Library management system Essay

1. 1 Back institute of the topic With diminishing finances, it is r atomic overtation 18ly come-at- adequate for a program library or instruct center to fork over generous pickfulnesss to fulfill the needs of its clients. What is being delivered is b bely a portion of what their clients in truth need (Ramos & Mohd Ali, 2005). Collaboration is widely recognized as the best course for libraries to cope with the always increasing ch tout ensembleenges volume of discipline resources nature and note of in fleshation user needs and expectations information and conversation technology competencies and al-Qaeda inflated price of information resources and laging needs.However, although these challenges keep continue to prevail, libraries running(a) base collaborative initiatives comparable the Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois (CARLI) swal paltry registered awe-inspiring success. This thesis reports the decisions of a thorough study to establ ish the instruments that have led to the success of CARLI and how such success factors can be utilize in libraries of exploitation countries equal Uganda. Emphasis is billetd on the government of CARLI leading, the sacramental manduction of responsibility and decision fashioning processes as well as sources of backing for the syndicate.Also central to the research study is exploration of the parting and responsibility of dynamic subdivision libraries and their contri saveions to and expectations from the consortium. I cont dismiss that deprivation of supporting to facilitate consortium activitiesis not the central factor in the failed draw close of the planned consortium activities in Uganda, rather it is the lack of attached leaders and cooperation among inscribe libraries that is responsible for the lack of progress.In whatsoever kind of governing body or cooperation a standardized(p) a library consortium, backing has never been comme il faut due to ever changing technologies and continuous demands from library patrons. However, good leadership and cooperation among membership plays a bigger single-valued function in achieving a earthy goal. Having and working towards a common goal, under dedicated, dynamic and faithful leadership with an active and energetic membership plays a cracking role in the success of a consortium.2 To assist in the possible onward motion of consortium operations in Uganda, I need to visualize the leadership, responsibility, staffing, collection, policies and procedures, supporting and structure of pedantic libraries in the participating membership of CARLI in comparison with those of Uganda. My research has incorporated interviews with CARLI staff and a questionnaire survey to all the participating CARLI membership. 1. 2 Problem statement.There is now ample research on the returns of library quislingism mainly in developed countries (Kaul 2001, Riley 2006, Wright 2006, Bennett 2007, Foulonneau et al. 2007, Williams 2008, Feather, Bracken & Diaz 2008, butler 1998, Domatob, 1998). In Africa, a lot of research has been devoted toward the need for quislingismism (Musoke 2008, Paulos 2008, Kinengyere 2007, Ibeun & Obasuyi 2007,Amaeshi (Ed. ) 2003, Kaul 2001, Rosenberg 2001, Ade Ajayi, Goma & Johnson 1996) and a few registered successes (Musoke 2008, Paulos 2008, Rosenberg 2001, Kinengyere 2007, Ibeun & Obasuyi 2007, Amaeshi (Ed.) 2003, Kaul 2001).However, no research has been reported on how to apply identified success factorsfrom developed countries in set out to chip in a change in developing countries. Developed countries have registered tremendous success stories comp argond to less developed countries failure in developing countries has been attributed to scurvy funding without looking at another(prenominal) factors like committed leadership and cooperative membership.The National Council for Higher Education (NCHE) (2007) indicates that in that location are hexad public and twenty- cardinal personal universities giving a total of 30 registered universities in Uganda. Of these, only twenty-one universities and 2 research institutions are actively and currently participating in the Consortium of Uganda University Libraries, (CUUL) (2008). It is clear, however, that or so of these universities do not have adequate resources to support certain, if not all, areas of their academic and research curriculums.Since 2005, main course to computer facilities, books and other t distributivelying materials has improved still some are farthermostfrom r severallying ratios comparable to world standards and, unfortunately, the educatee tobook ratio dropped from twenty-three books per savant to nineteen in 2006 (NCHE, 2007). The NCHE 2006 (2007) study further shows that there has been a 9. 4% sum up in the total number of students that enroll in the universities from 124,313 in 2005 to 137,190 in 2006 without an cast up in 3the number of informat ion materials in most of these universities.Although there is evidence of no increase in the number of information resources to be used by students in these universities, NCHE instead attributes the low level of research across the high(prenominal) bringing up spectrum to inadequate funding more so, the student to book ratio stated above is far below the set standards and NCHE does not suggest for these universities to embark in resource sharing as a way of bridging the student to book ratio.The NCHE (2007) acknowledges the returns of the library, stating that the library is the heartbeat of an academic institution. However, its 2006 study indicates that universities have proceed to reduce the amount of money spent on books (0. 