced the following challenges; slow internet connectivity, information illiteracy, lack of searching skills, low awareness levels, slow downloading speed, unfriendly platforms, password requirements for some databases, poor ICT infrastructure, poor ICT skills for both users and staff, delays in releasing of funds by the management, and slow communication from the publishers. KLISC itself faces the following challenges: members do not efficiently communicate about their information needs, lack of sponsorship since INASP pulled out, delay by KLISC’s members to pay their annual subscription fee, and the management team is overwhelmed by work. The study therefore recommended the following: Institutions should invest more on ICT infrastructure, KLISC should come up with a way of ensuring relevancy, KLISC should stand on its own as an institution and acquire its own offices and employ staff who will just be working for KLISC, KLISC should create a mini-consortium to cater for research institutions and also other specialized fields in different institutions in Kenya, KLISC should come up with a way of dealing with individual defaulters in a way that does not affect the other members, the publishers should improve the interfaces of their databases to make them user friendly and easy to navigate, and the publishers should also ensure fast communications with the institutions.

https://doi.org/10.23974/ijol.2021.vol6.1.128
pdf

References

Chadwell, F. A. (2011). Assessing the value of academic library consortia. Journal of Library Administration, 51(7-8), 645-661. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2011.601268

Chander, R., & Gupta, A. (2015). Library consortia in India. Kowledge Librarian: An International Peer Reviewed Bilingual e-Journal of Library and Information Science, 2(3).

Fresnido, A. M. B., & Yap, J. M. (2014). Academic library consortia in the Philippines. Library Management, 35(1/2), 15-36.

Galyani, G., & Talawar, V. G. (2009). Library consortia in developing countries: an overview. Program, 43(1), 94-104. https://doi.org/10.1108/00330330910934138

Islam, M. A., & Mezbah-ul-Islam, M. (2000). Concept, issues and importance of library consortium: Problems and prospects of university library consortium in Bangladesh. University of Dhaka: Bangladesh.

Israel, G. (2003). Determining sample size. Retrieved from https://www.tarleton.edu/academicassessment/documents/Samplesize.pdf

Kiilu, D., Gathoni, N., & Kabugu, A. (2011). Monitoring and Evaluation of Electronic Resources in Academic and Research Institutions in Kenya. INASP/KLISC.

Posigha, B. E., Godfrey, V. Z., & Seimode, F. D. (2015). The trend of academic libraries consortia in the north central and south east geo-political zones of Nigeria. Library Review, 64(4/5), 305-320. https://doi.org/10.1108/LR-07-2014-0084

Thanuskodi, S. (2012). Awareness and usage of UGC-Infonet Digital Library Consortium among faculty members of state universities in Tamil Nadu: A survey. International Journal of Information Science, 2(3), 13-18. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.ijis.20120203.02

University of Nairobi. (2017). UON Profile | UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI. Retrieved August 24, 2017, from University of Nairobi website: http://uonbi.ac.ke/about/profile

Veenapani, S., Singh, K., & Devi, R. (2008). Use of e-resources and UGC-Infonet Consortium by the teachers and research scholars in Manipur University. International CALIBER, 563.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.