1% in private and in 2. 5% in public universities) and that library property is being converted to student instruction classrooms. This is an indication of low disbursal on library books much as these universities are still working harder to acquire i nformation materials, space to store them is excessively becoming other challenge.One of the important things I have learned all by dint of the time I have worked at Makerere University program librarys outr to each one programme inpartnership with CUUL as Deputy Country Coordinator for E-resources, on top of other evidentiary institutional challenges among African universities, a committed leadership and membership was discover as still lacking among CUUL membership. While there are already tangible successes registered by CUUL, still much has not been achieved, like spearheading resource sharing as one of its objectives since inception.This study begins to address issues that are environ the inefficiency involved in partnership, networking and collaboration among university libraries in Uganda. This includes how universities with far better information resources like Makerere University can portion out with newly completed universities lacking qualified library resources . More particularly, the study directly addresses consortium issues like leadership, conference and membership contribution as key factors in this kind of collaboration. 1. 3 Objectives of the study. Study the consortium history among academic and research libraries in the state of Illinois 4 discover the factors that influence libraries to yoke and continue to participate in a consortium Determine how consortium values affect participating libraries Determine the effectiveness and extent of resource sharing among CARLI member libraries Identify factors that lead to the success of a consortium other than money hint practical ways for resource sharing in developing countries like Uganda 1. 4 Limitations of the study.Any comparison of differing societies, or search for causal relationships must be conducted within dimensional identities (Amaeshi (Ed), 2003) meaning, a perceived need to prevalentise the economic, political, readingal and sociological factors that affect i nformation sharing among universities in twain developed and developing countries. While the majority of the developments are standard expend in academic libraries in the developed world, many of these issues are relatively new to us in developing countries, and we have had to considerationualize them by finding practical but local ways of addressing many of them (Musoke, 2008).In this study therefore, I do fully understand the dimensional identities that exist among CARLI and CUUL I try to contextualize identified success factors by finding practical but local ways of applying these factors that have led to CARLI advancement putting into context the economic, political, educational and sociological environments of operation between the two consortia. 5 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW.2. 1 Introduction In my writings review, I have found a good representative literature discussing the need for collaboration among Ugandas universities and research institutions and a few outlines of the benefits so far registered in these universities. However, little is written in detail about resource sharing as a way to bridge the shortage of information resources among these universities.I am grateful to some authors (Musoke 2008, Paulos 2008, NCHE 2007, Rosenberg 2001, Kaul 2001) who identified some of the factors that have hindered collaboration in Africa, although their discussions outline funding as a major factor in this progress as opposed to good leadership, effective communication and responsive membership. By studying the relevant literature, it will help me understand more fully how other factors play a big role in the development of consortium in developing countries. 2. 1. 1 res publica of higher education in Uganda.To time, the existing physical resources of higher education institutions are quite inadequate. Past political instability, lack of financial resources and the general lack of a culture that values maintenance have have to cause gross negligence in the maintenance of physical radical including laboratories, seminar rooms, libraries, research facilities and staff offices (Musisi, 2003).Higher education received about 10 percent of a total Ministry budget of UGX 619. 93 billion in the 2004/05 budget year (Ministry of Education and Sports,2005), a rate that has remained more or less constant since the mid 1990s. The implementation of cost sharing in institutions of higher learning has change magnitude revenue generation to supplement transfers from the government.In addition to cost sharing, funds are generated internally through private sponsorship of students, consultancies, sales of works and contributions from donors, (Musisi, 2003). However these sources have not beenable to accommodate the ever increasing budget needs. Due to such poor funding, much has been left undone.2. 1. 2 Structure of academic libraries in Uganda According to the Universities and Other ordinal Institutions Act of 2001, with reference to Maker ere University library structure (Makerere University library, 2007), 6 the overall judicature of libraries is vested in the office of the University Librarian who reports to the offense-Chancellor through the Deputy Vice-Chancellor in switch on of Academic Affairs (DVC-AA). The University Librarian is a member of Makerere University Top focus and Senate.Within the library, the University Librarian and deputies form the Librarys Management team, which work with heads of sections and branch libraries to implement University Library policies and programmes, and enforce library rules and regulations. The policy making body of the University Library is the Academic computer programmes and Library perpetration, which is a senate delegacy chairmaned by the DVC-AA. It is be of members of Senate representing the sciences, arts and humanities, library, students and other relevant stakeholders.2. 1. 3 recital of consortium in Uganda To strengthen the network of librarians, resear chers and academics in developing countries and Uganda in particular, the outside(a) Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications (INASP) encouraged librarians to form national consortia. During a workshop on the topic of library cooperation for effective provision of information in Uganda and beyond, CUUL was established in 2001. Areas of cooperation include resource mobilization and sharing, and training and marketing of member libraries (Kinengyere, 2007).One of the challenges being addressed by CUUL is the sustainability of e-journal subscriptions atthe end of donor funding. In November 2005, CUUL decided on the mechanism of cost-sharing the e-resources, starting in 2006. Out of the 43 registered Programme for the Enhancement of Research Information institutions-(PERI)-Uganda, only 11 (25%) responded to the e-resources sustainability initiative in time for the 2007 subscriptions and this trend has not changed to date (Kinengyere, 2007).The networking and collaboratio n of CUUL has not yielded good results as describe in its objectives and thishas been cursed on the lack of funds without looking at other factors like the commitment of its membership, and trust from its leadership. Both CUUL and CARLI which began in July 1, 2005, do have a lot in common in their formation. Like UIUC for CARLI, Makerere University Library is the organise institution for CUUL under the PERI programme.The current establishment of CUUL as per its constitution (2001) is composed of a five member elected executive committee (Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Treasurer, Secretary, 7 Publicity) who conduct CUUL activities in addition to their institutional responsibilities and a committee of representatives from actively participating institutions constituteed Functional committees who help to coordinate CUUL activities in their single institutions. It is interesting to note that the Functional committees referred to by CUUL are never as active as they should be.2. 1. 4 The need for collaboration A perceived need for collaboration among the African university libraries was stated as early as 1990 (Ifidon, 1990) and was outlined in the Carnegie obtaining of 2004, which identified the ability to participate in a global economy that is increasingly centered on regain to knowledge as a critical key in declaration the problems of the African nations. One of the goals of the conference was to develop partnerships between libraries and donors, and establish a platform on which future consortia and agendas could be built.During the run into, many problems faced by African university libraries were discussed, such as poor networks, little cooperation between institutions that cook their make databases of local materials, and very few digitization programs to increase African content on the Web and respond to the thousands of different cultures and languages across the continent. The benefits of collaboration, consortia, networks and coadjutor suppor t have been emphasized in information science literature for a long time.Most of the success stories reported by African University Librarians revolve around collaboration and networking within institutions to lobby policy makers, within the country to form consortia and share the subscription of e-resources, skeletal governing body mental object andget professional support. The unquestionable and potential of networking, cooperation and digitization is to modify the functions of acquiring, storing and disseminating information and knowledge, hence the need to be supported (Musoke, 2008).Because of limited resources there is, therefore, need to build on the achievements, share experiences and best practices through collaboration and networks. 2. 1. 5 Resource sharing The innovation of resource sharing has been used in the developed countries as a means to alleviate the resource inadequacies of individual libraries. In Africa, it has been seized upon as a way of sustaining infor mationservices. Rosenberg (2001, p. 14- 8.15) in her constitution The sustainability of libraries and resource centers in Africa quoted a Kenyan librarian who concluded that there is no doubt that resource sharing programmes have a significant role to play in developing countries, given the problem of scarce resources and if libraries are to continueto meet the demands of other users, increased cooperation and resource sharing are vital. Rosenberg (1993) continues to note that on the ground there is little in the way of resource sharing.In some ways the situation has deteriorated, as systems that used towork (like the East African books Service) have collapsed. The survey (Rosenberg, 2001) of University libraries in Africa found that interlibrary lending (the main, if not the only, form of resource sharing practiced), was minimal, especially in-country and within Africa. Such evidence suggests that there is a lot that needs to be done in order to bring a change about the idea of r esource sharing among universities and research institutions.Even though these universities have little to share, even a little sharing may help future sharing of acquisitions in the most demanding subject areas. 2. 1. 6 Research and research paradigms In her paper Strategies for addressing the university library users changing needs and practices in Sub-Saharan Africa, Musoke (2008) states that there is drastic change in the methods of conducting research and research paradigms.For example, the demand for a multidisciplinary nestle to research has meant that a research project in the Medical School, which would normally contend medical literature now besides requires some cordial science and ICT components. Such approaches put further demands on the already hardscrabble information resourcesin our libraries, hence the need for sharing. The diversity of research methods is an indicator of the complexness of research and the challenges of meeting the information needs of human b eings conducting research.Such challenges call for immediate revival of resource sharing among these universities in order to meet the changing needs. The presence and advancements in information technology can also help in this process.2. 1. 7 Policy formation and leadership The connexion of African Universities (AAU) emphasizes that the way ahead for the development of research and postgraduate capacity in African universities is through selective concentration of resources within the university system, and the 9achievement of collaborative links among African universities, and between African universities and research institutions (AAU, 2009).In order to achieve that goal, AAU suggested that providing effective leadership to facilitate meaning(prenominal) regional interuniversity cooperation among African universities may help to ease the resource constraints and to build a viable educational enterprise in Africa capable of meeting the challenges ahead (Ade Ajayi, Goma & Johnso n, 1996) 2. 1. 8 Consortium membership.Among the most serious problems of Ugandas libraries is the low level of and response rate towards collaboration and consortium in a number of library and information science activities. According to Paulos(2008), the most no-hit libraries in southern Africa, like in Botswana and South Africa, have been able to form strong alliances. Developing complex and strong links and partnerships facilitates the consumption of information resources. An example of a successful regional network is the connecter for Health Information and Libraries in Africa (AHILA).In addition to its supranational connections, AHILA has two internal concernssharing scarce resources through interlibrary cooperation and developing systems for improved bibliographical control of the health literature produced in Africa (Kinegyere, 2008). Such strategies if applied at the national level will not only strengthen regional networks, but also work as satellite communication ne tworks for international organizations to overcome the problems of lack of physical infrastructure and as a earth for enhancing access to information among university libraries with fewer resources.2. 1. 9 Library funding The enormousness of government support towards consortia is elucidated in the plan of the United Nations (UN) World confidential information on theInformation Society. This body acknowledges the significance of addressing fundamental issues of development in global access, infrastructure, information and communication technologies, literacy, skills and training, E-learning, and E-Agriculture (Ibeun & Obasuyi, 2007). If Uganda is a signatory, it should join other countries in the move to support libraries and archives.Lack of funding has been a bigger issue among university libraries and has been attributed to lack of understanding of the role of libraries in an institution of higher 10 learning by university and political leaders as it emerged from the Carnegi e conference (2004) and mentioned by many other writers (Musoke 2008, Ade Ajayi, Goma & Johnson 1996, Paulos 2008, Rosenberg 2001). However, not all African countries are unbuttoned on external funding. Libraries in Botswana and South Africa are examples where funding is internally generated and the quality of library resources is very high, (Paulos, 2008).As a source of funding for libraries in Africa, including Uganda, Paulos (2008) in his paper Library resources, knowledge production, and Africa in the 21 st century suggested the need for funding from African governments the importance of proactive approaches on the part of academic librarians in Africa including the importance of identifying unique materials in the collections and pursuance collaboration to digitize them and the importance of outreach, in particular, seeking the support of Africans in the diaspora.2. 1. 10 Increasing number of library users The growing number of university students, the increase in study pro grammes coupled with paradigm shifts in curriculum and research, the increase in research and the rapid ICT developments have all changed the routines of traditional academic librarianship (Musoke, 2008). The demand for information resources has increased, with diminishing budgets, resulting in a poor service to library users.This is further evidenced in the NCHE report of 2007 as outlined above. 2. 2 Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois (CARLI) CARLI is an unincorporated association, with a total of 153 member institutions all over the State of Illinois (CARLI, July 2009). 2. 2. 1 History July 1, 2005 saw the merging of three Illinois academic library consortia to a consolidate consortium called CARLI the mergedconsortia include Illinois Cooperative Collection Management Program (ICCMP), formed in 1986 and housed statewide collection studies and grantsIllinois Digital Academic Library (IDAL), formed in 1999 and provided centralized electronic resource licensi ng and Illinois Library information processing system Systems Organization (ILCSO) formed in 1980, provided the shared integrated library system Illinet Online which became I-Share in the consolidation.The merging of these three consortia was aimed at improving the efficiency and cost 11effectiveness of services, increasing the effectiveness of consortial and member library staff efforts, and creating opportunities to pursuenew programs and services that the three constituent consortia would not have been able to provide on their own. CARLI has continued to add new products, services and programs including The I-Share integrated library system, E-resources licensing, digital collections and statewide collections awards and programs.2. 2. 2 Strategic plan, values, and goals CARLI remains fully committed to fulfilling its established mission The Consortium leads Illinois academic libraries tocreate and sustain a rich, supportive, and diverse knowledge environment that furthers teach ing, learning, and research through the sharing of collections, expertise and programsand attaches great importance to cooperation among academic and research libraries of all types, sizes and missions respect for the diverse missions and populations served by member institutions recognition of each member institutions libertySharing the full range of academic library resources effectively and economically free and open access to all intellectual resources excellence in providing services and programs innovation in identifying and implementing collaborative solutions to shared challenges responsiveness to member needs cost-effectiveness in the delivery of programs, services, and products careful stewardship of all CARLI resources protecting the concealment and security of library records supportingintellectual freedom and advocacy for academic and research libraries at the local, state, regional and national levels.Furthermore, the consortium reaffirms its commitment to resource s haring, through the continued maintenance and development of its integrated library management system, and the provision of substantive electronic resources, through brokering, subsidization and cost-sharing agreements as outlined in its four broad strategic priorities Collaboration and Leadership, Innovation, Resource Sharing, and E-Resources (CARLI, 2007).12 2. 2. 3 social rank 2. 2. 3. 1 How to become a CARLI member whole higher education institutions in Illinois that are recognized by the Illinois carte of Higher Education, and are members of the Illinois Library and Information Network (ILLINET) are eligible for membership in CARLI andwill agree to abide by the terms and conditions of the CARLI Membership Agreement and any other subsidiary agreements governing participation in a specialized CARLI service.However individual member libraries retain autonomy over their own operations. CARLI membership includes three categories each with a different entitlement and responsibil ity, and different yearbook membership fees. As of the fall of2009 there were 107 Governing, 30 Associate and 16 Basic members. 2. 2. 3. 2 Membership categories and obligations Governing membership is entitled to participate in all CARLI products, services, and programs at the fullest level of central support participate in all CARLI committees, task forces, and user groups receive priority shape on waiting lists to join I-Share and other premium services like enrollment in training sessions.Associate membership is eligible for most services and programs, and participates in CARLI brass as a group delineate by a single voting member on the CARLI posting of Directors. Basic membership qualifies for selected services and programs, and does not participate in CARLI governance or voting. CARLI member institutions may upgrade to a higher or move to a lesser membership level by sideline the CARLI Bylaws. Eligible institutions that have not joined CARLI may participate in CARLIemail d iscussion lists, and may attend CARLI training events and workshops at a feesometimes higher than that of the three membership categories. 2. 2. 3. 3 Membership benefits.CARLI serves over 98% of Illinois higher education students, faculty and staff at 153 member institutions of which 76 institutions benefit from I-Share E-resources brokering with over 1,000 discounted subscriptions to electronic journals and other resources a 24-hour delivery by Illinois Library Delivery Service (ILDS) to 141 CARLI libraries and all the states regional library systems the Book Digitization Initiative for Illinois academic and research libraries in-house development of VuFind an open 13 source front end to I-Share catalog and participation in the University of Rochesters Extensible Catalog project.2. 2. 3. 4 Funding sources CARLIs sources of funding include annual subscription membership fees where Governing membership contribution ranges from a minimum of $1000 to a maximum of $10,000 and is calcula ted by student Full Time Equivalent (FTE) enrollment and institution type, Associate members put up $500, and Basic membership is $100.Other funding includes contributions towards e-resources brokering, development of library systems like I-share catalogue and VuFind, support for digitization projects and the Open Content Alliance, through conducting workshops where each membership contributes different fees to participate in any activity, and grants from the state and federal official governments. The CARLI financial year runs from July 1 June 30. 2. 2. 4 Governance CARLI operates under the tutelage of the CARLI Bylaws 2008 (CARLI, 2008, 2006). The University of Illinois serves as CARLIs fiscal and contractual agent under a Memorandum of Understanding between the shape up of Trustees of the University of Illinois and CARLI panel of Directors. CARLI operates as a unit of the University Office for intend.and Administration, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 2. 2. 4. 1 mesa of Directors and committees CARLI Board of Directors oversees the personal matters of CARLI except those reserved for the entire membership sets strategic directionof the consortium oversees all CARLI committees reviews and approves the detail and thetotal organizational budget each year advises and gives recommendations on the hiring and paygrade of the Assistant Vice- professorship for Planning & Administration/ CARLI administrator Director and provides advice and input to the University of Illinois in matters relating to the Consortium. The Board meets unshakablely throughout the year.In addition to the Board of Directors, there are several committees, working groups, user groups, and task groups established to support the Board in carrying out operational and programmatic activities of the consortium assist the Board in the development, implementation, operation, and valuation of programs and services provide the Board with advice and recommendations related to policy , management, fiscal, and on other matters that 14 require the Boards attention. separately committee or group has CARLI liaison fulltime staff who works as a focal point for a designated committee committees meet quarterly with CARLI Board of Directors or as required. The committees and groups are required to present reports at the end of each task assigned tothem the reports are published and made public online on the CARLI web page. 2. 2.4. 2 Board committee organization Board committees are of two categories, standing (permanent) committees referenced in the CARLI Bylaws and temporary ad hoc groups established to carry out a specific task and then discharged. All committeesreport to the Board on a schedule established by the Board. Each Board committee has a CARLI staff liaison.Ad hoc groups have old dates at which point the group will be discharged. 2. 2. 4. 2. 1 stand (permanent) committees There are five permanent committees established by the CARLI Bylaws. Executive commi ttee The officers of the CARLI Board of Directors shall constitute the Executive Committee.The Committee is advisory twain to the Chair and to the Board of Directors on scheduling agenda topics and preparing information for the Board of Directors review and action. The Executive Committee is authorized to act on behalf of the Board of Directors on any urgent matter requiring Board approval, unless a regular or special meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled to take place within 48 hours.The CARLI Board elects its own Vice-Chair/Chair- choose each year to join the current Chair, Past Chair, and CARLI Executive Director in forming the Executive Committee and will meet as needed to update the Board on their plans and actions. CARLI Executive Director is the mental faculty or Board liaison.The finance committee provides the Board with recommendations related to annual budget requests, the annual budget, the annual financial performance report, and any other financial matters th at require the Boards attention. Its composed of four Board members, one each from public institutions, private institutions, community colleges, and one at large. The Past CARLI Chair isthe chair of the committee.The Finance committee reports to the CARLI Board of Directors, on a quarterly basis. CARLI Staff or Board liaisons are the CARLI Executive Director, and CARLI Director for Business and financial Services. 15 The personnel committee provides the Board with recommendations and input into the recruitment, compensation and evaluation of performance of the Assistant VicePresident and Executive Director.The Board, in turn, provides its recommendations to the University of Illinois. The Committee may also provide the Board with recommendations and input into any other personnel matters that require its attention. The Personnel Committee is composed of four Board members, one each from public institutions, private institutions, community colleges, and one at large.The ViceChair/C hair Elect is the Chair of the Committee. The group reports to the CARLI Board of Directors and University of Illinois Associate Vice President for Planning and Budgeting on an annual basis. The CARLI Board liaison is the University of Illinois Associate Vice President for Planning and Budge.